[bmwg] draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology
"MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acmorton@att.com> Tue, 03 November 2015 23:19 UTC
Return-Path: <acmorton@att.com>
X-Original-To: bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B35C01B35CF for <bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Nov 2015 15:19:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.104
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.104 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, LOCALPART_IN_SUBJECT=1.107, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 EkazO5_X5yFe for <bmwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Nov 2015 15:19:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pink.research.att.com (mail-pink.research.att.com [204.178.8.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B7F01B35C9 for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Nov 2015 15:19:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-blue.research.att.com (unknown [135.207.178.11]) by mail-pink.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFBCC1224D5; Tue, 3 Nov 2015 18:20:16 -0500 (EST)
Received: from exchange.research.att.com (sentinel.research.att.com [135.207.255.38]) by mail-blue.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7DC3F063D; Tue, 3 Nov 2015 18:19:47 -0500 (EST)
Received: from NJFPSRVEXG0.research.att.com ([fe80::108a:1006:9f54:fd90]) by sentinel.research.att.com ([fe80::7914:9c7e:6a73:a8d6%10]) with mapi; Tue, 3 Nov 2015 18:19:47 -0500
From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acmorton@att.com>
To: "draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology@tools.ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology@tools.ietf.org>, "bmwg@ietf.org" <bmwg@ietf.org>
Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 18:19:46 -0500
Thread-Topic: draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology
Thread-Index: AdEWjYL21GGDCZczSNa1Ynq3cOaZJQ==
Message-ID: <4AF73AA205019A4C8A1DDD32C034631D0BB6ADB211@NJFPSRVEXG0.research.att.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bmwg/rysPAJ-2U2ALTjWh1P4HkpVnjb4>
Subject: [bmwg] draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 03 Nov 2015 23:19:49 -0000
Hi Lucien and Jacob, Following the bmwg session yesterday there were several reviews and comments expressed. I have one section revision to suggest, Al (as a participant) In the latest draft of Data Center Terminology -01: - using the term Jitter, should be delay variation now - still citing RFC 3393 almost exclusively, which is too flexible - only citing IPDV from RFC 5481, - in the past meeting we agreed on RFC 5481 PDV as primary, IPDV only if you want to understand if traffic has become more bursty in transfer - Metric Units section is the place to specify Units of Measure (seconds in this case, not much else) I suggest to revise section 3 as follows: NEW: 3 Delay Variation 3.1 Definition Delay variation is derived from multiple measurements of one-way delay, as described in RFC 3393. The mandatory definition of Delay Variation is the PDV form from section 4.2 of RFC 5481. When considering a stream of packets, the delays of all packets are subtracted from the minimum delay over all packets in the stream. This facilitates assessment of the range of delay variation (Max - Min), or a high percentile of PDV (99th percentile, for robustness against outliers). If First-bit to Last-bit timestamps are used for Delay measurement, then Delay Variation MUST be measured using packets or frames of the same size, since the definition of latency includes the serialization time for each packet. Otherwise if using First-bit to First-bit, the size restriction does not apply. 3.2 Discussion In addition to PDV Range and or a high percentile of PDV, Inter-Packet Delay Variation (IPDV) as defined in section 4.1 of RFC5481 (differences between two consecutive packets) MAY be used for the purpose of determining how packet spacing has changed during transfer, for example to see if packet stream has become closely-spaced or "bursty". However, the Absolute Value of IPDV SHOULD NOT be used, as this collapses the "busrty" and "dispersed" sides of the IPDV distribution together. 3.3 Measurement Units The measurement of delay variation is expressed in units of seconds. A PDV histogram MAY be provided for the population of packets measured. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- OLD: 3 Jitter 3.1 Definition The definition of Jitter is covered extensively in RFC 3393. This definition is not meant to replace that definition, but it is meant to provide guidance of use for data center network devices. The use of Jitter is in according with the variation delay definition from RFC 3393: The second meaning has to do with the variation of a metric (e.g., delay) with respect to some reference metric (e.g., average delay or minimum delay). This meaning is frequently used by computer scientists and frequently (but not always) refers to variation in delay. Even with the reference to RFC 3393, there are many definitions of "jitter" possible. The one selected for Data Center Benchmarking is closest to RFC 3393. 3.2 Discussion Jitter can be measured in different scenarios:-packet to packet delay variation-delta between min and max packet delay variation for all packets sent. 3.3 Measurement Units The jitter MUST be measured when sending packets of the same size. Jitter MUST be measured as packet to packet delay variation and delta between min and max packet delay variation of all packets sent. A histogram MAY be provided as a population of packets measured per latency or latency buckets. Inter-Packet Delay Variation as defined in RFC5481 (differences between two consecutive packets) MAY be used for this purpose.
- [bmwg] draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)
- Re: [bmwg] draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology Sarah Banks
- Re: [bmwg] draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology GEORGESCU LIVIU MARIUS
- Re: [bmwg] draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)
- Re: [bmwg] draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology Sarah Banks
- Re: [bmwg] draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology GEORGESCU LIVIU MARIUS