Re: [bmwg] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv-03: (with COMMENT)

"MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acmorton@att.com> Wed, 07 June 2017 23:21 UTC

Return-Path: <acmorton@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 EAF1A126D45; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 16:21:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.4
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 VuOcGw1LsZYc; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 16:21:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (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 2550C126CD6; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 16:21:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0049287.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0049287.ppops.net-00191d01. (8.16.0.17/8.16.0.17) with SMTP id v57NL7wB017445; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:21:25 -0400
Received: from tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (sbcsmtp3.sbc.com [144.160.112.28]) by m0049287.ppops.net-00191d01. with ESMTP id 2axt6hh5qc-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 07 Jun 2017 19:21:25 -0400
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 v57NLNZu047110; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 18:21:24 -0500
Received: from dalint02.pst.cso.att.com (dalint02.pst.cso.att.com [135.31.133.160]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v57NLFsI047030 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 7 Jun 2017 18:21:15 -0500
Received: from clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (clpi183.sldc.sbc.com [135.41.1.46]) by dalint02.pst.cso.att.com (RSA Interceptor); Wed, 7 Jun 2017 23:21:02 GMT
Received: from sldc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v57NL2hc028653; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 18:21:02 -0500
Received: from mail-green.research.att.com (mail-green.research.att.com [135.207.255.15]) by clpi183.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v57NKtY0028251; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 18:20:55 -0500
Received: from exchange.research.att.com (njmtcas2.research.att.com [135.207.255.47]) by mail-green.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D389BE10A8; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:20:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from njmtexg5.research.att.com ([fe80::b09c:ff13:4487:78b6]) by njmtcas2.research.att.com ([fe80::d550:ec84:f872:cad9%15]) with mapi id 14.03.0319.002; Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:20:54 -0400
From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acmorton@att.com>
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
CC: "draft-ietf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv@ietf.org>, Sarah Banks <sbanks@encrypted.net>, "bmwg-chairs@ietf.org" <bmwg-chairs@ietf.org>, "sbanks@encrypted.net" <sbanks@encrypted.net>, "bmwg@ietf.org" <bmwg@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv-03: (with COMMENT)
Thread-Index: AQHS395kGfAw0QclwU2J8cyDUH8NZaIaAxbA
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2017 23:20:53 +0000
Message-ID: <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF25FD6E3C@njmtexg5.research.att.com>
References: <149687493553.25630.10964914484670596603.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <149687493553.25630.10964914484670596603.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [73.178.187.36]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-RSA-Inspected: yes
X-RSA-Classifications: public
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:, , definitions=2017-06-07_14:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1703280000 definitions=main-1706070415
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/Ft_TwnaHJsk7e6jaSwfMBmwS7GI>
Subject: Re: [bmwg] Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv-03: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: Wed, 07 Jun 2017 23:21:31 -0000

Hi Adam,
Thanks for your review, please see reply below.
Al (for the co-authors)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Adam Roach [mailto:adam@nostrum.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2017 6:36 PM
> To: The IESG
> Cc: draft-ietf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv@ietf.org; Sarah Banks; bmwg-
> chairs@ietf.org; sbanks@encrypted.net; bmwg@ietf.org
> Subject: Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv-03:
> (with COMMENT)
> 
> Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv-03: No Objection
> 
...
>  
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> I think this is a variation on the issue that Alissa calls out, but I'm
> having a hard time reconciling:
> 
>    It's unlikely that the virtual switch will be the only application
>    running on the System Under Test (SUT), so CPU utilization, Cache
>    utilization, and Memory footprint should also be recorded for the
>    virtual implementations of internetworking functions.
> 
> ...with...
> 
>    Further, benchmarking is performed on a "black-box" basis, relying
>    solely on measurements observable external to the DUT/SUT.
> 
> Please add text that clarifies how the metrics that 3.1 says should be recorded
> in section 3.1 relate to benchmarking.
> 
[ACM] 
Ok, this is a somewhat different issue.
There are metrics like CPU, Cache, and Memory Utilization
which are reported by measurement processes running on the 
Device Under Test. These are useful for the user/operations community
to know, and may also be useful if there is a problem encountered 
during testing. However, these metrics cannot be promoted to
"Benchmark" status, because we cannot measure any of them 
external to the DUT or SUT.  In fact, only the most important 
externally observable metrics are designated as Benchmarks
in our consensus process, and BMWG refers to internally measured
metrics as "white-box metrics" to clearly distinguish them
from the others.

So, I suggest adding the new sentence below:
>    It's unlikely that the virtual switch will be the only application
>    running on the System Under Test (SUT), so CPU utilization, Cache
>    utilization, and Memory footprint should also be recorded for the
>    virtual implementations of internetworking functions.
+    However, internally-measured metrics such as these are not
+    benchmarks; they should be useful for the audience (operations)
+    to know, and may also be useful if there is a problem encountered 
+    during testing.