draft-ietf-bmwg-2544-as-07.txt   draft-ietf-bmwg-2544-as-08.txt 
Network Working Group S. Bradner Network Working Group S. Bradner
Internet-Draft Harvard University Internet-Draft Harvard University
Updates: 2544 (if approved) K. Dubray Updates: 2544 (if approved) K. Dubray
Intended status: Informational Juniper Networks Intended status: Informational Juniper Networks
Expires: March 22, 2013 J. McQuaid Expires: April 25, 2013 J. McQuaid
Turnip Video Turnip Video
A. Morton A. Morton
AT&T Labs AT&T Labs
September 18, 2012 October 22, 2012
RFC 2544 Applicability Statement: RFC 2544 Applicability Statement:
Use on Production Networks Considered Harmful Use on Production Networks Considered Harmful
draft-ietf-bmwg-2544-as-07 draft-ietf-bmwg-2544-as-08
Abstract Abstract
Benchmarking Methodology Working Group (BMWG) has been developing key Benchmarking Methodology Working Group (BMWG) has been developing key
performance metrics and laboratory test methods since 1990, and performance metrics and laboratory test methods since 1990, and
continues this work at present. The methods described in RFC 2544 continues this work at present. The methods described in RFC 2544
are intended to generate traffic that overloads network device are intended to generate traffic that overloads network device
resources in order to assess their capacity. Overload of shared resources in order to assess their capacity. Overload of shared
resources would likely be harmful to user traffic performance on a resources would likely be harmful to user traffic performance on a
production network, and there are further negative consequences production network, and there are further negative consequences
skipping to change at page 1, line 46 skipping to change at page 1, line 46
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 22, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 25, 2013.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
skipping to change at page 9, line 33 skipping to change at page 9, line 33
The risk of frame loss caused by outside effects is significantly The risk of frame loss caused by outside effects is significantly
higher in production networks, and significantly higher with long higher in production networks, and significantly higher with long
paths (both those with long physical path lengths, and those with paths (both those with long physical path lengths, and those with
large numbers of interfaces in the path). Thus, the risk of falsely large numbers of interfaces in the path). Thus, the risk of falsely
low reported Throughput using an [RFC2544] methodology test is low reported Throughput using an [RFC2544] methodology test is
considerably increased in a production network. considerably increased in a production network.
Therefore, to successfully conduct tests with similar objectives to Therefore, to successfully conduct tests with similar objectives to
those in [RFC2544] in a production network, it will be necessary to those in [RFC2544] in a production network, it will be necessary to
develop modifications to the methodologies defined in [RFC2544] and develop modifications to the methodologies defined in [RFC2544] and
standards to describe them. standards to describe them. See [Bryant] for an in-progress effort
and [Y.1564] for an approved method adapted to production service
activation.
11. References 11. References
11.1. Normative References 11.1. Normative References
[RFC1242] Bradner, S., "Benchmarking terminology for network [RFC1242] Bradner, S., "Benchmarking terminology for network
interconnection devices", RFC 1242, July 1991. interconnection devices", RFC 1242, July 1991.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
skipping to change at page 9, line 49 skipping to change at page 10, line 4
[RFC1242] Bradner, S., "Benchmarking terminology for network [RFC1242] Bradner, S., "Benchmarking terminology for network
interconnection devices", RFC 1242, July 1991. interconnection devices", RFC 1242, July 1991.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2544] Bradner, S. and J. McQuaid, "Benchmarking Methodology for [RFC2544] Bradner, S. and J. McQuaid, "Benchmarking Methodology for
Network Interconnect Devices", RFC 2544, March 1999. Network Interconnect Devices", RFC 2544, March 1999.
[RFC5180] Popoviciu, C., Hamza, A., Van de Velde, G., and D. [RFC5180] Popoviciu, C., Hamza, A., Van de Velde, G., and D.
Dugatkin, "IPv6 Benchmarking Methodology for Network Dugatkin, "IPv6 Benchmarking Methodology for Network
Interconnect Devices", RFC 5180, May 2008. Interconnect Devices", RFC 5180, May 2008.
11.2. Informative References 11.2. Informative References
[Bryant] Bonica, R. and S. Bryant, "Work in-progress, "RFC2544
Testing in Production Network",
(draft-bb-2544like-production-tests-00)", October 2012.
[Y.1564] ITU-T Recommendation Y.1564, "Ethernet Service Activation [Y.1564] ITU-T Recommendation Y.1564, "Ethernet Service Activation
Test Methodology", March 2011. Test Methodology", March 2011.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Scott Bradner Scott Bradner
Harvard University Harvard University
29 Oxford St. 29 Oxford St.
Cambridge, MA 02138 Cambridge, MA 02138
USA USA
 End of changes. 7 change blocks. 
6 lines changed or deleted 13 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/