Re: [ippm] [Bloat] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-cpaasch-ippm-responsiveness-00.txt

Erik Auerswald <> Thu, 19 August 2021 07:17 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 783013A0EA5; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 00:17:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3T77O0N_BduF; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 00:17:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:638:208:120::220]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4FBD3A0EA0; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 00:17:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:638:208:ef34:0:ff:fe00:65]) by (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id 17J7HYuf153682 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 19 Aug 2021 09:17:34 +0200
Received: from (ip6-localhost [IPv6:::1]) by (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4+deb7u1) with ESMTP id 17J7HYJQ004991 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 19 Aug 2021 09:17:34 +0200
Received: (from auerswal@localhost) by (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id 17J7HYwq004990; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 09:17:34 +0200
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 09:17:34 +0200
From: Erik Auerswald <>
To: Christoph Paasch <>
Message-ID: <>
References: <YRbm8ZqLdi3xs3bl@MacBook-Pro-2.local> <> <YR2DRslj1nk4RwOL@MacBook-Pro-2.local>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YR2DRslj1nk4RwOL@MacBook-Pro-2.local>
Author: Erik Auerswald <>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [ippm] [Bloat] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-cpaasch-ippm-responsiveness-00.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 07:17:48 -0000

Hello Christoph,

On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 03:01:42PM -0700, Christoph Paasch wrote:
> On 08/15/21 - 15:39, Erik Auerswald wrote:
> > [...]
> > I do not think RPM can replace all other metrics.  This is, in a way,
> > mentioned in the introduction, where it is suggested to add RPM to
> > existing measurement platforms.  As such I just want to point this out
> > more explicitely, but do not intend to diminish the RPM idea by this.
> > In short, I'd say it's complicated.
> Yes, I fully agree that RPM is not the only metric. It is one among
> many.  If there is a sentiment in our document that sounds like "RPM
> is the only that matters", please let me know where so we can reword
> the text.

Regarding just this, in section 3 (Goals), item 3 (User-friendliness),
the I-D states that '[u]sers commonly look for a single "score" of their
performance.'  This can lead to the impression that RPM is intended to
provide this single score.

I do think that RPM seems more generally useful than either idle latency
or maximum bandwidth, but for a more technically minded audience, all
three provide useful information to get an impression of the usefulness
of a network for different applications.

Thinking doesn't guarantee that we won't make mistakes. But not thinking
guarantees that we will.
                        -- Leslie Lamport