draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-intraarea-04.txt   draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-intraarea-05.txt 
Network Working Group Vishwas Manral Network Working Group Vishwas Manral
Internet Draft Netplane Systems Internet Draft Netplane Systems
Russ White Russ White
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Aman Shaikh Aman Shaikh
Expiration Date: September 2003 University of California Expiration Date: September 2003 University of California
File Name: draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-intraarea-04.txt March 2003 File Name: draft-bmwg-ospfconv-intraarea-05.txt March 2003
Benchmarking Methodology for Basic OSPF Convergence Benchmarking Basic OPSF Single Router Control Plane Convergence
draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-intraarea-04.txt draft-bmwg-ospfconv-intraarea-05.txt
1. Status of this Memo 1. Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its Areas, and its Working Groups. Note that other Task Force (IETF), its Areas, and its Working Groups. Note that other
groups may also distribute working documents as Internet Drafts. groups may also distribute working documents as Internet Drafts.
skipping to change at page 1, line 37 skipping to change at page 1, line 37
draft" or "work in progress". draft" or "work in progress".
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
2. Abstract 2. Abstract
This draft establishes standards for measuring OSPF convergence This draft establishes standards for measuring OSPF single router
performance on a single router (SR-Convergence [TERM]). Its initial control plane convergence [TERM]. Its initial emphasis is on the
emphasis is on the control plane of single OSPF routers. We do not control plane of single OSPF routers. We do not address forwarding
address forwarding plane performance. plane performance.
NOTE: Within this document, the word convergence relates to single
router control plane convergence only.
3. Motivation 3. Motivation
There is a growing interest in routing protocol SR-Convergence There is a growing interest in routing protocol convergence testing,
testing, with many people looking at various tests to determine how with many people looking at various tests to determine how long it
long it takes for a network to converge after various conditions takes for a network to converge after various conditions occur. The
occur. The major problem with this sort of testing is that the major problem with this sort of testing is that the framework of the
framework of the tests has a major impact on the results; for tests has a major impact on the results; for instance, determining
instance, determining when a network is converged, what parts of the when a network is converged, what parts of the router's operation are
router's operation are considered within the testing, and other such considered within the testing, and other such things will have a
things will have a major impact on what apparent performance routing major impact on what apparent performance routing protocols provide.
protocols provide.
This document attempts to provide a framework within which Open This document attempts to provide a framework within which Open
Shortest Path First [OSPF] performance testing can be placed, and Shortest Path First [OSPF] performance testing can be placed, and
provide some tests with which some aspects of OSPF performance can be provide some tests with which some aspects of OSPF performance can be
measured. The motivation of the draft is to provide a set of tests measured. The motivation of the draft is to provide a set of tests
that can provide the user comparable data from various vendors with that can provide the user comparable data from various vendors with
which to evaluate the OSPF protocol performance on the devices. which to evaluate the OSPF protocol performance on the devices.
4. Overview & Scope 4. Overview & Scope
While this document describes a specific set of tests aimed at While this document describes a specific set of tests aimed at
characterizing the SR-Convergence performance of OSPF processes in characterizing the single router control plane convergence
routers or other boxes that incorporate OSPF functionality, a key performance of OSPF processes in routers or other boxes that
objective is to propose methodology that will standardize the incorporate OSPF functionality, a key objective is to propose
conducting and reporting of convergence-related measurements. methodology that will standardize the conducting and reporting of
convergence-related measurements.
Things which are outside the scope of this document include: Things which are outside the scope of this document include:
o The interactions of SR-Convergence and forwarding; testing is o The interactions of convergence and forwarding; testing is
restricted to events occurring within the control plane. For- restricted to events occurring within the control plane. For-
warding performance is the primary focus in [INTERCONNECT] warding performance is the primary focus in [INTERCONNECT]
and it is expected to be dealt with in work that ensues from and it is expected to be dealt with in work that ensues from
[FIB-TERM]. [FIB-TERM].
o Inter area routing, AS-external routing, and simultaneous o Inter area route generation, AS-external route generation,
traffic on the control and data paths within the DUT. and simultaneous traffic on the control and data paths within
the DUT. While the tests outlined in this document measure
SPF time, flooding times, and other aspects of all OSPF con-
vergence performance, it does not provide tests for measuring
external or summary route generation, route translation, or
other OSPF interarea and external routing performance. These
are expected to be dealt with in a later draft.
Other drafts in the future may cover some of the items noted as not Other drafts in the future may cover some of the items noted as not
covered in the scope of this draft. For a discussion of the terminol- covered in the scope of this draft. For a discussion of the
ogy used in this draft (in relation to the tests themselves), refer terminology used in this draft (in relation to the tests themselves),
to [TERM]. For a discussion of the applicability of this draft, refer refer to [TERM]. For a discussion of the applicability of this draft,
to [APPLICABILITY]. refer to [APPLICABILITY].
While this draft assumes OSPFv2, which only carries routing informa- While this draft assumes OSPFv2, which only carries routing informa-
tion for IPv4 destinations, nothing in this draft precludes it from tion for IPv4 destinations, nothing in this draft precludes it from
use with OSPFv3, which carries IPv6 destinations. use with OSPFv3, which carries IPv6 destinations.
5. Test Conditions 5. Test Conditions
In all tests, the following test conditions will be assumed: In all tests, the following test conditions will be assumed:
o The link speed should be high enough so that does not become o The link speed should be high enough so that does not become
skipping to change at page 8, line 40 skipping to change at page 8, line 40
These tests measure the performance of an OSPF implementation for These tests measure the performance of an OSPF implementation for
basic intra-area tasks, including: basic intra-area tasks, including:
o Forming Adjacencies on Point-to-Point Link (Initialization) o Forming Adjacencies on Point-to-Point Link (Initialization)
o Forming Adjacencies on Point-to-Point Links o Forming Adjacencies on Point-to-Point Links
o Link Up with Information Already in the Database o Link Up with Information Already in the Database
o Initial SR-Convergence Time on a Designated Router Electing o Initial convergence Time on a Designated Router Electing (Broad-
(Broadcast) Network cast) Network
o Link Down with Layer 2 Detection o Link Down with Layer 2 Detection
o Link Down with Layer 3 Detection o Link Down with Layer 3 Detection
o Designated Router Election Time on A Broadcast Network o Designated Router Election Time on A Broadcast Network
8.1. Forming Adjacencies on Point-to-Point Link (Initialization) 8.1. Forming Adjacencies on Point-to-Point Link (Initialization)
This test measures the time required to form an OSPF adjacency from This test measures the time required to form an OSPF adjacency from
skipping to change at page 11, line 35 skipping to change at page 11, line 35
The time between the last hello received on R2 and the first The time between the last hello received on R2 and the first
network LSA generated by the DUT should be taken as the network LSA generated by the DUT should be taken as the
amount of time required for the DUT to complete a designated amount of time required for the DUT to complete a designated
router election computation. Note this test includes the dead router election computation. Note this test includes the dead
interval timer at the DUT, so this time can be factored out, interval timer at the DUT, so this time can be factored out,
or the hello and dead intervals reduced to make these timers or the hello and dead intervals reduced to make these timers
impact the overall test times less. All changed timers, the impact the overall test times less. All changed timers, the
number of routers connected to the link, and other variable number of routers connected to the link, and other variable
factors should be noted in the test results. factors should be noted in the test results.
8.5. Initial SR-Convergence Time on a Designated Router Electing (Broad- 8.5. Initial convergence Time on a Designated Router Electing (Broad-
cast) Network cast) Network
o Using reference topology 3 (Broadcast Network), begin with o Using reference topology 3 (Broadcast Network), begin with
the DUT connected to the network with OSPF enabled. OSPF the DUT connected to the network with OSPF enabled. OSPF
should be enabled on R1, but the broadcast link should be should be enabled on R1, but the broadcast link should be
disabled. disabled.
o Enable the broadcast link between R1 and the DUT. Note the o Enable the broadcast link between R1 and the DUT. Note the
time of the first hello received by R1. time of the first hello received by R1.
o Note the time the first network LSA is flooded by the DUT o Note the time the first network LSA is flooded by the DUT
at R1. at R1.
o The differential between the first hello and the first o The differential between the first hello and the first
network LSA is the time required by the DUT to converge on network LSA is the time required by the DUT to converge on
this new topology. this new topology.
This test assumes that the DUT will be the designated router This test assumes that the DUT will be the designated router
on the broadcast link. A similar test could be designed to on the broadcast link. A similar test could be designed to
test the SR-Convergence time when the DUT is not the desig- test the convergence time when the DUT is not the designated
nated router as well. router as well.
This test may be performed with varying numbers of devices This test may be performed with varying numbers of devices
attached to the broadcast network, and varying sets of LSAs attached to the broadcast network, and varying sets of LSAs
being advertised to the DUT from the routers attached to the being advertised to the DUT from the routers attached to the
broadcast network. Variations in the LSA sets and other fac- broadcast network. Variations in the LSA sets and other fac-
tors should be noted in the test results. tors should be noted in the test results.
The time required to elect a designated router, as measured The time required to elect a designated router, as measured
in Designated Router Election Time on A Broadcast Network, in Designated Router Election Time on A Broadcast Network,
above, may be subtracted from the results of this test to above, may be subtracted from the results of this test to
skipping to change at page 13, line 41 skipping to change at page 13, line 41
Thanks to Howard Berkowitz, (hcb@clark.net), for his encouragement Thanks to Howard Berkowitz, (hcb@clark.net), for his encouragement
and support. Thanks also to Gurpreet Singh and support. Thanks also to Gurpreet Singh
(Gurpreet.Singh@SpirentCom.COM) and Yasuhiro Ohara (Gurpreet.Singh@SpirentCom.COM) and Yasuhiro Ohara
(yasu@sfc.wide.ad.jp) for their comments as well. (yasu@sfc.wide.ad.jp) for their comments as well.
11. Normative References 11. Normative References
[OPSF]Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", RFC 2328, April 1998. [OPSF]Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", RFC 2328, April 1998.
[TERM]Manral, V., "OSPF Convergence Testing Terminiology and Concepts", [TERM]Manral, V., "OSPF Convergence Testing Terminiology and Concepts",
draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-term-03, March 2003 draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-term-04, March 2003
[APPLICABILITY] [APPLICABILITY]
Manral, V., "Benchmarking Applicability for Basic OSPF Conver- Manral, V., "Benchmarking Applicability for Basic OSPF Conver-
gence", draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-applicability-02, March 2003 gence", draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-applicability-03, March 2003
12. Informative References 12. Informative References
[INTERCONNECT] [INTERCONNECT]
Bradner, S., McQuaid, J., "Benchmarking Methodology for Network Bradner, S., McQuaid, J., "Benchmarking Methodology for Network
Interconnect Devices", RFC2544, March 1999. Interconnect Devices", RFC2544, March 1999.
[MILLISEC] [MILLISEC]
Alaettinoglu C., et al., "Towards Milli-Second IGP Convergence" Alaettinoglu C., et al., "Towards Milli-Second IGP Convergence"
draft-alaettinoglu-isis-convergence draft-alaettinoglu-isis-convergence
 End of changes. 

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.23, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/