Re: [bmwg] WG Last Call: OSPF convergence benchmarking

[Scott Poretsky <[e-mail]>]

BMWG-ers,

Reviewed the Terminology Draft.  Not much change from where we were in March.

Hadn't we had agreed that the existing terms would have references added 
and move to the "Existing Terminology" section?  4 of the 9 terms provided 
are from John Moy's OSPFv2 RFC.  Those are now referenced (weren't in the 
previous version), but the still need to go in "Existing Terminology".

Hadn't we agreed that defining Internal Measurement, External Measurement, 
and Multi-Device Measurements in this draft was inappropriate and would be 
removed?  We did because these are broad terms with a broad scope to the 
BMWG.  That now covers 7 of the 9 terms.

Hadn't we agreed that the term "Incremental-SPF" would not be included 
because it is implementation specific.  Cisco also does PRC.  Why not 
include that?  Avici does RTC.  Let's include that.  Of course this would 
go on and on so we decided to not include Incremental-SPF.  That is 8 of the 9.

The 9th term is "Shortest Path First Time".  Mitchell had posted for the 
previous version the comment "ADD... Some implementations may force a 
interval between
successive SPF calculations. If it exists, then this additional time
value should be subtracted from the total time.".  This is a great 
recommendation to add here in the Terminology draft.  In fact, some 
implementations have an SPF Delay and an SPF Holdtime.  The definition 
should state explicitly that measurement includes the SPF Delay, but the 
SPF HoldTime may be subtracted.  I also recommend that the term be changed 
to "Shortest Path First Execution Time".  That would then be the only 
remaining term.

There is one other new term introduced in the Terminology Document, Single 
Router Convergence (or SR-Convergence).  This definition should be added to 
the "Terminology" section as the second term rather than in the "Concepts" 
section where it is currently located.  I also recommend that based upon 
the other ongoing work for Data Plane Convergence that the "SR-Convergence" 
term be changed to "Control Plane Convergence" to eliminate confusion and 
match the way most people already speak.  Also, in the sentence 
"convergence will mean the point in time when the DUT has performed all 
actions needed to react to the change in topology represented by the test 
condition", it is recommended to change the word "all" to "some" because 
the Tree Building and FIB Update are not included in this measurement term.

Provided there is follow-up to the changes discussed in March and the 
additional changes for SR-Convergence, I would recommend the Terminology 
draft then be progressed to the ADs.

Scott

At 05:28 PM 5/7/2003 -0400, Kevin Dubray wrote:
>BMWG'ers:
>
>A WG Last Call period for the Internet-Drafts regarding
>OSPF convergence benchmarking terminology, methodology, and
>benchmark applicability,
>
>    <draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-term-03.txt>,
>    <draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-intraarea-04.txt>,
>    <draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-applicability-02.txt>
>
>will be open from 7 May 2003 until 17 May 2003.
>
>These I-Ds contain modifications based on feedback from the previous
>WG Last Call.
>
>Please weigh in on whether or not you feel each individual draft
>should not be given to the Area Directors for consideration in
>progressing the draft to an Informational RFC.  Send your comments
>to this list or [e-mail].
>
>
>URLs for the Internet-Drafts are:
>
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-term-03.txt
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-intraarea-04.txt
>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-ospfconv-applicability-02.txt
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>bmwg mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg


_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg