IMIX Genome: Specification of variable packet sizes for additional testing
draft-ietf-bmwg-imix-genome-01

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (bmwg WG)
Author Al Morton 
Last updated 2012-01-08 (latest revision 2011-10-20)
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd None
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Working Group                                          A. Morton
Internet-Draft                                                 AT&T Labs
Intended status: Informational                           January 8, 2012
Expires: July 11, 2012

   IMIX Genome: Specification of variable packet sizes for additional
                                testing
                     draft-ietf-bmwg-imix-genome-01

Abstract

   Benchmarking Methodologies have always relied on test conditions with
   constant packet sizes, with the goal of understanding what network
   device capability has been tested.  Tests with constant packet size
   reveal device capabilities but differ significantly from the
   conditions encountered in operational deployment, and so additional
   tests are sometimes conducted with a mixture of packet sizes, or
   "IMIX".  The mixture of sizes a networking device will encounter is
   highly variable and depends on many factors.  An IMIX suited for one
   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
   augment the fixed size tests.  To address this need, and the
   perpetual goal of specifying repeatable test conditions, this draft
   defines a way to specify the exact repeating sequence of packet sizes
   from the usual set of fixed sizes, and other forms of mixed size
   specification.

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

Morton                    Expires July 11, 2012                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                 IMIX Genome                  January 2012

   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on July 11, 2012.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 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
   (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.

Morton                    Expires July 11, 2012                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft                 IMIX Genome                  January 2012

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   2.  Scope and Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   3.  Specification of the IMIX Genome  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   4.  Specification of a Custom IMIX  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   5.  Reporting Long or Pseudo-Random Packet Sequences  . . . . . . . 7
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
   8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Morton                    Expires July 11, 2012                 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft                 IMIX Genome                  January 2012

1.  Introduction

   This memo defines a method to unambiguously specify the sequence of
   packet sizes used in a load test.

   Benchmarking Methodologies [RFC2544] have always relied on test
   conditions with constant packet sizes, with the goal of understanding
   what network device capability has been tested.  Tests with the
   smallest size stress the header processing capacity, and tests with
   the largest size stress the overall bit processing capacity.  Tests
   with sizes in-between may determine the transition between these two
Show full document text