Benchmarking Virtual Switches in OPNFV
draft-ietf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv-04

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (bmwg WG)
Last updated 2017-07-27 (latest revision 2017-06-08)
Replaces draft-vsperf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Informational
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Reviews GENART will not review this version
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Sarah Banks
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2017-04-19)
IESG IESG state RFC Ed Queue
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Responsible AD Warren Kumari
Send notices to Sarah Banks <sbanks@encrypted.net>
IANA IANA review state Version Changed - Review Needed
IANA action state No IC
RFC Editor RFC Editor state AUTH48
Network Working Group                                          M. Tahhan
Internet-Draft                                               B. O'Mahony
Intended status: Informational                                     Intel
Expires: December 10, 2017                                     A. Morton
                                                               AT&T Labs
                                                            June 8, 2017

                 Benchmarking Virtual Switches in OPNFV
                    draft-ietf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv-04

Abstract

   This memo describes the contributions of the Open Platform for NFV
   (OPNFV) project on virtual switch performance "VSPERF", particularly
   in the areas of test set-ups and configuration parameters for the
   system under test.  This project has extended the current and
   completed work of the Benchmarking Methodology Working Group in IETF,
   and references existing literature.  The Benchmarking Methodology
   Working Group has traditionally conducted laboratory characterization
   of dedicated physical implementations of internetworking functions.
   Therefore, this memo describes the additional considerations when
   virtual switches are implemented in general-purpose hardware.  The
   expanded tests and benchmarks are also influenced by the OPNFV
   mission to support virtualization of the "telco" infrastructure.

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 December 10, 2017.

Tahhan, et al.          Expires December 10, 2017               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft           Benchmarking vSwitches                June 2017

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 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.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Benchmarking Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  Comparison with Physical Network Functions  . . . . . . .   5
     3.2.  Continued Emphasis on Black-Box Benchmarks  . . . . . . .   5
     3.3.  New Configuration Parameters  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.4.  Flow classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     3.5.  Benchmarks using Baselines with Resource Isolation  . . .   8
   4.  VSPERF Specification Summary  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   5.  3x3 Matrix Coverage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     5.1.  Speed of Activation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     5.2.  Accuracy of Activation section  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     5.3.  Reliability of Activation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     5.4.  Scale of Activation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     5.5.  Speed of Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     5.6.  Accuracy of Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     5.7.  Reliability of Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
     5.8.  Scalability of Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
     5.9.  Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
Show full document text