Re: Preliminary agenda for IP Provider Metrics (IPPM)

Megan Davies Walnut <mwalnut@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> Mon, 20 March 1995 18:26 UTC

To: Matt Mathis <mathis@zippy.psc.edu>
cc: Megan Davies Walnut <mwalnut@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>, wgchairs@CNRI.Reston.VA.US, bofchairs@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Subject: Re: Preliminary agenda for IP Provider Metrics (IPPM)
In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 20 Mar 95 09:54:27 EST." <9503201454.AA10095@mailer.psc.edu>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 1995 13:25:59 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Megan Davies Walnut <mwalnut@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>
Message-ID: <9503201326.aa09354@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US>

Hi Matt,


This agenda is now available via gopher and the web.

Megan

 >> 9:00 - 11:30 Wednesday, April 5, 1995
 >> =====================================
 >> 
 >> = Consider a possible WG.                       (15 minutes at opening)
 >>     - Is a new WG needed? (*)
 >>     - Inventory of possible tasks
 >>     - Relationship to BMWG/GISD/other WGs (*)
 >>     - Define scope and priorities (*)
 >>     - Chair issues, Editor/secretary (*)
 >>     - Charter (*)
 >>     (* introduce at the open, but postpone detailed discussion until the
 >> close)
 >> 
 >> = General Requirements for IP provider metrics                  (15 min)
 >> 
 >> = IP bulk data transfer performance             (technical issues, 30 min)
 >> 
 >> = IP routing stability and robustness           (technical issues, 30 min)
 >> 
 >> = Consider a possible WG...., part 2                            (30 min)
 >> 
 >> ======================
 >> Draft charter for a possible WG
 >> 
 >> The IPPM WG will develop a set of standard metrics that can be applied to t
he
 >> the quality, performance and reliability of an IP datagram service.  These
 >> metrics will be designed such that they can be performed by the providers
 >> themselves, customers, potential customers or independent testing groups.
 >> 
 >> The areas covered will include:
 >>         I) Path Performance
 >>                 A) Bulk data transfer performance (ftp, etc)
 >>                 B) Interactive performance (Telnet, X11, etc)
 >>                 C) Real-time and multicast performance (delay statistics)
 >>         II) Routing stability and robustness
 >>                 A) End to end availability
 >>                 B) Time to recover (e.g. switch to backup paths)
 >>                 C) Route stability (Spurious route transitions, etc)
 >>         III) others TBD
 >> 
 >> The IPPM WG will select or adapt existing tools and develop standard
 >> procedures for performing and documenting the measurements.

Preliminary agenda for IP Provider Metrics (IPPM) Matt Mathis
Re: Preliminary agenda for IP Provider Metrics (I… Megan Davies Walnut