Network Working Group Terry Martin
Internet-Draft M2networx INC
Expiration Date: B. Hickman
Netcom Systems
June 2000
Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls
<draft-ietf-bmwg-firewall-00.txt>
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
4. Test setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.1 Test Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.2 Virtual Client/Servers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.3 Test Traffic Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.4 DUT/SUT Traffic Flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.5 Multiple Client/Server Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.6 NAT(Network Address Translation) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.7 Rule Sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.8 Web Caching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Benchmarking Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.1 Concurrent Connection Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.2 Maximum Connection Rate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.3 Denial Of Service Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.3 Single Application Goodput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.4 FTP Goodput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.5 SMTP Goodput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.6 HTTP Goodput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Martin, Hickman [Page 1]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
5.7 Mixed Application Goodput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.8 Illegal Traffic Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.9 Latency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
A. File Transfer Protocol(FTP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
A.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
A.2 Connection Establishment/Teardown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
A.3 Object Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
B. Simple Mail Transfer Protocol(SMTP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
B.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
B.2 Connection Establishment/Teardown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
B.3 Object Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
C. HyperText Transfer Protocol(HTTP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
C.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
C.2 Version Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
C.3 Object Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
D. GoodPut Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
E. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
1. Introduction
This document is intended to provide methodology for the benchmarking
of firewalls. It provides methodologies for benchmarking forwarding
performance, connection performance, latency and filtering. In
addition to defining the tests, this document also describes specific
formats for reporting the results of the tests.
A previous document, "Benchmarking Terminology for Firewall
Performance" [1], defines many of the terms that are used in this
document. The terminology document SHOULD be consulted before
attempting to make use of this document.
2. Requirements
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.
3. Scope
Firewalls can provide a single point of defense between two
networks--it protects one network from the other. Usually, a firewall
protects the company's private network from the public or shared
networks to which it is connected. A firewall can be as simple as a
device that filters different packets or as complex as a group of
devices providing solutions that offers combined packet filtering
and application-level proxy or network translation services. This RFC
will focus on developing bench mark testing of systems from an
application perspective and will be developed independent of any
firewall implementation. These tests will evaluate the ability of
firewall devices to control and manage applications services used
Martin, Hickman [Page 2]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
by today's businesses such as applications like the World Wide Web,
File transfer procedures and e-mail.
Even through there are many different control methods of managing
application level being implemented, this RFC does not condone or
promote any aforementioned process or procedure. It's goal is to
present a procedure that will evaluate firewall performance
independent of their implementation.
4. Test Setup
Test configurations defined in this document will be confined to
dual-homed and tri-homed as shown in figure 1 and figure 2
respectively.
Firewalls employing Dual-Homed configurations connect two networks.
One interface of the firewall is attached to the unprotected network,
typically the public network(i.e. - Internet). The other interface is
connected to the protected network, typically the internal LAN. In
the case of Dual-Homed configurations, servers which are made
accessible to the public(Unprotected) network are attached to the
private(Protected) network.
+----------+ +----------+
| | | +----------+ | | |
| Servers/ |----| | | |------| Servers/ |
| Clients | | | | | | Clients |
| | |-------| DUT/SUT |--------| | |
+----------+ | | | | +----------+
| +----------+ |
Protected | | Unprotected
Network Network
Figure 1(Dual-Homed)
Tri-homed configurations employ a third segment called a DMZ. With
tri-homed configurations, servers accessible to the public network
are attached to the DMZ. Tri-Homed configurations offer additional
security by separating server accessible to the public network from
internal hosts.
Martin, Hickman [Page 3]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
+----------+ +----------+
| | | +----------+ | | |
| Clients |----| | | |------| Servers/ |
| | | | | | | Clients |
+----------+ |-------| DUT/SUT |--------| | |
| | | | +----------+
| +----------+ |
Protected | | | Unprotected
Network | Network
|
|
-----------------
| DMZ
|
|
+-----------+
| |
| Servers |
| |
+-----------+
Figure 2(Tri-Homed)
4.1 Test Considerations
4.2 Virtual Clients/Servers
Since firewall testing may involve data sources which emulate multiple
users or hosts, the methodology uses the terms virtual clients/servers.
For these firewall tests, virtual clients/servers specify application
layer entities which may not be associated with a unique physical
interface. For example, four virtual clients may originate from the
same data source.
4.3 Test Traffic Requirements
While the function of a firewall is to enforce access control
policies, the criteria by which those policies are defined vary
depending on the implementation. Firewalls may use network layer
and/or, in many cases, application-layer criteria to make
access-control decisions. Therefore, the test equipment used to
benchmark the DUT/SUT performance MUST consist of real clients and
servers generating legitimate layer 7 conversations. Specifically,
the tests defined in this document use HTTP, FTP, and SMTP sessions
for benchmarking the performance of the DUT/SUT. See appendices for
specific information regarding the transactions involved in
establishing/tearing down connections as well as object formats
for each of the aforementioned protocols.
Martin, Hickman [Page 4]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
4.4 DUT/SUT Traffic Flows
This section discusses the client -> server traffic flow
requirements associated with the source -> destination interfaces
of the firewall. Since the number of interfaces are not fixed, the
traffic flows will be dependent upon the configuration used in
benchmarking the DUT/SUT. Note that the term "traffic flows" is in
the context of client requests since traffic between clients and
servers are, by nature, bi-directional with transactions occurring
between both entities.
In the case of Dual-Homed configurations, traffic flows presented
to the DUT/SUT SHOULD consist of client -> server requests associated
with the following interfaces:
Protected -> Unprotected
Unprotected -> Protected
In the case of Tri-Homed configurations, traffic flows presented
to the DUT/SUT SHOULD consist of client -> server requests associated
with the following interfaces:
Protected -> Unprotected
Protected -> DMZ
Unprotected -> DMZ
4.5 Multiple Client/Server Testing
The methodologies defined in this document MAY be performed with one
or more clients targeting multiple servers for a given application.
When performing tests with one or more virtual clients targeting
multiple servers, each virtual client MUST initiate requests
(Connection, file transfers, etc.) in a round-robin fashion. For
example, if the test consisted of six virtual clients targeting
three servers, the pattern would be as follows:
Client Target Server(In order of request)
#1 1 2 3 1...
#2 2 3 1 2...
#3 3 1 2 3...
#4 1 2 3 1...
#5 2 3 1 2...
#6 3 1 2 3...
Martin, Hickman [Page 5]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
4.6 NAT(Network Address Translation)
Most firewalls come with Network Address Translation(NAT)networks
built in which translates internal host IP addresses attached to the
protected network to a virtual IP address for communicating across the
unprotected network(Internet). Since this involves additional processing
on the part of the DUT/SUT, its impact on performance should be measured.
Therefore, tests defined in this document SHOULD first be ran with NAT
disabled and then repeated with NAT enabled to determine the performance
differentials.
4.7 Rule Sets
Rule sets are a collection of access control policies that determines
which packets the DUT/SUT will forward and which it will reject. The
criteria by which these access control policies may be defined will
vary depending on the capabilities of the product. Therefore, this
document will not attempt to define the specifics of the rule sets,
but instead define how the rule sets should be applied when testing
the DUT/SUT.
The firewall monitors the incoming traffic and checks to make sure
that the traffic meets one of the defined rules before allowing it to
be forwarded. It is RECOMMENDED that a rule be entered for each
host(i.e. - Virtual client). Although many firewalls permit groups
of IP addresses to be defined for a given rule, tests SHOULD be
performed with as large a rule set as possible to better stress test
the DUT/SUT. In addition, a rule MUST be defined which denies access
to all traffic which was not previously defined in the rule set,
provided such a rule can be defined in the DUT/SUT.
4.8 Web Caching
Some firewalls include caching agents in order to reduce network
load. When making a request through a caching agent, the caching
agent attempts to service the response from its internal resources.
The cache itself saves responses it receives, such as responses for
HTTP GET requests. Therefore, caching SHOULD be disabled on the
DUT/SUT prior to performing the tests.
Martin, Hickman [Page 6]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
5. Benchmarking Tests
The following tests offer objectives, procedures, and reporting
formats for benchmarking firewalls.
5.1 Concurrent Connection Capacity
5.1.1 Objective
To determine the maximum number of concurrent connections supported
by the DUT/SUT, as defined in RFC2647[1]. This test will employ a
step search algorithm to obtain the maximum number of concurrent FTP
connections the DUT/SUT can maintain.
5.1.2 Setup Parameters
The following parameters MUST be defined. Each variable is configured
with the following considerations.
Connection Attempt Rate - The rate at which new connection requests
are attempted. The rate SHOULD be set lower than maximum rate at
which the DUT/SUT can accept new connection requests. The connection
attempt rate MUST be evenly divided among all of the participating
virtual clients.
Connection Step count - Defines the number of additional connections
attempted for each iteration of the search algorithm. The step count
SHOULD be a multiple of the number of virtual clients participating
in the test. In addition, the number MUST be greater than or equal to
the number of virtual clients participating in the test.
5.1.3 Procedure
Each virtual client will attempt to establish FTP control connections
by issuing an OPEN command to their target server(s) at a fixed rate.
Each iteration will involve the virtual clients attempting to
establish a fixed number of additional connections. This search
algorithm will be repeated until either:
- One or more of the additional connection attempts fail to
complete
- One or more of the previously established connections drop.
The transactions between the client and server associated with
establishing FTP connections are defined in Appendix A. In order to
verify that work can be performed across that connection, the virtual
client MUST issue a NOOP command. This command is in addition to the
transactions define in Appendix A, and must be accompanied by the
Command Successful reply from the target server in order to be
considered a successful connection.
Martin, Hickman [Page 7]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
After each iteration, all virtual clients MUST issue a NOP command
across all of their open connections to verify that none of the
previously opened connections were dropped by the DUT/SUT.
The algorithm for the test is as follows:
CONSTANT
STEP = Connection Step Count; {# of additional connection attempts
per iteration}
MAX = ...; {maximum connections supported by test tool
implementation}
VARIABLE
CURRENT := 0; {Highest passed value}
STATUS = PASS;
BEGIN
RESET; {RESET all connections}
DO
BEGIN
EstablishStepConnections; { See Appendix A.3}
IF(AttemptsSucessful) THEN
BEGIN
VerifyAllConnections { Send NOP command over all open
connections }
IF(Received replies for all NO0P commands) THEN
BEGIN { Maximum number of connections NOT found }
CURRENT := CURRENT + Step Count
END
ELSE
BEGIN { Maximum number of connections < Step Count }
STATUS := FAIL
END
END
ELSE
BEGIN { Maximum number of connections < Step Count }
STATUS := FAIL
END
END
END WHILE(STATUS == PASS && [[CURRENT + Step Count] < MAX])
END
END {Value of CURRENT equals number connections supported by DUT/SUT}
5.1.4 Measurements
Whether all of the connection attempts were successfully completed.
Test equipment MUST be able to track each connection to verify all
required transaction between the virtual client and server completed
successfully. This includes successful completion of both the
command sequences and exchanging of any data across each of those
connections.
Martin, Hickman [Page 8]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
5.1.5 Reporting Format
Maximum concurrent connections reported MUST be the aggregate number
of connections completed for the last successful iteration. Report
SHOULD also include:
- Number of virtual clients and servers participating in the test
- Whether NAT was enabled or disabled.
5.2 Maximum Connection Setup Rate
5.2.1 Objective
To determine the maximum connection rate which the DUT/SUT can
successfully establish connections. As with the Concurrent Connection
Capacity test, FTP session will be used to determine this metric.
5.2.2 Setup Parameters
The following parameters MUST be defined. Each variable is configured
with the following considerations.
Initial Attempt Rate - The rate at which the initial connection
requests are attempted. The connection attempt rate MUST be evenly
divided among all of the participating virtual clients.
Rate Step Count - The rate at which connection attempts are either
increased or decreased during the search algorithm. The rate step
count MUST be evenly divided among all of the participating virtual
clients.
Number of Connections - Defines the number of connections that must
be established. The number MUST be between the number of
participating virtual clients and the maximum number supported by the
implementation. It is RECOMMENDED not to exceed the concurrent
connection capacity found in section 5.1.
5.2.3 Procedure
An algorithm similar to the one used to determine the concurrent
connection capacity will be used to determine the maximum connection
rate. This test iterates the rate at which connections are attempted
by the virtual clients to their associated server(s).
The connection establishment rate might be determined for different
numbers of connections but in each test run, the number MUST remain
constant and SHOULD be equal to or less than the maximum connection
capacity.
Martin, Hickman [Page 9]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
As with the connection capacity test, NOOP commands will be
generated when both establishing the connection and after all
connections have been established to verify none of the previously
established connections have dropped.
5.2.4 Measurements
Min/Avg/Max connection times MUST be measured. The connection time
SHALL begin when the client initiates the OPEN command and end when
the client received a successful login acknowledgment from the
server. Note that although the NOOP command is included as part of
the procedure for establishing the connection, it MUST not be
included as part of the connection establishment time.
5.2.5 Reporting Format
The results for these tests SHOULD be reported in the form of a
graph. The x coordinate SHOULD be the connection count. The y
coordinate should be the connection establishment time. The graph
SHOULD include the Minimum, Average and Maximum connection times.
Report SHOULD also include:
- Number of virtual clients and servers participating in the test
- Whether NAT was enabled or disabled.
5.3 Denial Of Service Handling
5.3.1 Objective
To determine the effect of a denial of service attack in so far as
it's impacts on connection establishment rates through the DUT/SUT.
The Denial Of Service Handling test should be ran after obtaining
baseline measurements from section 5.2. The results can then be
compared with the baseline measurements to obtain the performance
differentials.
5.3.2 Setup Parameters
The following parameters MUST be defined. Each variable is
configured with the following considerations.
Initial Attempt Rate - The rate at which the initial connection
requests are attempted. The connection attempt rate MUST be evenly
divided among all of the participating virtual clients.
Rate Step Count - The rate at which connection attempts are either
increased or decreased during the search algorithm. The rate step
count MUST be evenly divided among all of the virtual clients
participating in the test.
Martin, Hickman [Page 10]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
Number of Connections - Defines the number of connections that must
be established. The number MUST be between the number of
participating clients and the maximum number supported by the
implementation. It is RECOMMENDED not to exceed the concurrent
connection capacity found in section 5.1.
SYN Attack Rate - Defines the rate at which the server(s) are
targeted with TCP SYN packets.
5.3.3 Procedure
This test will use the same procedure as defined in the maximum
connection setup rate, except that the test traffic will include
TCP SYN packets targeting the server(s) IP address or NAT proxy
address.
TCP employs a "three-way handshake" when establishing a connection
between two hosts. When a normal TCP connection starts, a destination
host receives a SYN (synchronize/start)packet from a source host and
sends back a SYN ACK (synchronize acknowledge). The destination host
must then hear an ACK (acknowledge) of the SYN ACK before the
connection is established. The TCP SYN attack exploits this design
by having an attacking source host generate TCP SYN packets with
random source addresses towards a victim host, thereby consuming
that hosts resources.
The tester originating the TCP SYN attack MUST be attached to the
Unprotected network. In addition, the tester MUST not respond to the
SYN ACK packets sent by target server in response to the SYN packet.
5.3.4 Measurements
Min/Avg/Max connection times MUST be measured. The connection time
SHALL begin when the client initiates the OPEN command and end when
the client received a successful login acknowledgment from the
server. Note that although the NOOP command is included as part of
the procedure for establishing the connection, it MUST not be
included as part of the connection establishment time.
5.2.5 Reporting Format
The results for these tests SHOULD be reported in the form of a
graph. The x coordinate SHOULD be the connection count. The y
coordinate should be the connection establishment time. The graph
SHOULD include the Minimum, Average and Maximum connection times.
Report SHOULD also include:
- Number of virtual clients and servers participating in the test
- Whether NAT was enabled or disabled.
- TCP SYN Attack Rate
Martin, Hickman [Page 11]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
5.4 Single Application Goodput
This section defined the procedures for baselining the Goodput of the
DUT/SUT for FTP, HTTP and SMTP traffic.
5.4.1.1 FTP Goodput
5.4.1.2 Objective
The File Transfer Protocol is a common application used by companies
to transfer files from one device to another. Evaluating FTP Goodput
will allow individuals to measure how much successful traffic has
been forwarded by the DUT/SUT.
5.4.1.3 Setup Parameters
The following parameters MUST be defined. Each variable is
configured with the following considerations.
Number of Connections - Defines the number of connections to be
opened for transferring data objects. Number MUST be equal or
greater than the number of virtual clients participating in the
test. The number SHOULD be a multiple of the virtual client
participating in the test.
Connection Rate - Defines the rate at which connections are
established. Number MUST be evenly divided among all of the
virtual clients participating in the test.
Object Size - Defines the number of bytes to be transferred across
each connection. RECOMMENDED object sizes still need to be
determined.
5.4.1.4 Procedure
Each virtual client will establish a FTP connection to its respective
server(s) at a user specified rate. The transaction involved in
establishing the FTP connection should follow the procedure defined
in Appendix A.
After the login process has been completed, the virtual client will
initiate a file transfer by issuing a "Get" command. The "Get"
command will target a predefined file of object size bytes.
Once the file transfer has completed, the virtual client will close
the FTP connection by issuing the QUIT command. When testing multiple
object sizes, all connections established for the previous file
transfer MUST have been torn down before testing the next object
size.
Martin, Hickman [Page 12]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
5.4.2.2 Measurement
The Goodput for each of the object sizes transferred MUST be
measured. See appendix B for details in regards to measuring the
Goodput of the DUT/SUT. Only file transfers which have been
successfully acknowledged by the server are to be included in the
Goodput measurements.
The transaction time for each object transferred MUST be measured.
The start time will begin when the time the "Get" commands is
initiated and end at the time when the client receives an
acknowledgment from the server that file transfer has completed.
5.4.2.3 Reporting Format
Goodput analysis:
Reporting SHOULD include a graph of the number of connections
versus the measured Goodput in Mbps.
Failure analysis:
Reporting should include a graph of number of connections versus
percent success.
Transaction Processing analysis:
Reporting should include a graph of number of virtual connections
versus average transaction time.
6.4.3 SMTP Goodput
Another application commonly in use today is the mail transfer. One
the common transport mechanisms for mail messages is the Simple Mail
Transfer Protocol(SMTP). As with the FTP Goodput, the SMTP Goodput
will allow individuals to measure how much successful SMTP traffic
has been forwarded by the DUT/SUT.
5.4.1.3 Setup Parameters
The following parameters MUST be defined. Each variable is
configured with the following considerations.
Number of Connections - Defines the number of connections to be
opened for transferring data objects. Number MUST be equal or
greater than the number of virtual clients participating in the
test. The number SHOULD be a multiple of the virtual client
participating in the test.
Connection Rate - Defines the rate at which connections are
attempted. Number MUST be evenly divided among all of the
virtual clients participating in the test.
Martin, Hickman [Page 13]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
Message Size - Defines the number of bytes to be transferred across
each connection. RECOMMENDED message sizes still need to be
determined.
5.4.1.4 Procedure
Each virtual client will establish a SMTP connection to its
respective server(s) at a user specified rate. The transaction
involved in establishing the SMTP connection should follow the
procedure defined in Appendix B.
After the greeting exchanges have been completed, the client will
initiate the transfer of the message by initiating the MAIL command.
The client will then send the predefined message.
Once the message has been acknowledged as being received by the
server, the virtual client will then close the connection. When
testing multiple message sizes, all connections established for the
previous test MUST be torn down before testing the next message
size. This process is to be repeated for each of the defined message
sizes.
5.4.2.2 Measurement
The Goodput for each of the message sizes transferred MUST be
measured. See appendix D for details in regards to measuring the
Goodput of the DUT/SUT. Only messages which have been successfully
acknowledged by the server are to be included in the Goodput
measurements.
The transaction time for each message transferred MUST be measured.
The start time will begin when the time the "MAIL" command is
initiated and end at the time when the client receives an
acknowledgment from the server that the message has been received.
6.4.2.3 Reporting Format
Goodput analysis:
Reporting SHOULD include a graph of the number of connections
versus the measured Goodput in Mbps.
Failure analysis:
Reporting should include a graph of number of connections versus
percent success.
Transaction Processing analysis:
Reporting should include a graph of number of virtual connections
versus average transaction time.
Martin, Hickman [Page 14]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
6.4.3 HTTP Goodput
Another common application is the World Wide Web (WWW) application
that can access documents over the Internet. This application uses
the Hypertext Transfer Control Protocol (HTTP) to copy information
from one system to another.
HTTP Goodput measurement is actually determined by evaluating the
Forwarding rate of packets. This is based on measuring only data
that has successfully been forwarded to the destination interface.
When benchmarking the performance of the DUT/SUT, consideration of
the HTTP version being used must be taken into account. Appendix C
of this document discusses enhancements to the HTTP protocol which
may impact performance results.
6.4.1.3 Setup Parameters
The following parameters MUST be defined. Each variable is
configured with the following considerations.
Number of Connections - Defines the number of HTTP connections
to be opened for transferring data objects. Number MUST be equal or
greater than the number of virtual clients participating in the
test. The number SHOULD be a multiple of the virtual client
participating in the test.
Connection Rate - Defines the rate at which connections are
attempted. Number MUST be evenly divided among all of the
virtual clients participating in the test.
Object Size - Defines the number of bytes to be transferred
across each connection. Need to determine the RECOMMENDED
object sizes.
6.4.2.1 HTTP Procedure
For the HTTP Goodput tests, it is RECOMMENDED to determine which
version of HTTP the DUT/SUT has implemented and use the same
version for the test. To determine the version of HTTP, the user
documentation of the DUT/SUT SHOULD be consulted.
Each client will attempt to establish HTTP connection's to their
respective servers a user defined rate. The clients will attach to
the servers using either the servers IP address or NAT proxy
address.
After the client has established the connection with the server,
the client will initiate GET command(s) to retrieve predefined
web page(s).
Martin, Hickman [Page 15]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
When employing HTTP/1.0 in benchmarking the performance of the
DUT/SUT, only one object will be retrieved for each of the defined
object sizes. After the object has been transferred, the connection
should then be torn down. When defining multiple objects, object
transfers must be completed and the connections closed for all
of the participating clients prior testing the next object size.
This process is repeated until all of the defined objects are
tested.
When employing HTTP/1.1, all objects defined by the user will
be requested with a GET request over the same connection. The
connection should then be torn down after all of the objects
have been transferred.
6.4.2.2 Measurement
The Goodput for each of the objects sizes transferred MUST be
measured. See appendix D for details in regards to measuring the
Goodput of the DUT/SUT. Only objects which have been successfully
acknowledged by the server are to be included in the Goodput
measurements.
The transaction times for each object transferred MUST measured.
The transaction connection time starts when the connection is
made and will end when the web pages is completely mapped on the
virtual client (when the client sends an acknowledgment packet is
sent from the client).
6.4.2.3 Reporting Format
Goodput analysis:
Reporting SHOULD include a graph of the number of connections
versus the measured Goodput in Mbps.
Failure analysis:
Reporting should include a graph of number of connections versus
percent success.
Transaction Processing analysis:
Reporting should include a graph of number of virtual connections
versus average transaction time.
Version Information
Report MUST include the version of HTTP used for the test. In
addition, if the HTTP/1.1 is used, the number of concurrent GET's
allowable(Pipelining) SHOULD be reported.
Martin, Hickman [Page 16]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
6.5 Concurrent Application Goodput
To determine the Goodput of the DUT/SUT when offering a mix of FTP,
SMTP and HTTP traffic flows. Real world traffic does not consist
of a single protocol, but a mix of different applications. This
test will allow an individual to determine how well the DUT/SUT
handles a mix of applications by comparing the results to the
individual baseline measurements.
6.5.1 Setup Parameters
The following parameters MUST be defined. Each variable is
configured with the following considerations.
Number of Connections - Defines the aggregate number of connections
to be opened for transferring data/message objects. Number MUST be
equal to or greater than the number of virtual clients participating
in the test. The number SHOULD be a multiple of the virtual client
participating in the test.
Connection Rate - Defines the rate at which connections attempts are
opened. Number MUST be evenly divided among all of the virtual
clients participating in the test.
Object/Message Size - Defines the number of bytes to be transferred
across each connection. RECOMMENDED message sizes still needs to be
determined.
At a minimum, at least one of the following parameters MUST be
defined. In addition, the cumulative percentage all the defined
percentages MUST equal 100%.
FTP Percentage - Defines the percentage of traffic connections
which are to consist of FTP file transfers.
SMTP Percentage - Defines the percentage of traffic connections
which are to consist of SMTP Message transfers.
HTTP Percentage - Defines the percentage of traffic connections
which are to consist of HTTP GET requests.
6.5.1 Procedure
This test will run each of the single application Goodput tests,
for which there is a defined percentage, concurrently. For each
of the defined traffic types, the connection establishment,
data/message transfer and teardown procedures will be the same
as defined in the individual tests.
Martin, Hickman [Page 17]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
6.5.2 Measurements
As with the individual tests, the Goodput for each of the defined
traffic types MUST be measured. See appendix D for details in
regards to measuring the Goodput of the DUT/SUT. Only messages/data
which have been successfully acknowledged as being transferred are
to be included in the Goodput measurements.
The transaction times for each of the defined applications MUST be
measured. See the appropriate single application Goodput test for
the specifics of measuring the transaction times for each of the
defined traffic types.
6.5.3 Reporting Format
Goodput analysis:
Reporting SHOULD include a graph of the number of connections
versus the measured Goodput in Mbps for each of the defined
traffic types(FTP, SMTP, HTTP).
Failure analysis:
Reporting should include a graph of number of connections versus
percent success for each of the defined traffic types.
Transaction Processing analysis:
Reporting should include a graph of number of virtual connections
versus average transaction for each of the defined traffic types.
6.6 Illegal Traffic Handling
To determine the behavior of the DUT/SUT when presented with a
combination of both legal and Illegal traffic.
6.6.1 Procedure
Still Needs to be determined
6.6.2 Measurements
Still Needs to be determined
6.6.3 Reporting Format
Still Needs to be determined
Martin, Hickman [Page 18]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
6.7 Latency
Determine the latency of application layer data through the DUT/SUT.
6.7.1 Procedure
Still Needs to be determined
6.7.2 Measurements
Still needs to be determined.
6.7.3 Reporting format
Still needs to be determined.
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: FTP(File Transfer Protocol)
A.1 Introduction
The FTP protocol was designed to be operated by interactive end users
or application programs. The communication protocol to transport this
service is TCP. The core functions of this application enable users
to copy files between systems, view directory listings and perform
house keeping chores - such as renaming, deleting and copying files.
Unlike other protocols, FTP uses two connections. One connection,
called the control connection, is used to pass commands between
the client and the server. The other, called the data connection, is
used to transfer the actual data(Files, directory lists, etc.).
A.2 Connection Establishment/Teardown(Control)
FTP control connections are established by issuing OPEN command
targeting either the URL or a specific IP address. Since the
methodology does not include DNS servers, OPEN commands should
target specific IP address of target server.
It is RECOMMENDED to perform the test using Anonymous FTP Login and
should use the following syntax:
User ID: Anonymous
Password: will correspond to the System ID
(client1_1@test.net through client 1_8@test.net)
Once a successful login acknowledgment is received from the server,
the client may then initiate a file transfer. After all transfer
operations have been completed, the FTP connection may be closed by
issuing a QUIT command.
Martin, Hickman [Page 19]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
A.3 Data Connection
The data connection is established each time the user requests a file
transfer and torn down when the transfer is completed. FTP supports
two modes of operation, namely normal mode and passive mode, which
determine who initiates the data connection. In normal mode
operation, the server initiates the data connection, targeting a
predefined PortID specified in the PORT command. In passive mode, the
client initiates the data connection, targeting the PortID returned
in response to the PASV Command. It is RECOMMENDED to perform the
tests in normal mode operation.
File transfers are initiated by using the "Get" or "Put" command and
specifying the desired filename. The tests defined in this document
will use the "Get" command to initiate file transfers from the target
server to the client.
A.4 Object Format
Need to define the object format.
APPENDIX B: SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol)
B.1 Introduction
The SMTP defines a simple straight forward way to move messages
between hosts. There are two roles in the SMTP protocol, one is the
sender and one is the receiver. The sender acts like a client and
establishes a TCP connection with the receiver which acts like a
server. The transactions defined in this section will use the terms
client and server in place of sender and receiver.
B.2 Connection Establishment/Teardown
Each connection involves a connection greeting between the
sender(Client) and receiver(Server). After a connection is first
established, both the server and the client will exchange greetings
identifying themselves. The syntax used to identify each other's
hostnames SHOULD be:
"SMTPRcv_<Virtual_Server>.com"
"SMTPSender_<Virtual Client>.com"
where <Virtual_Client> and <Virtual_Server> represent a
unique virtual number for the client and server
respectively.
Martin, Hickman [Page 20]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
The basic transactions in moving mail between two hosts involve three
basic steps which are outlined below. These are:
1) Client issuing a MAIL command identifying the message originator
for that session. Syntax used to identify the originator SHOULD
be as follows:
connection1,2,3...@hostname
2) Client issues an RCPT command identifying the recipient of the
message for that session. Syntax used to identify the recipient
of the message SHOULD be as follows:
reciever1,2,3...@hostname
3) Client issues a DATA command. After receiving the
acknowledgment from the server, the client will then transfer
the message which MUST include a line with a period to
indicate to the server the end of the message. Once the end of
message is received by the server, it will acknowledge the end
of message.
The client may initiate another message transfer or close the session
by initiating the QUIT command.
B.3 Message Format
As Internet e-mail has evolved, SMTP extensions have been added to
support both audio and video message transfers. For these firewall
tests, messages SHOULD consist of plain text ASCII.
APPENDIX C: HTTP(HyperText Transfer Protocol)
C.1 Introduction
As HTTP has evolved over the years, changes to the protocol have
occurred to both fix problems of previous versions as well as improve
performance. The most common versions in use today are HTTP/1.0 and
HTTP/1.1 and are and are discussed below.
C.2 Version Considerations
HTTP/1.1 was approved by the WWW Consortium in July 1999 as an IETF
Draft Standard. This is a formal recognition of the fact that all
known technical issues have been resolved in the specification which
was brought out in June 1997. HTTP/1.1 is also downward compatible
with HTTP/1.0. Both protocols on the popular browsers in use today.
The following is a list of features that are offered in HTTP 1.1 that
are not in HTTP 1.0.
Martin, Hickman [Page 21]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
- Persistent connections and pipelining
Though both use TCP for data transfer, but differ in the way it is
used, with the later version being more efficient. Once a connection
is opened, it is not closed until the HTML document and all objects
referred by it are downloaded. This technique is called persistent
connection. By serving multiple requests on the same TCP segment,
many control packets (which are not part of actual data transfer)
are avoided. The technique of containing multiple requests and
responses within the same TCP segment over a persistent connection
is called pipelining.
- Data compression
HTTP/1.1 provides for compression of documents before file transfer.
Since most other objects like images and binaries are already
compressed, this feature applies only to HTML and plain text
documents.
- Range request and validation
Bandwidth saving measure is the introduction of two new fields in
an HTTP request header, viz. If-Modified-Since: and If-Unmodified-
Since:. The significance of this feature is that if a browser
identifies a file in its cache, it needn't reload it unless it has
changed since the last time it was used.
- Support for multiple hosts
It is common for an ISP to host more than one Web site on a single
server. In such a case, each domain requires its own IP address.
C.3 Object Format
Object SHOULD be an HTLM formatted object.
Martin, Hickman [Page 22]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
Append D GOODPUT Measurements
Methodology for determining the "Goodput" of the DUT still needs
to be determined. Note that the methodology should be independent
of the application which is initiating the transfer of the object
(File, message, Web Page, etc.).
Appendix E. References
Newman, "Benchmarking Terminology for Firewall Devices", RFC 2647,
February 1998.
J. Postel, "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol", RFC 821, August 1982.
R. Fielding, J. Gettys, J. Mogul, H Frystyk, T. Berners, "Hypertext
Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1", January 1997
J. Postel, J. Reynolds, "File Transfer Protocol(FTP)", October 1985
Martin, Hickman [Page 23]
INTERNET-DRAFT Benchmarking Methodology for Firewalls June 2000
