Skip to main content

Packet Loss measurement Model
draft-bhaprasud-ippm-pm-00

The information below is for an old version of the document.
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Bharat M Gaonkar , Praveen Ananthasankaran , sudhin jacob , Giuseppe Fioccola
Last updated 2016-08-04
Stream (None)
Formats plain text htmlized pdfized bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-bhaprasud-ippm-pm-00
Network Working Group                                        BM. Gaonkar
Internet-Draft                                        P. Ananthasankaran
Intended status: Experimental                                   S. Jacob
Expires: February 5, 2017                               Juniper Networks
                                                             G. Fioccola
                                                          Telecom Italia
                                                          August 4, 2016

                     Packet Loss measurement Model
                     draft-bhaprasud-ippm-pm-00.txt

Abstract

   This document defines the loss measurement matrix models for service
   level packets on the network which can be implemented in different
   kind of network scenerios.

Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on February 5, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents

Gaonkar, et al.         Expires February 5, 2017                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                  PL Model                     August 2016

   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Loss Measurement Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  Complete data measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.2.  Color based data measurement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.3.  COS based Data measurement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.4.  COS and color based Data measurement  . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Active and Passive performance measurements . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Appendix  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5

1.  Introduction

   Today, Performance monitoring is a key technology to strengthen
   service offers based on enhanced QoE and SLAs.  The draft aims to
   define performance monitoring loss measurement matrix models for
   service level packets on the network.

   The network would be provisioned with multiple services having
   different SLAs based on the customers' requirement.  This models aims
   at computing Loss measurement for these services independently for
   each defined SLA matrixes.

   The class-of-service defined in the network drives the SLA factors
   and the implementation to achieve these SLAs.  This draft uses the
   class-of-service model for any given network to define the packet
   loss measurement for the different SLAs.

   The proposed matrix models is suitable mainly for passive performance
   measurements but can be considered for active and hybrid performance
   measurements as well.

   This solution models loss measurement in different kinds of network
   scenarios.  The different models explaind here will help to analyse
   packet loss pattern, analyze the network congestion in a better way
   and model the network in a better way.

Gaonkar, et al.         Expires February 5, 2017                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft                  PL Model                     August 2016

   Loss measurement is carried out between 2 end points.  The underlying
   technology could be an active loss measurement or a Passive loss
   measurement.

   Any loss measurement will require 2 counters

   o  Number of packets transmitted from one end point.

   o  Number of packets received at the other end point.

   This draft explains the different ways to model the above data and
   get meaningful result for the loss measurement compulation.  The
   underlying technology could be an MPLS Loss measurement, or based
   loss measurement or an IP based loss measurement.

2.  Terminologies

   TBD

3.  Loss Measurement Models

3.1.  Complete data measurement

   This model uses the complete data traffic between the 2 end-points to
   compute loss measurement.  This will result in computation of loss
   measurement for the entire traffic in the network in one direction.
   This is primerly used in cases of backbone traffic where traffic from
   different services are aggregated and send into the core network.

3.2.  Color based data measurement

   This is same as the abve section of "complete data measurement" with
   a minor difference.

   In this model the packets are counted in any one of the following
   ways

   o  Count all committed traffic between the 2 end-point for loss
      measurement.

   o  Count all Excess traffic which is beyond the committed traffic for
      the specific network.

   When both of these are combined then it becomes the model for
   complete traffic as mentioned in the above section.

   In practice the Color of traffic can be using any mechanism based on
   the network encapsulation.  As long as the packets could be treated

Gaonkar, et al.         Expires February 5, 2017                [Page 3]
Internet-Draft                  PL Model                     August 2016

   differently based on the underlying encapsulation this mechanism
   could be used.

   This is used in core networks where the aggregated traffic has
   differential priority and loss measurement can be computed on the
   committed traffic which is guaranteed in the network when compared
   with excess traffic which could be dropped based on network load and
   provisioning.

3.3.  COS based Data measurement

   This model uses the data traffic in the network which is flowing in a
   specific COS to measure the loss in the network.  Based on the class
   of traffic in the network the transmitted and received packets are
   counted to calculate the loss measurement.

   Cos is differentiated with Color as COS treats different classes with
   a set of network streams whereas color differentiates a set of
   packets within the same COS stream itself.

   Primary use of this kind of loss measurement is to measure loss
   measurement for a specific service which has strict SLAs.  The
   service could be a point-to-point layer2 service, an MPLS based
   service.

3.4.  COS and color based Data measurement

   This model uses a combination of both Color based data measurement
   and Cos based data measurement.  Packets are counter for a specific
   COS with a specific color.

4.  Active and Passive performance measurements

   This model reinforces the use of well known methodologies for passive
   performance measurements.  A very simple, flexible and
   straightforward mechanism is presented in [I-D.ietf-ippm-alt-mark].
   The basic idea is to virtually split traffic flows into consecutive
   batches of packets: each block represents a measurable entity
   unambiguously recognizable thanks to the alternate marking.  This
   approach, called Alternate Marking method, is efficient both for
   passive performance monitoring and for active performance monitoring.

5.  Acknowledgements

   TBD

Gaonkar, et al.         Expires February 5, 2017                [Page 4]
Internet-Draft                  PL Model                     August 2016

6.  Appendix

   TBD

7.  References

   [I-D.ietf-ippm-alt-mark]
              Fioccola, G., Capello, A., Cociglio, M., Castaldelli, L.,
              Chen, M., Zheng, L., Mirsky, G., and T. Mizrahi,
              "Alternate Marking method for passive performance
              monitoring", draft-ietf-ippm-alt-mark-01 (work in
              progress), July 2016.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

Authors' Addresses

   Bharat M Gaonkar
   Juniper Networks
   1133 Innovation Way
   Sunnyvale, California  94089
   USA

   Phone: 1-408-526-4000
   Email: gbharat@juniper.net

   Praveen Ananthasankaran
   Juniper Networks
   1133 Innovation Way
   Sunnyvale, California  94089
   USA

   Email: panantha@juniper.net

   Sudhin Jacob
   Juniper Networks
   1133 Innovation Way
   Sunnyvale, California  94089
   USA

   Email: sjacob@juniper.net

Gaonkar, et al.         Expires February 5, 2017                [Page 5]
Internet-Draft                  PL Model                     August 2016

   Giuseppe Fioccola
   Telecom Italia
   Via Reiss Romoli, 274
   Torino  10148
   Italy

   Email: giuseppe.fioccola@telecomitalia.it

Gaonkar, et al.         Expires February 5, 2017                [Page 6]