RE: [bmwg] Comments on draft-ietf-bmwg-mcastm-12.txt

"Perser, Jerry" <jerry.perser@spirentcom.com> Wed, 21 May 2003 16:02 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA26365 for <bmwg-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 21 May 2003 12:02:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h4LFTeQ30587 for bmwg-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 21 May 2003 11:29:40 -0400
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4LFTNB30559; Wed, 21 May 2003 11:29:23 -0400
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h4LFS9B30523 for <bmwg@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 21 May 2003 11:28:09 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA26297 for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 May 2003 12:00:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19IVzy-00006i-00 for bmwg@ietf.org; Wed, 21 May 2003 11:59:26 -0400
Received: from mail-out-b.spirentcom.com ([199.1.46.14] helo=exch-connector.netcomsystems.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19IVzx-00006Z-00 for bmwg@ietf.org; Wed, 21 May 2003 11:59:26 -0400
Received: by exch-connector.netcomsystems.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) id <LF889S1A>; Wed, 21 May 2003 09:00:14 -0700
Message-ID: <629E717C12A8694A88FAA6BEF9FFCD441E54E5@brigadoon.spirentcom.com>
From: "Perser, Jerry" <jerry.perser@spirentcom.com>
To: "'bmwg@ietf.org'" <bmwg@ietf.org>
Subject: RE: [bmwg] Comments on draft-ietf-bmwg-mcastm-12.txt
Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 09:00:06 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: bmwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: bmwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Benchmarking Methodology Working Group <bmwg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:bmwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>

Brooks,

Why perform the baseline at all?  How is the baseline metric used in
determining the burdened metric?

The point is that these are two separate tests.  They even have their own
sections.  The way it is written now, you can run test A, but you can not
run test B without first running test A.  It's the dependency that is the
issue.

If you remove the baseline measurement dependency from Forwarding Burdened
Multicast Latency, what breaks?  Are the burdened results INVALID if you
don't already have baseline results?

Jerry.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hickman, Brooks [mailto:brooks.hickman@spirentcom.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2003 1:41 PM
> To: 'bmwg@ietf.org'
> Subject: [bmwg] Comments on draft-ietf-bmwg-mcastm-12.txt
> 
> 
> >8.1. Forwarding Burdened Multicast Latency
> >
> >- Why 'Perform a baseline measurement of Multicast Latency'? 
>  It is not
> used
> >in determining the Forwarding Burdened Multicast Latency.  
> You can run both
> >tests for comparison.  The burdened test is a separate test. 
>  Suggest to
> >remove this.
> 
> 
> Jerry, the FDB of the DUT/SUT is populated with the unicast 
> addresses prior
> to performing a baseline
> test. The test is then performed with the DUT/SUT actually 
> forwarding the
> unicast traffic. This
> also applies to section 8.2. 
> _______________________________________________
> bmwg mailing list
> bmwg@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg
> 
_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
bmwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg