draft-ietf-bmwg-imix-genome-04.txt   draft-ietf-bmwg-imix-genome-05.txt 
Network Working Group A. Morton Network Working Group A. Morton
Internet-Draft AT&T Labs Internet-Draft AT&T Labs
Intended status: Informational December 12, 2012 Intended status: Informational June 3, 2013
Expires: June 15, 2013 Expires: December 5, 2013
IMIX Genome: Specification of variable packet sizes for additional IMIX Genome: Specification of variable packet sizes for additional
testing testing
draft-ietf-bmwg-imix-genome-04 draft-ietf-bmwg-imix-genome-05
Abstract Abstract
Benchmarking Methodologies have always relied on test conditions with Benchmarking Methodologies have always relied on test conditions with
constant packet sizes, with the goal of understanding what network constant packet sizes, with the goal of understanding what network
device capability has been tested. Tests with constant packet size device capability has been tested. Tests with constant packet size
reveal device capabilities but differ significantly from the reveal device capabilities but differ significantly from the
conditions encountered in operational deployment, and so additional conditions encountered in operational deployment, and so additional
tests are sometimes conducted with a mixture of packet sizes, or tests are sometimes conducted with a mixture of packet sizes, or
"IMIX". The mixture of sizes a networking device will encounter is "IMIX". The mixture of sizes a networking device will encounter is
skipping to change at page 2, line 6 skipping to change at page 2, line 6
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 June 15, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on December 5, 2013.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2013 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
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Scope and Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Scope and Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Specification of the IMIX Genome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Specification of the IMIX Genome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Specification of a Custom IMIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Specification of a Custom IMIX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Reporting Long or Pseudo-Random Packet Sequences . . . . . . . 7 5. Reporting Long or Pseudo-Random Packet Sequences . . . . . . . 8
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This memo defines a method to unambiguously specify the sequence of This memo defines a method to unambiguously specify the sequence of
packet sizes used in a load test. packet sizes used in a load test.
Benchmarking Methodologies [RFC2544] have always relied on test Benchmarking Methodologies [RFC2544] have always relied on test
conditions with constant packet sizes, with the goal of understanding conditions with constant packet sizes, with the goal of understanding
what network device capability has been tested. Tests with the what network device capability has been tested. Tests with the
skipping to change at page 4, line 35 skipping to change at page 4, line 35
variable and depends on many factors. An IMIX suited for one variable and depends on many factors. An IMIX suited for one
networking device and deployment will not be appropriate for another. networking device and deployment will not be appropriate for another.
However, the mix of sizes may be known and the tester may be asked to However, the mix of sizes may be known and the tester may be asked to
augment the fixed size tests. The references above cite the original augment the fixed size tests. The references above cite the original
studies and their methodologies. Similar methods can be used to studies and their methodologies. Similar methods can be used to
determine new size mixes present on a link or network. We note that determine new size mixes present on a link or network. We note that
the architecture for IP Flow Information Export [RFC5470] provides the architecture for IP Flow Information Export [RFC5470] provides
one method to gather packet size information on private networks. one method to gather packet size information on private networks.
To address this need, and the perpetual goal of specifying repeatable To address this need, and the perpetual goal of specifying repeatable
test conditions, this draft proposes a way to specify the exact test conditions, this memo proposes a way to specify the exact
repeating sequence of packet sizes from the usual set of fixed sizes: repeating sequence of packet sizes from the usual set of fixed sizes:
the IMIX Genome. Other, less exact forms of size specification are the IMIX Genome. Other, less exact forms of size specification are
also recommended for extremely complicated or customized size mixes. also recommended for extremely complicated or customized size mixes.
We apply the term "genome" to infer that the entire test packet size
sequence can be replicated if this information is known, a parallel
to the information needed for biological replication.
This memo takes the position that it cannot be proven for all This memo takes the position that it cannot be proven for all
circumstances that the sequence of packet sizes does not affect the circumstances that the sequence of packet sizes does not affect the
test result, thus a standardized specification of sequence is test result, thus a standardized specification of sequence is
valuable. valuable.
2. Scope and Goals 2. Scope and Goals
This memo defines a method to unambiguously specify the sequence of This memo defines a method to unambiguously specify the sequence of
packet sizes that have been used in a load test, assuming that a packet sizes that have been used in a load test, assuming that a
skipping to change at page 5, line 21 skipping to change at page 5, line 23
other circumstances. other circumstances.
While documentation of the exact sequence is ideal, the memo also While documentation of the exact sequence is ideal, the memo also
covers the case where the sequence of sizes is very long or may be covers the case where the sequence of sizes is very long or may be
generated by a pseudo-random process. generated by a pseudo-random process.
It is a colossal non-goal to standardize one or more versions of the It is a colossal non-goal to standardize one or more versions of the
IMIX. This topic has been discussed on many occasions on the bmwg- IMIX. This topic has been discussed on many occasions on the bmwg-
list[IMIXonList]. The goal is to enable customization with minimal list[IMIXonList]. The goal is to enable customization with minimal
constraints while fostering repeatable testing once the fixed size constraints while fostering repeatable testing once the fixed size
testing is complete. testing is complete. Thus, the requirements presented in this
specification, expressed in [RFC2119] terms, are intended for those
performing/reporting laboratory tests to improve clarity and
repeatability.
3. Specification of the IMIX Genome 3. Specification of the IMIX Genome
The IMIX Genome is specified in the following format: The IMIX Genome is specified in the following format:
IMIX - 123456...x IMIX - 123456...x
where each number is replaced by the letter corresponding to the size where each number is replaced by the letter corresponding to the size
of the packet at that position in the sequence. The following table of the packet at that position in the sequence. The following table
gives the letter encoding for the [RFC2544] standard sizes (64, 128, gives the letter encoding for the [RFC2544] standard sizes (64, 128,
skipping to change at page 6, line 26 skipping to change at page 6, line 26
| 9000 | i | | 9000 | i |
| 16000 | j | | 16000 | j |
| MTU | z | | MTU | z |
+-------------+--------------------+ +-------------+--------------------+
For example: a five packet sequence with sizes 64,64,64,1280,1518 For example: a five packet sequence with sizes 64,64,64,1280,1518
would be designated: would be designated:
IMIX - aaafg IMIX - aaafg
If z (MTU) is used, the tester MUST specify the length of the MTU in
the report.
While this approach allows some flexibility, there are also While this approach allows some flexibility, there are also
constraints. constraints.
o Non-RFC2544 packet sizes would need to be approximated by those o Non-RFC2544 packet sizes would need to be approximated by those
available in the table. available in the table.
o The Genome for very long sequences can become undecipherable by o The Genome for very long sequences can become undecipherable by
humans. humans.
o z=MTU is seen as valuable, so MTU MUST be specified if used.
o "jumbo" sizes are included.
Some questions testers must ask and answer when using the IMIX Genome Some questions testers must ask and answer when using the IMIX Genome
are: are:
1. Multiple Source-Destination Address Pairs: is the IMIX sequence 1. Multiple Source-Destination Address Pairs: is the IMIX sequence
applicable to each pair, across multiple pairs in sets, or across applicable to each pair, across multiple pairs in sets, or across
all pairs? all pairs?
2. Multiple Tester Ports: is the IMIX sequence applicable to each 2. Multiple Tester Ports: is the IMIX sequence applicable to each
port, across multiple ports in sets, or across all ports? port, across multiple ports in sets, or across all ports?
The chosen configuration would be expressed the following general The chosen configuration would be expressed in the following general
form: form:
+-----------------------+-------------------------+-----------------+ +------------------------+--------------------------+---------------+
| Source | Destination | Corresponding | | Source Address + Port | Destination Address + | Corresponding |
| Address/Port/Blade | Address/Port/Blade | IMIX | | AND/OR Blade | Port AND/OR Blade | IMIX |
+-----------------------+-------------------------+-----------------+ +------------------------+--------------------------+---------------+
| x.x.x.x Blade2 | y.y.y.y Blade3 | IMIX - aaafg | | x.x.x.x Blade2 | y.y.y.y Blade3 | IMIX - aaafg |
+-----------------------+-------------------------+-----------------+ +------------------------+--------------------------+---------------+
where testers can specify the IMIX used between any two entities in where testers can specify the IMIX used between any two entities in
the test architecture (and Blade is a component in a multi-component the test architecture (and Blade is a component in a multi-component
device chassis). device chassis).
4. Specification of a Custom IMIX 4. Specification of a Custom IMIX
This section describes how to specify an IMIX with locally-selected
packet sizes
The Custom IMIX is specified in the following format: The Custom IMIX is specified in the following format:
CUSTOM IMIX - 123456...x CUSTOM IMIX - 123456...x
where each number is replaced by the letter corresponding to the size where each number is replaced by the letter corresponding to the size
of the packet at that position in the sequence. The tester MUST of the packet at that position in the sequence. The tester MUST
complete the following table, giving the letter encoding for each complete the following table, giving the letter encoding for each
size used, where each set of three lower-case letters would be size used, where each set of three lower-case letters would be
replaced by the integer size in octets. replaced by the integer size in octets.
skipping to change at page 7, line 49 skipping to change at page 8, line 8
+-------------+--------------------+ +-------------+--------------------+
For example: a five packet sequence with sizes For example: a five packet sequence with sizes
aaa=64,aaa=64,aaa=64,ggg=1020,ggg=1020 would be designated: aaa=64,aaa=64,aaa=64,ggg=1020,ggg=1020 would be designated:
CUSTOM IMIX - AAAGG CUSTOM IMIX - AAAGG
5. Reporting Long or Pseudo-Random Packet Sequences 5. Reporting Long or Pseudo-Random Packet Sequences
When the IMIX-Genome cannot be used (when the sheer length of the When the IMIX-Genome cannot be used (when the sheer length of the
sequence would make the genome unmanageable), two options are sequence would make the Genome unmanageable), two options are
possible. When a sequence can be decomposed into a series of short possible. When a sequence can be decomposed into a series of short
repeating sequences, then a run-length encoding approach MAY be used repeating sequences, then a run-length encoding approach MAY be
as shown below: specified as shown in the table below (using the single lower-case
letter Genome Codes from section 3):
+------------------------------+----------------------+ +------------------------------+----------------------+
| Count of Repeating Sequences | Packet Size Sequence | | Count of Repeating Sequences | Packet Size Sequence |
+------------------------------+----------------------+ +------------------------------+----------------------+
| 20 | abcd | | 20 | abcd |
| 5 | ggga | | 5 | ggga |
| 10 | dcba | | 10 | dcba |
+------------------------------+----------------------+ +------------------------------+----------------------+
The run-length encoding approach is also applicable to custom IMIX
described in section 4 (where the single upper-case letter Genome
Codes would be used instead).
When the sequence is designed to vary within some proportional When the sequence is designed to vary within some proportional
constraints, a table simply giving the proportions of each size MAY constraints, a table simply giving the proportions of each size MAY
be used instead. be used instead.
+-----------+---------------------+---------------------------+ +-----------+---------------------+---------------------------+
| IP Length | Percentage of Total | Length(s) at other layers | | IP Length | Percentage of Total | Length(s) at other layers |
+-----------+---------------------+---------------------------+ +-----------+---------------------+---------------------------+
| 64 | 23 | 82 | | 64 | 23 | 82 |
| 128 | 67 | 146 | | 128 | 67 | 146 |
| 1000 | 10 | 1018 | | 1000 | 10 | 1018 |
+-----------+---------------------+---------------------------+ +-----------+---------------------+---------------------------+
Note that the table of proportions also allows non-standard packet Note that the table of proportions also allows non-standard packet
sizes, but trades the short genome specification and ability to sizes, but trades the short Genome specification and ability to
specify the exact sequence for other flexibilities. specify the exact sequence for other flexibilities.
If a deterministic packet size generation method is used (such as
monotonic increase by one octet from start value to MTU), then the
generation algorithm SHOULD be reported.
If a pseudo-random length generation capability is used, then the If a pseudo-random length generation capability is used, then the
generation algorithm SHOULD be reported with the results along with generation algorithm SHOULD be reported with the results along with
the seed value used. We also recognize the opportunity to randomize the seed value used. We also recognize the opportunity to randomize
inter-packet spacing from a test sender as well as the size, and both inter-packet spacing from a test sender as well as the size, and both
spacing and length pseudo-random generation algorithms and seeds spacing and length pseudo-random generation algorithms and seeds
SHOULD be reported when used. SHOULD be reported when used.
Finally, we note another possibility: a pseudo-random sequence
generates an index to the table of packet lengths, and the generation
algorithm SHOULD be reported with the results along with the seed
value if used.
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
Benchmarking activities as described in this memo are limited to Benchmarking activities as described in this memo are limited to
technology characterization using controlled stimuli in a laboratory technology characterization using controlled stimuli in a laboratory
environment, with dedicated address space and the other constraints environment, with dedicated address space and the other constraints
[RFC2544]. [RFC2544].
The benchmarking network topology will be an independent test setup The benchmarking network topology will be an independent test setup
and MUST NOT be connected to devices that may forward the test and MUST NOT be connected to devices that may forward the test
traffic into a production network, or misroute traffic to the test traffic into a production network, or misroute traffic to the test
skipping to change at page 10, line 9 skipping to change at page 10, line 27
display?skey=testing_pppox, "Library: Test Plans", 2010. display?skey=testing_pppox, "Library: Test Plans", 2010.
[RFC5470] Sadasivan, G., Brownlee, N., Claise, B., and J. Quittek, [RFC5470] Sadasivan, G., Brownlee, N., Claise, B., and J. Quittek,
"Architecture for IP Flow Information Export", RFC 5470, "Architecture for IP Flow Information Export", RFC 5470,
March 2009. March 2009.
[Spirent] http://gospirent.com/whitepaper/ [Spirent] http://gospirent.com/whitepaper/
IMIX%20Test%20Methodolgy%20Journal.pdf, "Test Methodology IMIX%20Test%20Methodolgy%20Journal.pdf, "Test Methodology
Journal: IMIX (Internet Mix) Journal", 2006. Journal: IMIX (Internet Mix) Journal", 2006.
[jumbo] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/bmwg/current/ [jumbo] http://sd.wareonearth.com/~phil/jumbo.html and
msg00691.html, "Discussion of Jumbo Packets and FCS http://staff.psc.edu/mathis/MTU/arguments.html#crc,
Failure, see http://sd.wareonearth.com/~phil/jumbo.html "Discussion of Jumbo Packets and FCS Failure".
and http://staff.psc.edu/mathis/MTU/arguments.html#crc".
Author's Address Author's Address
Al Morton Al Morton
AT&T Labs AT&T Labs
200 Laurel Avenue South 200 Laurel Avenue South
Middletown,, NJ 07748 Middletown,, NJ 07748
USA USA
Phone: +1 732 420 1571 Phone: +1 732 420 1571
 End of changes. 21 change blocks. 
29 lines changed or deleted 50 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/