Re: [bmwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bmwg-imix-genome-01.txt

"Aamer Akhter (aakhter)" <aakhter@cisco.com> Mon, 09 April 2012 17:56 UTC

Return-Path: <aakhter@cisco.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 73B7F21F8427 for <bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Apr 2012 10:56:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -109.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-109.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_51=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cjwPgrFH+plV for <bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Apr 2012 10:56:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com [173.37.86.73]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E75B221F84FF for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Apr 2012 10:56:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=aakhter@cisco.com; l=10787; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1333994193; x=1335203793; h=mime-version:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:from:to:cc; bh=MXQYUHKJ5DL54OyaN9HfRnwyNHt7re4roE5LrWrZdKw=; b=G8SqzrrzJD133Aome7JHhR2RP/QONSj0TQ/bqRVyNvM4vO3Hp7Z/x93M Fh7RnNBo0Mn/k5OWKmmSVlumJCo1trAZH9Cnp6XEA+jgkMWSPEZQFVw2M WaDxbFyyUcMpzV/08nEvbWER8x86es76k03/H2tGYs/iOwoxSKyT3ann5 k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgEFAJMig0+tJV2a/2dsb2JhbABEgka2ZIEHggkBAQEEAQEBDwEJEQM+CwwEAgEIDgMBAgEBAQEKBhcBBgEmHwMGCAEBBBMIGodsC5l7oAAEj3djBIham1+BaYMF
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.75,393,1330905600"; d="scan'208,217"; a="73180912"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by rcdn-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 09 Apr 2012 17:56:32 +0000
Received: from xbh-rcd-301.cisco.com (xbh-rcd-301.cisco.com [72.163.63.8]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q39HuVxR014963; Mon, 9 Apr 2012 17:56:32 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-101.cisco.com ([72.163.62.143]) by xbh-rcd-301.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 9 Apr 2012 12:56:21 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CD167A.1232BAC2"
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 12:56:18 -0500
Message-ID: <7F298ACC76CC154F832B6D02852D169F07BB84FE@XMB-RCD-101.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <201204091631.q39GVGiD014953@alpd052.aldc.att.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [bmwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bmwg-imix-genome-01.txt
Thread-Index: Ac0WbkkV6RVe/mEoRUeAJfVRCfbWWwAC7yJA
References: <7F298ACC76CC154F832B6D02852D169F079F3DC7@XMB-RCD-101.cisco.com> <201204091631.q39GVGiD014953@alpd052.aldc.att.com>
From: "Aamer Akhter (aakhter)" <aakhter@cisco.com>
To: Al Morton <acmorton@att.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Apr 2012 17:56:21.0235 (UTC) FILETIME=[124B2C30:01CD167A]
Cc: bmwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bmwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bmwg-imix-genome-01.txt
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 17:56:35 -0000

Thanks Al-this is fine. 

 

I think the existing RFC reference is ok as well. 

 

From: Al Morton [mailto:acmorton@att.com] 
Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 12:32 PM
To: Aamer Akhter (aakhter)
Cc: bmwg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [bmwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bmwg-imix-genome-01.txt

 

At 03:24 AM 3/28/2012, Aamer Akhter (aakhter) wrote:

Hi Al,

:-) I don't have a strong opinion against the indirect reference.

My preference would be to be more direct about it and perhaps even a 

mention of IPFIX as a scalable way to gather this data in private 

networks. 


OK, what if we say:

...
The mixture of sizes a networking device will encounter is highly
variable and depends on many factors. An IMIX suited for one networking
device and deployment will not be appropriate for another.
However, the mix of sizes may be known and the tester may be asked to
augment the fixed size tests. The references above cite the original
studies and their methodologies. Similar methods can be used to
determine new size mixes present on a link or network. We note that
the architecture for IP Flow Information Export [RFC5470] provides
one method to gather packet size information on private networks.

Are there any other canonical ipfix RFCs that should also be listed?

Al








-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-bmwg-imix-genome-01.txt
Date:   Tue, 27 Mar 2012 10:23:09 -0400
From:   Al Morton <acmorton@att.com>
To:     Aamer Akhter (aakhter) <aakhter@cisco.com>
CC:     bmwg@ietf.org
Newsgroups:     gmane.ietf.bmwg
References:      <20120108140704.17736.30648.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
<4F71ACFC.5080706@cisco.com>
<7F298ACC76CC154F832B6D02852D169F078D5B82@XMB-RCD-101.cisco.com>
<7F298ACC76CC154F832B6D02852D169F078D5B82@XMB-RCD-101.cisco .com
<mailto:7F298ACC76CC154F832B6D02852D169F078D5B82@XMB-RCD-101.cisco%20.co
m> >



At 08:10 AM 3/27/2012, Aamer Akhter (aakhter) wrote:
> Al,
>
> Just following up on the quick discussion on the live meeting at 
> IETF-83 regarding the creation of a representative the IMIX:
>
> A cntrl+f search against CAIDA didn't turn up any matches.
> Perhaps this got lost in the editing

Turns out that the CAIDA study is an indirect Reference, see below:

1. Introduction

...
Streams of constant packet size differ significantly from the conditions
encountered in operational deployment, and so additional tests are
sometimes conducted with a mixture of packet sizes. The set of sizes
used is often called an Internet Mix, or "IMIX"
[Spirent], [IXIA], [Agilent].

The mixture of sizes a networking device will encounter is highly
variable and depends on many factors. An IMIX suited for one networking
device and deployment will not be appropriate for another.
However, the mix of sizes may be known and the tester may be asked to
augment the fixed size tests. The references above cite the original
studies and their methodologies - *similar methods can be used to
determine new size mixes.

*hope that does it,
Al
_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
bmwg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg