RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D?ch
Jim McQuaid <jim.mcquaid@netiq.com> Thu, 08 April 2004 01:55 UTC
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA06749 for <bmwg-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 21:55:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BBOl7-0002Qa-N4; Wed, 07 Apr 2004 21:55:13 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BBOkm-0001zV-2s for bmwg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 07 Apr 2004 21:54:52 -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 VAA06458 for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 21:54:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BBOki-0000bl-00 for bmwg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Apr 2004 21:54:48 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BBNWJ-0003RS-00 for bmwg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Apr 2004 20:35:53 -0400
Received: from [65.222.200.22] (helo=ralexch01.netiq.local) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BBLCM-0004xq-00 for bmwg@ietf.org; Wed, 07 Apr 2004 18:07:06 -0400
Received: by ralexch01.netiq.local with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id <FV2ZSV9G>; Wed, 7 Apr 2004 22:09:05 -0000
Message-ID: <613E3F060982754CBF2FC6751E82679B0587EC50@ralexch01.netiq.local>
From: Jim McQuaid <jim.mcquaid@netiq.com>
To: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <hcb@gettcomm.com>, bmwg@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D?ch
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 22:09:02 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60
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>
You make an excellent point (can it be tested with created traffic or does it require live network traffic in some form). That's the "bench" in benchmark; it can be done with lab equipment. I would agree with that distinction. On the other hand, if there is enthusiasm to do this work within BMWG, tthat may be more important than legalisms, however sound. Jim McQuaid -----Original Message----- From: Howard C. Berkowitz [mailto:hcb@gettcomm.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 9:29 AM To: bmwg@ietf.org Subject: RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D? At 10:56 AM +0000 4/7/04, Jim McQuaid wrote: ><sorry for the blank reply> > >At the time the IPPM was "spun off" of the BMWG, the general understanding >was that BMWG would look at "things" more or less in isolation, although >that concept is somewhat elastic. IPPM would look at end to end network >kinds of performance issues. > >It seems clear to me that convergence is a performance characteristic of >complete networks and primarily an end to end or at least, core element to >core element characteristic. > >My thought would be that this is interesting and useful work but not >necessarily for BMWG. > >Jim McQuaid I don't completely disagree with you. I do feel that single-platform performance definition and benchmarking is definitely within the scope of BMWG, and some of my comments relating to clarifying test methods (e.g., black box vs. white box vs. passive analysis) definitely can be applied to one box. BMWG has always looked at forwarding plane performance of single boxes, and I really don't think we are straying far to look at there control plane performance. You are correct that IPPM, as well as some of the internet scalability issues both in the IETF and IRTF, are probably better places for end-to-end convergence. At least in the case of BGP, however, there is a meaningful intermediate level that isn't single box and isn't end-to-end: convergence within an AS, and conceivably subsets thereof such as route reflector clusters. Similar points can be made about intra-area convergence in OSPF and ISIS. Where do these fit? I'm inclined to say BMWG, and let me suggest what might be a very crude rule of thumb in saying BMWG or not-BMWG. Many of the Internet-wide experiments have to rely on sampling live data, with perhaps some selective probes. Single-box, or small-system-of-boxes measurement, plausibly can be done with an artificial benchmark in a testing lab. Given the name of this group, perhaps, then, the decision if something belongs here depends on asking the question early, "can the measurement be made with a synthetic benchmark and test equipment," or does some of it really have to come from sampling and probing live networks? If the former, it's BMWG eligible. If the latter, it's interesting, might even warrant BMWG liaison and/or help in placing it elsewhere, but shouldn't stay in BMWG. _______________________________________________ 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
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Jim McQuaid
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D? scott bradner
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Russ White
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… sporetsky
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Russ White
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… sporetsky
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Russ White
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Russ White
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Jim McQuaid
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D? Howard C. Berkowitz
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Russ White
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… sporetsky
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Russ White
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Michele Bustos
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… sporetsky
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… sporetsky
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Michele Bustos
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Russ White
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Jim McQuaid
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Russ White
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Robert Holley (rholley)
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… sporetsky
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D? Howard C. Berkowitz
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D? scott bradner
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D? Howard C. Berkowitz
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D? David Newman
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D? scott bradner
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D… Russ White
- RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D? Henk Uijterwaal (RIPE NCC)