[bmwg] Fwd: Liaison to IEEE 802.1 on DCB proposal

Al Morton <acmorton@att.com> Thu, 29 April 2010 19:21 UTC

Message-Id: <201004291921.o3TJL5ow003304@klpd017.kcdc.att.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 15:19:31 -0400
To: bmwg@ietf.org
From: Al Morton <acmorton@att.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Subject: [bmwg] Fwd: Liaison to IEEE 802.1 on DCB proposal
Precedence: list

FYI - the liaison statement to IEEE 802.1 went out today.

>Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 12:23:09 -0400
>To: tony@jeffree.co.uk, pthaler@broadcom.com
>From: Al Morton <acmorton@att.com>
>Subject: Liaison to IEEE 802.1 on DCB proposal
>Cc: Eric Gray <eric.gray@ericsson.com>, Ron Bonica 
><rbonica@juniper.net>, "Dan Romascanu" <dromasca@avaya.com>, 
>ietf-secretariat@ietf.org
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>To: IEEE 802.1
>     Tony Jeffrey, WG Chair <tony@jeffree.co.uk>
>and Pat Thaler, DCB TG Chair <pthaler@broadcom.com>
>
>From: IETF Benchmarking Methodology Working Group (BMWG)
>CC: Ron Bonica, OPS Area Director, BMWG Advisor, <rbonica@juniper.net>
>     Dan Romascanu, OPS Area Director, <dromasca@avaya.com>
>     Eric Gray, IETF Liaison Manager for IEEE 802.1, <eric.gray@ericsson.com>
>     IETF Secretariat, <ietf-secretariat@ietf.org>
>
>Response Contacts: Al Morton, BMWG Chair, <acmorton@att.com>
>                    and <statements@ietf.org>
>Technical Contact: <bmwg@ietf.org>
>
>Title: Proposal to update RFCs 2544 and 2889 to address the
>        Per-Flow Control capabilities of IEEE 802.1Qbb
>
>Purpose: For Action/Comment
>The purpose of this Liaison is to inform you of a new work proposal
>in the Benchmarking Methodology Working Group (BMWG) of the IETF,
>and seek your comments.
>
>Deadline: August 1, 2010
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>BMWG is considering adding a charter work item to update several of our
>foundation RFCs, described in detail in the memo by D.Newman and T.Player:
>http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-player-dcb-benchmarking-01
>In this proposal, there is an intersection between IETF benchmarking
>practice and new IEEE standardization work.
>
>Benchmarks for Ethernet switch performance based on RFCs 1242, 2285,
>2544 and 2889 (these represent BMWG's foundation RFCs that are referenced
>frequently in our work) are recognized as industry standards. The
>terminology and methodology described in these memos have been in
>widespread use by test equipment vendors, networking device manufacturers,
>enterprises and service providers for more than a decade.
>
>Some key concepts from our past work are not meaningful when testing
>switches that implement new IEEE specifications in the area of data center
>bridging. For example, throughput as defined in RFC 1242 cannot be
>measured when testing devices that implement three new IEEE
>specifications: priority-based flow control (802.1Qbb); priority groups
>(802.1Qaz); and congestion notification (802.1Qau).
>
>Since devices that implement these new congestion-management
>specifications should never drop frames, and since the metric of
>throughput distinguishes between non-zero and zero drop rates, no
>throughput measurement is possible using the existing methodology.
>There are related cases where other existing metrics can be extended
>or replaced. See the list of affected RFCs attached below.
>
>The Internet-Draft seeks to recognize the importance of these new IEEE
>specifications in the context of data center switch benchmarking.
>The draft seeks to extend rather than replace existing
>industry standard practices for benchmarking switch performance
>characteristics in the lab, and it does so by defining new terms
>and metrics relevant to recent IEEE work on data center bridging.
>
>The charter of BMWG strictly limits our work to laboratory characterization.
>Therefore, live network performance testing, manageability, MIB module
>development, and other operational/functional testing are beyond our scope.
>http://www.ietf.org/dyn/wg/charter/bmwg-charter
>
>Before considering this work proposal further, we seek your comments on:
>  - whether there is overlapping work planned in 802.1
>  - whether a liaison relationship (between the BMWG and IEEE 802.1 WG)
>    could be beneficial to complete this work
>  - the proposal details, as currently described
>
>sincerely,
>Al Morton
>bmwg chair
>
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>RFC1242-style throughput is a significant metric in at least these RFCs,
>and possibly others:
>
>1242
>2285
>2432
>2544
>2889
>3511
>3918
>
>And the tests described in the new DCB proposal Internet-Draft
>use concepts discussed in:
>
>1242
>2285
>2544
>2889
>4689
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[bmwg] Fwd: Liaison to IEEE 802.1 on DCB proposal Al Morton
[bmwg] Fwd: Re: Liaison to IEEE 802.1 on DCB prop… Al Morton