datatracker.ietf.org
Sign in
Version 5.4.0, 2014-04-22
Report a bug

Test Plan and Results for Advancing RFC 2680 on the Standards Track
draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-05

Document type: Active Internet-Draft (ippm WG)
Document stream: IETF
Last updated: 2014-04-07 (latest revision 2014-04-03)
Intended RFC status: Informational
Other versions: plain text, xml, pdf, html

IETF State: Submitted to IESG for Publication Jul 2013
Consensus: Yes
Document shepherd: Brian Trammell
Shepherd Write-Up: Last changed 2014-01-20

IESG State: RFC Ed Queue
IANA Action State: No IC
RFC Editor State: EDIT
Responsible AD: Spencer Dawkins
Send notices to: ippm-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680@tools.ietf.org

Network Working Group                                      L. Ciavattone
Internet-Draft                                                 AT&T Labs
Intended status: Informational                                   R. Geib
Expires: October 5, 2014                                Deutsche Telekom
                                                               A. Morton
                                                               AT&T Labs
                                                               M. Wieser
                                          Technical University Darmstadt
                                                           April 3, 2014

  Test Plan and Results for Advancing RFC 2680 on the Standards Track
                  draft-ietf-ippm-testplan-rfc2680-05

Abstract

   This memo proposes to advance a performance metric RFC along the
   standards track, specifically RFC 2680 on One-way Loss Metrics.
   Observing that the metric definitions themselves should be the
   primary focus rather than the implementations of metrics, this memo
   describes the test procedures to evaluate specific metric requirement
   clauses to determine if the requirement has been interpreted and
   implemented as intended.  Two completely independent implementations
   have been tested against the key specifications of RFC 2680.

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 October 5, 2014.

Ciavattone, et al.       Expires October 5, 2014                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft          Stds Track Tests RFC2680              April 2014

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 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.

   This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
   Contributions published or made publicly available before November
   10, 2008.  The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
   material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
   modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
   Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
   the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
   outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
   not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
   it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
   than English.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  RFC 2680 Coverage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  A Definition-centric metric advancement process . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Test configuration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Error Calibration, RFC 2680 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     4.1.  Clock Synchronization Calibration . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     4.2.  Packet Loss Determination Error . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   5.  Pre-determined Limits on Equivalence  . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   6.  Tests to evaluate RFC 2680 Specifications . . . . . . . . . .  11
     6.1.  One-way Loss, ADK Sample Comparison . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       6.1.1.  340B/Periodic Cross-imp. results  . . . . . . . . . .  12
       6.1.2.  64B/Periodic Cross-imp. results . . . . . . . . . . .  13

[include full document text]