Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-capacity-metric-method-08.txt

"MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com> Thu, 01 April 2021 15:03 UTC

Return-Path: <acm@research.att.com>
X-Original-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ippm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 510653A1700 for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 08:03:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.919
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.919 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 KBTcDk0ZigTX for <ippm@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 08:03:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA1173A16FA for <ippm@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 08:03:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0053301.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 131EjCJX008700; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 11:03:18 -0400
Received: from tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (sbcsmtp3.sbc.com [144.160.112.28]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 37n2h7m6hs-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 01 Apr 2021 11:03:17 -0400
Received: from enaf.dadc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 131F3Fsd011387; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 10:03:16 -0500
Received: from zlp30499.vci.att.com (zlp30499.vci.att.com [135.46.181.149]) by tlpd255.enaf.dadc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 131F39k8011216 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 1 Apr 2021 10:03:09 -0500
Received: from zlp30499.vci.att.com (zlp30499.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp30499.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 33C90401B726; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:03:09 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from clph811.sldc.sbc.com (unknown [135.41.107.12]) by zlp30499.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id 11C6C401B722; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:03:09 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from sldc.sbc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by clph811.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 131F383H068978; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 10:03:08 -0500
Received: from mail-green.research.att.com (mail-green.research.att.com [135.207.255.15]) by clph811.sldc.sbc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 131F31OW068019; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 10:03:01 -0500
Received: from exchange.research.att.com (njmtcas1.research.att.com [135.207.255.86]) by mail-green.research.att.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1963810A18C3; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 11:03:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from njmtexg5.research.att.com ([fe80::b09c:ff13:4487:78b6]) by njmtcas1.research.att.com ([fe80::e881:676b:51b6:905d%12]) with mapi id 14.03.0513.000; Thu, 1 Apr 2021 11:03:23 -0400
From: "MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <acm@research.att.com>
To: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, "Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de" <Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de>
CC: "ippm@ietf.org" <ippm@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-capacity-metric-method-08.txt
Thread-Index: AQHXJOMHlm9sjtq8v0uvrodRIOhLraqcfcAAgAAgCgCAAV5yAIAAHfYAgABTGACAAEsagIABJZwA///DTUCAAGcJAP//vXVg
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2021 15:03:22 +0000
Message-ID: <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF0147CD4F07@njmtexg5.research.att.com>
References: <161705348048.17388.9380614999436689902@ietfa.amsl.com> <HE1PR0702MB3772E8BA15BFF01315E139A8957D9@HE1PR0702MB3772.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <FRYP281MB01127BBC2A94F40783044DFE9C7D9@FRYP281MB0112.DEUP281.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <201af4d37914dfc0a87204b82c6db3c236acea6d.camel@ericsson.com> <FRYP281MB011208657C5A83AA34F137829C7C9@FRYP281MB0112.DEUP281.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <ae21c673c1f86ab3e4907c0f74e04e5b12d5a0f0.camel@ericsson.com> <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF0147CD4BB8@njmtexg5.research.att.com> <64181229306db31c71c372457c4775489918a8d1.camel@ericsson.com> <4D7F4AD313D3FC43A053B309F97543CF0147CD4D47@njmtexg5.research.att.com> <d74986f3baa3a0f2c905f74645da651a87a4d31a.camel@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <d74986f3baa3a0f2c905f74645da651a87a4d31a.camel@ericsson.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [24.148.42.167]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-GUID: X3oRQfxorHC_ofSh_3HWHoFSuUqEX34m
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: X3oRQfxorHC_ofSh_3HWHoFSuUqEX34m
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.369, 18.0.761 definitions=2021-04-01_05:2021-03-31, 2021-04-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2103310000 definitions=main-2104010102
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ippm/YBWmRlMvlQDlPCT950VRHxaHt0I>
Subject: Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-capacity-metric-method-08.txt
X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <ippm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ippm/>
List-Post: <mailto:ippm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm>, <mailto:ippm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2021 15:03:26 -0000

Great. As I often said, we have completed lots of testing to reach this point.

So, with the text changes offered to resolve your comments on version 8 this week, are we now good-to-go?

-=-=-  Al -=-=-

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 10:59 AM
> To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) <acm@research.att.com>om>; Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de
> Cc: ippm@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-capacity-metric-method-08.txt
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I had actually missed that text at the bottom. But thanks for the answer. Yes,
> I
> can understand that complete starvation was not achieved in that short
> timescale
> for flow that are high rate. I think that is in the realm of what I expected.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Magnus
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 2021-04-01 at 12:53 +0000, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) wrote:
> > bottom post:
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: ippm <ippm-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Magnus Westerlund
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 1, 2021 8:27 AM
> > > To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) <acm@research.att.com>om>; Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de
> > > Cc: ippm@ietf.org
> > > Subject: Re: [ippm] I-D Action: draft-ietf-ippm-capacity-metric-method-
> > > 08.txt
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > See below.
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2021-03-31 at 23:37 +0000, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In Version 08, we have this statement in the Scope/Applicability
> > > > section regarding the
> > > > algorithm:
> > > >
> > > >    The load rate adjustment algorithm's goal is to determine the Maximum
> > > >    IP-Layer Capacity in the context of an infrequent, diagnostic, short
> > > >    term measurement.  It is RECOMMENDED to discontinue non-measurement
> > > >    traffic that shares a subscriber's dedicated resources while testing.
> > > >
> > > > We can express the limitations more clearly in the first sentence, and
> > > > augment the second sentence as follows:
> > > >
> > > > The load rate adjustment algorithm's scope is limited to helping
> > > > determine the Maximum IP-Layer Capacity in the context of an
> > > > infrequent, diagnostic, short term measurement. It is RECOMMENDED to
> > > > discontinue non-measurement traffic that shares a subscriber's
> > > > dedicated resources while testing: measurements may not be accurate
> > > > and throughput of competing elastic traffic may be greatly reduced.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes, I think that is a good sentence.
> > >
> > > /Magnus
> >
> > [acm]
> > Thanks. Did you also see the reply at the end of my message, regarding your
> > question on competing traffic?
> >
> > Al
> >
> >
> > >
> >
> >