Skip to main content

Minutes IETF112: bmwg

Meeting Minutes Benchmarking Methodology (bmwg) WG
Date and time 2021-11-08 16:00
Title Minutes IETF112: bmwg
State Active
Other versions plain text
Last updated 2021-11-08


BMWG Session (IETF-112)
Monday, Nov 8, 2021
10:00-12:00 US CST  (UTC-06) and  16:00-18:00 UTC
Monday Session III  (Room 5)

Final Agenda as of November 8, 2021

WG Status:

 - Benchmarking Methodology for EVPN and PBB-EVPN
   status: IESG Review on July 1, 2021; Resolving DISCUSS and Comment ballots
   AD Advisor has imposed a *Dead*-line (Oct 31)

   >>> Question whether anyone else in the group will help with this DISCCUSS,
   And AUTH48??? >>> All attempts to reach authors have failed. >>> Sarah will
   reach out to the co-authors again.

WG Drafts:

 - Multiple Loss Ratio Search
   - This version describes the new logic and examples on throughput
   intransactions per second, not just packets.  Some more to do in next ver. -
   Discussion between Gabor and Vratko - Vladimir's new comments - Reviewers
   Requested! >>>> Looking for an update -02 to reflect comments.

- Benchmarking Methodology for Network Security Device Performance
   - Draft was updated several times since March 2021 meeting
   - WGLC on -08 ended in May
   - Doc Shepherd review complete, version 11 addresses Most comments.
   - Revised version needed (then Publication Requested/AD Review)
   >>>>  Authors will produce -12 soon, to fix edits and nits

WG Adoption Review:

 + A YANG Data Model for Network Interconnect Tester Management
   - WG Adoption saw one objection and discussion... Tom Petch and Jürgen
   Schönwälder provided many comments, including Status -> Standards Track -
   Draft updated 25 Oct, 2021 - Need YANG Doctor to work with us on this?
   Q4Warren... - Discuss adoption-outcome now. - Vladimir has shared "Yet
   Another RFC2544 Testimplementation" open-source/hardware implementation with
   the BMWG. >>>>  No clear statements of support yet. >>>>  Not much YANG
   expertise in BMWG, and Adopt as a Standards track Doc? >>>>  Vlad - Agrees -
   new adoption call for Stds track, Sarah Also agrees >>>>  Warren gave a
   quick check of charter - we should be ok...(?) >>>>  cross-post to netmod?
   cc OPSAWG, yang-doctors and Robert >>>>  Mailing list Address >>>>11:32:27

 + Benchmarking Methodology for Stateful NATxy Gateways using RFC 4814
   Pseudorandom Port Numbers
   - ~5 people have discussed the draft on the list in May-July
   - Reference to procedures in RFC 8219
   - TCP-based testing = compliments the NG security device testing?
   - Revised version of the Draft available -
   >>>> Gabor shared his test results, which were referenced in e-mail, useful
   to evaluate scaling to answer questions about differences between Stateful
   and stateless. v6OPS argued that stateless might be very much worse
   scaling... >>>> Not many had read, Encourage reviewers in Nov and Dec, and
   then Possible WG Adoption in 2022.

NEW !!

 + Problems and Requirements of Evaluation Methodology for
   Integrated Space and Terrestrial Networks
   - new draft, new participants!  Presenter: Zeqi Lai and co-authors
   - Key question: what limited aspect of the many-dimensional ISTN problem
   presented here could be pursued for benchmarking network DUT/SUT? - IOW,
   what aspects of the problem can be deferred, and yet keep results meaningful
   to some audience? >>> Sarah B: Any collaborators outside academia? Zeqi:
   Mostly the work done by the ISTN group. >>> Need to include the user
   audience of Sat network owners. Need specific set of tests/benchmarks that
   could help. >>> Al: Described past experience, some parts of the
   architecture can be removed in the lab and still obtain useful results -
   don't need high power amplifiers or antennas at ground stations, for
   example. >>> Also: this is a REAL Internet Service Now, 4500 satellites, a
   colleague used one of the serveices at a workshop nad had comparable
   connectivity and RTT to anyone else, better than some. >>> Zeqi:
   Benchmarking can help to determine design decisions, satellite utilization
   vs constellation density. >>> So, comments on this topic are welcome on the
   list. >>> It would be best if we could involve the current service providers
   to some extent.

 + AOB