[bmwg] Request for your comments on SDN Controller Benchmarking Drafts

"Bhuvan \(Veryx Technologies\)" <bhuvaneswaran.vengainathan@veryxtech.com> Tue, 22 March 2016 10:33 UTC

Return-Path: <bhuvaneswaran.vengainathan@veryxtech.com>
X-Original-To: bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 908C612D7F2; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 03:33:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WGKOD8pRwDUJ; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 03:33:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail3.veryxtech.com (mail3.veryxtech.com [199.193.251.103]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BE5112D714; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 03:33:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail3.veryxtech.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A56FF76537F; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 10:33:29 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at veryxtech.com
Received: from mail3.veryxtech.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail3.veryxtech.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id Cilz04d_m3UM; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 10:33:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from LA026 (unknown [203.196.171.36]) by mail3.veryxtech.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1544D764E3F; Tue, 22 Mar 2016 10:33:27 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Bhuvan (Veryx Technologies)" <bhuvaneswaran.vengainathan@veryxtech.com>
To: bmwg@ietf.org, sdn@irtf.org
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 16:03:13 +0530
Message-ID: <000c01d18426$3f00b650$bd0222f0$@veryxtech.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_000D_01D18454.58C01E40"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AdGD/1pkl55CKmAYRQKcKELTt7q/TQ==
Content-Language: en-gb
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/2qcc6VhhC5uzcqClbN7jE3SzZl4>
Cc: draft-ietf-bmwg-sdn-controller-benchmark-term@ietf.org
Subject: [bmwg] Request for your comments on SDN Controller Benchmarking Drafts
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Benchmarking Methodology Working Group <bmwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bmwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:bmwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 10:33:22 -0000

Dear BMWG & SDNRG members,

 

Thank you very much for providing your valuable comments and support for
this work. We have updated the draft about SDN Controller benchmarking
addressing comments received in the mailing list. The latest drafts can be
found here:

 

draft-ietf-bmwg-sdn-controller-benchmark-term-01
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bmwg-sdn-controller-benchmark-term-0
1> 

draft-ietf-bmwg-sdn-controller-benchmark-meth-01
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bmwg-sdn-controller-benchmark-meth-0
1> 

 

Summary of Changes - Terminology Document:

1.       Removed a few terminologies ( e.g., SDN Nodes etc.,) that are
already defined in RFC 7426 and added references for that RFC. The is based
on feedback from Al Morton, Adrian and Mohamed Boucadair 

2.       Added test setup information based on Scott's feedback

 

Summary of Changes - Methodology Document:

1.           Added requirements for Test Emulator and added some texts for
test repeatability. This is based on feedback from Scott, Al and Doug
Montgomery.

 

### We are still considering a solution for comments received from Marius G
about summarizing test results in terms of Average vs Median .

 

We would love to hear any further comments/queries on these drafts.

 

Thanks,

Authors