Re: [dhcwg] Load Balancing for DHCPv6

Andre Kostur <akostur@incognito.com> Fri, 21 September 2012 18:05 UTC

Return-Path: <akostur@incognito.com>
X-Original-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B657E21E80B7 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 11:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.452
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.452 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, J_CHICKENPOX_31=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NhBmG2V18pH2 for <dhcwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 11:05:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from na3sys010aog112.obsmtp.com (na3sys010aog112.obsmtp.com [74.125.245.92]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 5848D21F84A7 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 11:05:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-f172.google.com ([209.85.223.172]) (using TLSv1) by na3sys010aob112.postini.com ([74.125.244.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKUFysbEyIszfjb/zEntUQ/lCXcMbt7bWO@postini.com; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 11:05:33 PDT
Received: by iec9 with SMTP id 9so6998092iec.31 for <dhcwg@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 11:05:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=04PEGYwhXfjUkmFATx+50IWGT4QKN2e+0IlHt3/l7dk=; b=PlUXfD/d8e1QSqwtHfABdz47tnjfqGR5I3kAjFGWzh8uBjN7fJ5jGefxX24r0/L2i3 dMDIjWzvRFDh/QHYQ2kxuiFgnxNtpUj3DsbiqtzYpsrppftSLRCZgxsbZLRTIWBYxtS5 bidRHeij91Pdn7i53kiZQJwPJM6YV8w9oUjqsgDT3IyxZksIOB6K7qxp7Xzc37qacCcX DQ3RfxbHL2IG4k8//YzVKv2VxJY6BHBVeEdagbNxznbtIOT3AZXxi1hfSBwPkZ+7Q08Y Jzz8vi9+3h8l2Ia1bSHXHPswrFljVV7w1BDIiS9r5gGPMEYQn/KzZi/VT4bsWY7mA0Y3 essg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.158.194 with SMTP id ww2mr2441580igb.40.1348250731939; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 11:05:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.100.137 with HTTP; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 11:05:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAL10_BqaP1A3a68LcP7v6692+F9y4pE3bixMkkNBKfWrPuGP=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL10_Bqa4ftiVhyyf0ezwKR7mzAEOLNi_K3EJFPFUzPnz7QGPw@mail.gmail.com> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E0F4F3093@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <CAL10_Br=OcWZuar1fDOopevTy_W-3g9TsYqo61rOWm4tKkuYgg@mail.gmail.com> <2D09D61DDFA73D4C884805CC7865E61118003F@GAALPA1MSGUSR9N.ITServices.sbc.com> <CAL10_BpXdx03WfV1PeMKg1zYc1dAFKe1CDNdrcNf45+_EVCBPg@mail.gmail.com> <CDDB9016-BE11-489A-9361-0172D96A464C@nominum.com> <CAOpJ=k2CJS=FuUvFwOq=s2m871_qfo=xROsW=fx0E48w2wxAqQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAL10_BoLsdppYKNSfHheYrZg+SfaggoynQf2X11HEdy=ELFUiQ@mail.gmail.com> <5049C317.7090603@gmail.com> <94FA926F-2432-4AE7-BC20-AE7458AB40D9@cisco.com> <CAF4+nEHqRFHbz9qfQuOqpLCNeZqkT=+f53_eCboECfWX8QCt6A@mail.gmail.com> <71F17433-B2D9-4366-9B32-F0E4D294EDB5@nominum.com> <CAF4+nEE6pbmO_ss+3UEpRG1kh2YD20P2KD4CFQ7LwoRZ6gyxsg@mail.gmail.com> <A563FEA0-0A26-431D-BDAA-AD897F691754@nominum.com> <CAF4+nEFqLW6p1wE9BWE6c2CqGDwzUQTYom9K4icV1_NjM-nTXg@mail.gmail.com> <1BB5EDFF-BBA9-4335-BE55-058FACEE30EB@cisco.com> <CAL10_Bo_DE1Lq4BuXRaMmBs9Fah=4TxroBgUEQ8V_6VC2NnTzQ@mail.gmail.com> <489D13FBFA9B3E41812EA89F188F018E0F5033D6@xmb-rcd-x04.cisco.com> <CAL10_BqaP1A3a68LcP7v6692+F9y4pE3bixMkkNBKfWrPuGP=A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 11:05:31 -0700
Message-ID: <CAL10_BrxLSCj-7dMe1uH3WRNcokakxY3OhV0qkvw9CZGrUUYJQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Andre Kostur <akostur@incognito.com>
To: "Bernie Volz (volz)" <volz@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmlDOOKCzBDLW9zNWvp+5g1P0UdMRCYQLAyTU3F/8XIa4xDEVzd4jq6JhPPfDDKBiJlt3tp
Cc: "dhcwg@ietf.org" <dhcwg@ietf.org>, Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@nominum.com>
Subject: Re: [dhcwg] Load Balancing for DHCPv6
X-BeenThere: dhcwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: <dhcwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dhcwg>
List-Post: <mailto:dhcwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg>, <mailto:dhcwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 18:05:39 -0000

Bernie had asked off-list (and I was kinda curious myself) as to the
relative performance of the two algorithms as well.  So I put it under
a performance analyzer, and it came back with Pearson taking on
average 0.67 usecs per invocation, where FNV1a took 1.50 usecs per
invocation.  (That is on an optimized build of the algorithms, not
debug builds.)

Add this to all of the other reasons already mentioned, I think Person
is definitively the way to go.   (Unless someone can point out a flaw
in my methodology....)


On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Andre Kostur <akostur@incognito.com> wrote:
> Whups, yep.  Changed that to a 1, and no significant different in the
> stddev.  Both still in that 95 - 105 range.
>
> I'm also of the opinion that Pearson is the way to go.  Seems to give
> a pretty good spread of values, it's already documented in RFC
> (complete with implementation), and any servers or relays that may
> have already been doing load balancing for v4 will already have this
> algorithm implemented.

-- 
Andre Kostur