Re: [bmwg] Agenda for BMWG session at IETF-109

"MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com> Fri, 13 November 2020 18:30 UTC

Return-Path: <acm@research.att.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 67F733A1019 for <bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:30:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.796
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.796 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 9Gz78yRPpqHz for <bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:30:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.136]) (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 2C6323A0D78 for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 10:30:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0049458.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049458.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 0ADIE9BB016292; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:30:00 -0500
Received: from tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (sbcsmtp3.sbc.com [144.160.112.28]) by m0049458.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 34s0h61dxx-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:29:59 -0500
Received: from enaf.dadc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 0ADITwPH067434; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 12:29:59 -0600
Received: from zlp30494.vci.att.com (zlp30494.vci.att.com [135.46.181.159]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 0ADITvFj067395 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 13 Nov 2020 12:29:58 -0600
Received: from zlp30494.vci.att.com (zlp30494.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30494.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 497A34009E71; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 18:29:57 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from clph811.sldc.sbc.com (unknown [135.41.107.12]) by zlp30494.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 297A44009E6D; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 18:29:57 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from sldc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clph811.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 0ADITuN8010951; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 12:29:57 -0600
Received: from mail-azure.research.att.com (mail-azure.research.att.com [135.207.255.18]) by clph811.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 0ADITpgn010483; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 12:29:52 -0600
Received: from exchange.research.att.com (njmtcas1.research.att.com [135.207.255.86]) by mail-azure.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 205DE10A18E2; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:29:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: from njmtexg5.research.att.com ([fe80::b09c:ff13:4487:78b6]) by njmtcas1.research.att.com ([fe80::e881:676b:51b6:905d%12]) with mapi id 14.03.0487.000; Fri, 13 Nov 2020 13:29:44 -0500
From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com>
To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Lencse_G=E1bor?= <lencse@hit.bme.hu>, "bmwg@ietf.org" <bmwg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [bmwg] Agenda for BMWG session at IETF-109
Thread-Index: Ada1ScPjtICMVcqUT1O45HoXzLkNgQA3CHwAAPEDNJA=
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 18:29:43 +0000
Message-ID: <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF0147648858@njmtexg5.research.att.com>
References: <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF0147645848@njmtexg5.research.att.com> <665bd46b-f8b6-6d4f-bcbe-92c958987b79@hit.bme.hu>
In-Reply-To: <665bd46b-f8b6-6d4f-bcbe-92c958987b79@hit.bme.hu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [24.148.42.167]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF0147648858njmtexg5resea_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.312, 18.0.737 definitions=2020-11-13_10:2020-11-13, 2020-11-13 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1011 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011130118
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/9adxMZIGJ3rBjq3QIL7_fM-CBVU>
Subject: Re: [bmwg] Agenda for BMWG session at IETF-109
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 13 Nov 2020 18:30:29 -0000

Hi Gábor,

sorry for the delay replying - another very busy week here!

We can try to fit in your proposed short presentation on:
results regarding siitperf, my RFC 8219 compliant SIIT tester. (The usage of random port numbers is working well. I'm currently working on calibrating it with a legacy RFC 2544 tester by benchmarking the same DUT with the two devices and comparing their results.)

maybe title and 2 slides (setup and results)?  at the end of the meeting.  we might not have time in which case I hope you understand and we will try to cover the topic at another opportunity. But BMWG'ers will have your slides to review and discuss on the mailing list, in any case.

Al
bmwg co-chair


From: bmwg [mailto:bmwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Lencse Gábor
Sent: Sunday, November 8, 2020 1:22 PM
To: bmwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bmwg] Agenda for BMWG session at IETF-109

Dear Al,

Thank you very much for including our draft, too:

 - An Upgrade to Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect Devices

   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-lencse-bmwg-rfc2544-bis-00<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-lencse-bmwg-rfc2544-bis-00__;!!BhdT!x5bCGyOmAgXSJkn_g2pPkZsqSPUm5qg8v2yyK3_FZdZ27NBdhsj8zQwjDDPN$>

   status:

   - no updated text, but two exchanges on the list:

   >>>>> add <<<<<<


Unfortunately, we did not have time to progress with the draft. So now we do not have anything to present regarding the draft. But we do not want to abandon it. I hope that we'll be able to progress with it before IETF-110.

   - Several discussion threads related to this draft on list:

       Many other RFC2544 updates:

   https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/yEzFCign03ZveEUkvXsEevm8dDU/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/yEzFCign03ZveEUkvXsEevm8dDU/__;!!BhdT!x5bCGyOmAgXSJkn_g2pPkZsqSPUm5qg8v2yyK3_FZdZ27NBdhsj8zWLvhnqp$>

       strict packet time-outs for PDV and the siitperf implementation/tool

   https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/50qoL0gxTEKGU6CkUwPIf8FO-hc/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/50qoL0gxTEKGU6CkUwPIf8FO-hc/__;!!BhdT!x5bCGyOmAgXSJkn_g2pPkZsqSPUm5qg8v2yyK3_FZdZ27NBdhsj8zSKCWhzH$>

       different source and destination port numbers

   https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/Y3XIteCBVMScSolsagPH_FNoi_E/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/Y3XIteCBVMScSolsagPH_FNoi_E/__;!!BhdT!x5bCGyOmAgXSJkn_g2pPkZsqSPUm5qg8v2yyK3_FZdZ27NBdhsj8zchbk9Re$>
However, I have results regarding siitperf, my RFC 8219 compliant SIIT tester. (The usage of random port numbers is working well. I'm currently working on calibrating it with a legacy RFC 2544 tester by benhmarking the same DUT with the two devices and comparing their results.) If there is interest in the WG for it, I would be happy to present. But I do not want to push it.

So, what do you think?

Best regards,

Gábor


07/11/2020 22:47 keltezéssel, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) írta:

BMWG:



The first draft agenda is available [0] for bashing.



I constructed this agenda based on updated drafts, messages to the list, and some messages to the co-chairs.  IF I OVERLOOKED an item, please let me know!



There are lots of drafts to read to prepare for a productive session at IETF-109!



Note the time of the session: 12:00-14:00 UTC+7 on Thursday, November 19, 2020.



Please check your local time! [1]

In some time zones, like US PST, this meeting will start and end on Wednesday evening.

The US PST session is 2100 - 2300, on November 18 !



Authors, if you are not planning to attend this session, please let me know!



Al

bmwg co-chair





[0] https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/109/agenda/agenda-109-bmwg-00<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/proceedings/109/agenda/agenda-109-bmwg-00__;!!BhdT!x5bCGyOmAgXSJkn_g2pPkZsqSPUm5qg8v2yyK3_FZdZ27NBdhsj8zR12tFsp$>



[1] https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingtime.html?iso=20201119&p1=28&p2=37&p3=224<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingtime.html?iso=20201119&p1=28&p2=37&p3=224__;!!BhdT!x5bCGyOmAgXSJkn_g2pPkZsqSPUm5qg8v2yyK3_FZdZ27NBdhsj8zQr1Tl1V$>





_______________________________________________

bmwg mailing list

bmwg@ietf.org<mailto:bmwg@ietf.org>

https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg__;!!BhdT!x5bCGyOmAgXSJkn_g2pPkZsqSPUm5qg8v2yyK3_FZdZ27NBdhsj8zU14IPVJ$>