draft-ietf-bmwg-b2b-frame-01.txt   draft-ietf-bmwg-b2b-frame-02.txt 
Network Working Group A. Morton Network Working Group A. Morton
Internet-Draft AT&T Labs Internet-Draft AT&T Labs
Updates: 2544 (if approved) November 18, 2019 Updates: 2544 (if approved) May 19, 2020
Intended status: Informational Intended status: Informational
Expires: May 21, 2020 Expires: November 20, 2020
Updates for the Back-to-back Frame Benchmark in RFC 2544 Updates for the Back-to-back Frame Benchmark in RFC 2544
draft-ietf-bmwg-b2b-frame-01 draft-ietf-bmwg-b2b-frame-02
Abstract Abstract
Fundamental Benchmarking Methodologies for Network Interconnect Fundamental Benchmarking Methodologies for Network Interconnect
Devices of interest to the IETF are defined in RFC 2544. This memo Devices of interest to the IETF are defined in RFC 2544. This memo
updates the procedures of the test to measure the Back-to-back frames updates the procedures of the test to measure the Back-to-back frames
Benchmark of RFC 2544, based on further experience. Benchmark of RFC 2544, based on further experience.
This memo updates Section 26.4 of RFC 2544. This memo updates Section 26.4 of RFC 2544.
skipping to change at page 1, line 44 skipping to change at page 1, line 44
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 21, 2020. This Internet-Draft will expire on November 20, 2020.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
skipping to change at page 2, line 29 skipping to change at page 2, line 29
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Scope and Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Scope and Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Motivation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Prerequisites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Prerequisites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Back-to-back Frames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. Back-to-back Frames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.1. Preparing the list of Frame sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1. Preparing the list of Frame sizes . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.2. Test for a Single Frame Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.2. Test for a Single Frame Size . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.3. Test Repetition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.3. Test Repetition and Benchmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.4. Benchmark Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.4. Benchmark Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. Reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. Reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The IETF's fundamental Benchmarking Methodologies are defined in The IETF's fundamental Benchmarking Methodologies are defined
[RFC2544], supported by the terms and definitions in [RFC1242], and in[RFC2544], supported by the terms and definitions in [RFC1242], and
[RFC2544] actually obsoletes an earlier specification, [RFC1944]. [RFC2544] actually obsoletes an earlier specification, [RFC1944].
Over time, the benchmarking community has updated [RFC2544] several Over time, the benchmarking community has updated [RFC2544] several
times, including the Device Reset Benchmark [RFC6201], and the times, including the Device Reset Benchmark [RFC6201], and the
important Applicability Statement [RFC6815] concerning use outside important Applicability Statement [RFC6815] concerning use outside
the Isolated Test Environment (ITE) required for accurate the Isolated Test Environment (ITE) required for accurate
benchmarking. Other specifications implicitly update [RFC2544], such benchmarking. Other specifications implicitly update [RFC2544], such
as the IPv6 Benchmarking Methodologies in [RFC5180]. as the IPv6 Benchmarking Methodologies in [RFC5180].
Recent testing experience with the Back-to-back Frame test and Recent testing experience with the Back-to-back Frame test and
Benchmark in Section 26.4 of [RFC2544] indicates that an update is Benchmark in Section 26.4 of [RFC2544] indicates that an update is
skipping to change at page 4, line 36 skipping to change at page 4, line 36
When the VSPERF CI results were examined [VSPERF-b2b], several When the VSPERF CI results were examined [VSPERF-b2b], several
aspects of the results were considered notable: aspects of the results were considered notable:
1. Back-to-back Frame Benchmark was very consistent for some fixed 1. Back-to-back Frame Benchmark was very consistent for some fixed
frame sizes, and somewhat variable for others. frame sizes, and somewhat variable for others.
2. The number of Back-to-back Frames with zero loss reported for 2. The number of Back-to-back Frames with zero loss reported for
large frame sizes was unexpectedly long (translating to 30 large frame sizes was unexpectedly long (translating to 30
seconds of buffer time), and no explanation or measurement limit seconds of buffer time), and no explanation or measurement limit
condition was indicated. condition was indicated. It's important that the buffering time
was used in this analysis. The referenced testing [VSPERF-b2b]
and calculations produced buffer extents of 30 seconds for some
frame sizes, and clearly wrong in practice. On the other hand, a
result expressed only as a large number of Back-to-back Frames
does not permit such an easy comparison with reality.
3. Calculation of the extent of buffer time in the DUT helped to 3. Calculation of the extent of buffer time in the DUT helped to
explain the results observed with all frame sizes (for example, explain the results observed with all frame sizes (for example,
some frame sizes cannot exceed the frame header processing rate some frame sizes cannot exceed the frame header processing rate
of the DUT and therefore no buffering occurs, therefore the of the DUT and therefore no buffering occurs, therefore the
results depended on the test equipment and not the DUT). results depended on the test equipment and not the DUT).
4. It was found that the actual buffer time in the DUT could be 4. It was found that the actual extent of buffer time in the DUT
estimated using results from the Throughput tests conducted could be estimated using results to measure the longest burst in
according to Section 26.1 of [RFC2544]. It is apparent that the frames without loss and results from the Throughput tests
DUT's frame processing rate tends to increase the "implied" conducted according to Section 26.1 of [RFC2544]. It is apparent
estimate (measured according to Section 26.4 of [RFC2544]), and a that the DUT's frame processing rate empties the buffer during a
trial and tends to increase the "implied" buffer size estimate
(measured according to Section 26.4 of [RFC2544] because many
frames have left the buffer when the burst of frames ends). A
calculation using the Throughput measurement can reveal a calculation using the Throughput measurement can reveal a
"corrected" estimate. "corrected" buffer size estimate.
Further, if the Throughput tests of Section 26.1 of [RFC2544] are Further, if the Throughput tests of Section 26.1 of [RFC2544] are
conducted as a prerequisite test, the number of frame sizes required conducted as a prerequisite test, the number of frame sizes required
for Back-to-back Frame Benchmarking can be reduced to one or more of for Back-to-back Frame Benchmarking can be reduced to one or more of
the small frame sizes, or the results for large frame sizes can be the small frame sizes, or the results for large frame sizes can be
noted as invalid in the results if tested anyway (these are the frame noted as invalid in the results if tested anyway (these are the
sizes for which the back-to-back frame rate cannot exceed the frame larger frame sizes for which the back-to-back frame rate cannot
header processing rate of the DUT and no buffering occurs). exceed the frame header processing rate of the DUT and little or no
buffering occurs).
[VSPERF-b2b] provides the details of the calculation to estimate the [VSPERF-b2b] provides the details of the calculation to estimate the
actual buffer storage available in the DUT, using results from the actual buffer storage available in the DUT, using results from the
Throughput tests for each frame size, and the maximum theoretical Throughput tests for each frame size, and the maximum theoretical
frame rate for the DUT links (which constrain the minimum frame frame rate for the DUT links (which constrain the minimum frame
spacing). spacing).
The simplified model used in these calculations for the DUT includes In reality, there are many buffers and packet header processing steps
a packet header processing function with limited rate of operation, in a typical DUT. The simplified model used in these calculations
as shown below: for the DUT includes a packet header processing function with limited
rate of operation, as shown below:
|------------ DUT --------| |------------ DUT --------|
Generator -> Ingress -> Buffer -> HeaderProc -> Egress -> Receiver Generator -> Ingress -> Buffer -> HeaderProc -> Egress -> Receiver
So, in the back2back frame testing: So, in the back2back frame testing:
1. The Ingress burst arrives at Max Theoretical Frame Rate, and 1. The Ingress burst arrives at Max Theoretical Frame Rate, and
initially the frames are buffered initially the frames are buffered.
2. The packet header processing function (HeaderProc) operates at 2. The packet header processing function (HeaderProc) operates at
approximately the "Measured Throughput", removing frames from the the "Measured Throughput" (Section 26.1 of [RFC2544]), removing
buffer frames from the buffer (this is the best approximation we have).
3. Frames that have been processed are clearly not in the buffer, so 3. Frames that have been processed are clearly not in the buffer, so
the Corrected DUT buffer time equation (Section 5.4) estimates the Corrected DUT buffer time equation (Section 5.4) estimates
and removes the frames that the DUT forwarded on Egress during and removes the frames that the DUT forwarded on Egress during
the burst. the burst. We define buffer time as the number of Frames
occupying the buffer divided by the Maximum Theoretical Frame
Rate (on egress) for the Frame size under test.
4. A helpful concept is the buffer filling rate, which is the
difference between the Max Theoretical Frame Rate (ingress) and
the Measured Throughput (HeaderProc on egress). If the actual
buffer size in frames was known, the time to fill the buffer
during a measurement can be calculated using the filling rate as
a check on measurements. However, the Buffer in the model
represents many buffers of different sizes in the DUT data path.
Knowledge of approximate buffer storage size (in time or bytes) may Knowledge of approximate buffer storage size (in time or bytes) may
be useful to estimate whether frame losses will occur if DUT be useful to estimate whether frame losses will occur if DUT
forwarding is temporarily suspended in a production deployment, due forwarding is temporarily suspended in a production deployment, due
to an unexpected interruption of frame processing (an interruption of to an unexpected interruption of frame processing (an interruption of
duration greater than the estimated buffer would certainly cause lost duration greater than the estimated buffer would certainly cause lost
frames). frames). In Section 5, the calculations for the correct buffer time
for the combination of offered load at Max Theoretical Frame Rate and
header processing speed at 100% of Measured Throughput. Other
combinations are possible, such as changing the percent of measured
Throughput to account for other processes reducing the header
processing rate.
The presentation of OPNFV VSPERF evaluation and development of The presentation of OPNFV VSPERF evaluation and development of
enhanced search alogorithms [VSPERF-BSLV] was discussed at IETF-102. enhanced search alogorithms [VSPERF-BSLV] was discussed at IETF-102.
The enhancements are intended to compensate for transient inerrrupts The enhancements are intended to compensate for transient inerrrupts
that may cause loss at near-Throughput levels of offered load. that may cause loss at near-Throughput levels of offered load.
Subsequent analysis of the results indicates that buffers within the Subsequent analysis of the results indicates that buffers within the
DUT can compensate for some interrupts, and this finding increases DUT can compensate for some interrupts, and this finding increases
the importance of the Back-to-back frame characterization described the importance of the Back-to-back frame characterization described
here. here.
skipping to change at page 6, line 35 skipping to change at page 7, line 14
o the Throughput and the Back-to-back Frame measurement o the Throughput and the Back-to-back Frame measurement
configuration traffic characteristics (unidirectional or bi- configuration traffic characteristics (unidirectional or bi-
directional) MUST match. directional) MUST match.
o the Throughput measurement MUST be under zero-loss conditions, o the Throughput measurement MUST be under zero-loss conditions,
according to Section 26.1 of [RFC2544]. according to Section 26.1 of [RFC2544].
The Back-to-back Benchmark described in Section 3.1 of [RFC1242] MUST The Back-to-back Benchmark described in Section 3.1 of [RFC1242] MUST
be measured directly by the tester, where buffer size is inferred be measured directly by the tester, where buffer size is inferred
from packet loss measurements. Therefore, sources of packet loss from Back-to-back Frame bursts and associated packet loss
that are un-related to consistent evaluation of buffer size SHOULD be measurements. Therefore, sources of packet loss that are un-related
identified and removed or mitigated. Example sources include: to consistent evaluation of buffer size SHOULD be identified and
removed or mitigated. Example sources include:
o On-path active components that are external to the DUT o On-path active components that are external to the DUT
o Operating system environment interrupting DUT operation o Operating system environment interrupting DUT operation
o Shared resource contention between the DUT and other off-path o Shared resource contention between the DUT and other off-path
component(s), impacting DUT's behaviour, sometimes called the component(s) impacting DUT's behaviour, sometimes called the
"noisy neighbour" problem. "noisy neighbour" problem with virtualized network functions.
Mitigations applicable to some of the sources above are discussed in Mitigations applicable to some of the sources above are discussed in
Section 5.2, with the other measurement requirements described below Section 5.2, with the other measurement requirements described below
in Section 5. in Section 5.
5. Back-to-back Frames 5. Back-to-back Frames
Objective: To characterize the ability of a DUT to process back-to- Objective: To characterize the ability of a DUT to process back-to-
back frames as defined in [RFC1242]. back frames as defined in [RFC1242].
The Procedure follows. The Procedure follows.
5.1. Preparing the list of Frame sizes 5.1. Preparing the list of Frame sizes
From the list of RECOMMENDED Frame sizes (Section 9 of [RFC2544]), From the list of RECOMMENDED Frame sizes (Section 9 of [RFC2544]),
select the subset of Frame sizes whose measured Throughput was less select the subset of Frame sizes whose measured Throughput (during
than the maximum theoretical Frame Rate. These are the only Frame prerequisite testing) was less than the maximum theoretical Frame
sizes where it is possible to produce a burst of frames that cause Rate of the DUT/test-set-up. These are the only Frame sizes where it
the DUT buffers to fill and eventually overflow, producing one or is possible to produce a burst of frames that cause the DUT buffers
more discarded frames. to fill and eventually overflow, producing one or more discarded
frames.
5.2. Test for a Single Frame Size 5.2. Test for a Single Frame Size
Each trial in the test requires the tester to send a burst of frames Each trial in the test requires the tester to send a burst of frames
(after idle time) with the minimum inter-frame gap, and to count the (after idle time) with the minimum inter-frame gap, and to count the
corresponding frames forwarded by the DUT. corresponding frames forwarded by the DUT.
The duration of the trial MUST be at least 2 seconds, to allow DUT The duration of the trial MUST be at least 2 seconds, to allow DUT
buffers to deplete. buffers to deplete.
If all frames have been received, the tester increases the length of If all frames have been received, the tester increases the length of
the burst according to the search algorithm and performs another the burst according to the search algorithm and performs another
trial. trial.
If the received frame count is less than the number of frames in the If the received frame count is less than the number of frames in the
burst, then the limit of DUT processing and buffering may have been burst, then the limit of DUT processing and buffering may have been
exceeded, and the burst length is determined by the search algorithm exceeded, and the burst length is determined by the search algorithm
for the next trial. for the next trial (the burst length is typically reduced, but see
below).
Classic search algorithms have been adapted for use in benchmarking, Classic search algorithms have been adapted for use in benchmarking,
where the search requires discovery of a pair of outcomes, one with where the search requires discovery of a pair of outcomes, one with
no loss and another with loss, at load conditions within the no loss and another with loss, at load conditions within the
acceptable tolerance. Also for conditions encountered when acceptable tolerance or accuracy. Conditions encountered when
benchmarking the Infrastructure for Network Function Virtualization benchmarking the Infrastructure for Network Function Virtualization
require algorithm enhancement. Fortunately, the adaptation of Binary require algorithm enhancement. Fortunately, the adaptation of Binary
Search, and an enhanced Binary Search with Loss Verification have Search, and an enhanced Binary Search with Loss Verification have
been specified in [TST009]. These alogorithms (see clause 12.3) can been specified in clause 12.3 of [TST009]. These alogorithms can
easily be used for Back-to-back Frame benchmarking by replacing the easily be used for Back-to-back Frame benchmarking by replacing the
Offered Load level with burst length in frames. [TST009] Annex B Offered Load level with burst length in frames. [TST009] Annex B
describes the theory behind the enhanced Binary Search algorithm. describes the theory behind the enhanced Binary Search with Loss
Verification algorithm.
There is also promising work-in-progress that may prove useful in for There is also promising work-in-progress that may prove useful in for
Back-to-back Frame benchmarking. Back-to-back Frame benchmarking.
[I-D.vpolak-mkonstan-bmwg-mlrsearch] and [I-D.vpolak-bmwg-plrsearch] [I-D.vpolak-mkonstan-bmwg-mlrsearch] and [I-D.vpolak-bmwg-plrsearch]
are two such examples. are two such examples.
Either the [TST009] Binary Search or Binary Search with Loss Either the [TST009] Binary Search or Binary Search with Loss
Verification algorithms MUST be used, and input parameters to the Verification algorithms MUST be used, and input parameters to the
algorithm(s) MUST be reported. algorithm(s) MUST be reported.
The Back-to-back Frame value is the longest burst of frames that the The tester usually imposes a (configurable) minimum step size for
DUT can successfully process and buffer without frame loss, as burst length, and the step size MUST be reported with the results (as
determined from the series of trials. The tester may impose a this influences the accuracy and variation of test results).
(configurable) minimum step size for burst length, and the step size
MUST be reported with the results (as this influences the accuracy
and variation of test results).
5.3. Test Repetition The original Section 26.4 of [RFC2544] definition is stated below:
The test MUST be repeated N times for each frame size in the subset The Back-to-back Frame value is the longest burst of frames that
list, and each Back-to-back Frame value made available for further the DUT can successfully process and buffer without frame loss, as
processing (below). determined from the series of trials.
5.3. Test Repetition and Benchmark
On this topic, Section 26.4 of [RFC2544] requires:
The trial length MUST be at least 2 seconds and SHOULD be repeated
at least 50 times with the average of the recorded values being
reported.
Therefore, the Benchmark for Back-to-back Frames is the average of
burst length values over repeated tests to determine the longest
burst of frames that the DUT can successfully process and buffer
without frame loss. Each of the repeated tests completes an
independent search process.
In this update, the test MUST be repeated N times (the number of
repetitions is now a variable that must be reported),for each frame
size in the subset list, and each Back-to-back Frame value made
available for further processing (below).
5.4. Benchmark Calculations 5.4. Benchmark Calculations
For each Frame size, calculate the following summary statistics for For each Frame size, calculate the following summary statistics for
Back-to-back Frame values over the N tests: longest Back-to-back Frame values over the N tests:
o Average (Benchmark) o Average (Benchmark)
o Minimum o Minimum
o Maximum o Maximum
o Standard Deviation o Standard Deviation
Further, calculate the Implied DUT Buffer Time and the Corrected DUT Further, calculate the Implied DUT Buffer Time and the Corrected DUT
skipping to change at page 9, line 6 skipping to change at page 10, line 6
The formula above is simply expressing the Burst of Frames in units The formula above is simply expressing the Burst of Frames in units
of time. of time.
The next step is to apply a correction factor that accounts for the The next step is to apply a correction factor that accounts for the
DUT's frame forwarding operation during the test (assuming the simple DUT's frame forwarding operation during the test (assuming the simple
model of the DUT composed of a buffer and a forwarding function, model of the DUT composed of a buffer and a forwarding function,
described in Section 3). described in Section 3).
Corrected DUT Buffer Time = Corrected DUT Buffer Time =
/ \
Measured Throughput Implied DUT |Implied DUT Measured Throughput |
= Implied DUT Buffer Time * -------------------------- = Buffer Time - |Buffer Time * -------------------------- |
Max Theoretical Frame Rate | Max Theoretical Frame Rate |
\ /
where: where:
1. The "Measured Throughput" is the [RFC2544] Throughput Benchmark 1. The "Measured Throughput" is the [RFC2544] Throughput Benchmark
for the frame size tested, as augmented by methods including the for the frame size tested, as augmented by methods including the
Binary Search with Loss Verification aglorithm in [TST009] where Binary Search with Loss Verification aglorithm in [TST009] where
applicable, and MUST be expressed in Frames per second in this applicable, and MUST be expressed in Frames per second in this
equation. equation.
2. The "Max Theoretical Frame Rate" is a calculated value for the 2. The "Max Theoretical Frame Rate" is a calculated value for the
skipping to change at page 9, line 44 skipping to change at page 10, line 45
for each type of data stream tested. for each type of data stream tested.
The number of tests Averaged for the Benchmark, N, MUST be reported. The number of tests Averaged for the Benchmark, N, MUST be reported.
The Minimum, Maximum, and Standard Deviation across all complete The Minimum, Maximum, and Standard Deviation across all complete
tests SHOULD also be reported (they are referred to as tests SHOULD also be reported (they are referred to as
"Min,Max,StdDev" in the table below). "Min,Max,StdDev" in the table below).
The Corrected DUT Buffer Time SHOULD also be reported. The Corrected DUT Buffer Time SHOULD also be reported.
If the tester operates using a maximum burst length in frames, then If the tester operates using a limited maximum burst length in
this maximum length SHOULD be reported. frames, then this maximum length SHOULD be reported.
+--------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+ +--------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| Frame Size, | Ave B2B | Min,Max,StdDev | Corrected Buff | | Frame Size, | Ave B2B | Min,Max,StdDev | Corrected Buff |
| octets | Length, frames | | Time, Sec | | octets | Length, frames | | Time, Sec |
+--------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+ +--------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
| 64 | 26000 | 25500,27000,20 | 0.00004 | | 64 | 26000 | 25500,27000,20 | 0.00004 |
+--------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+ +--------------+----------------+----------------+------------------+
Back-to-Back Frame Results Back-to-Back Frame Results
Static and configuration parameters: Static and configuration parameters:
Number of test repetitions, N Number of test repetitions, N
Minimum Step Size (during searches), in frames. Minimum Step Size (during searches), in frames.
If the tester has an actual frame rate of interest (less than the If the tester has a specific (actual) frame rate of interest (less
Throughput rate), it is useful to estimate the buffer time at that than the Throughput rate), it is useful to estimate the buffer time
frame rate: at that actual frame rate:
Actual Buffer Time = Actual Buffer Time =
Measured Throughput Max Theoretical Frame Rate
= Corrected DUT Buffer Time * -------------------------- = Corrected DUT Buffer Time * --------------------------
Actual Frame Rate Actual Frame Rate
and report this value, properly labeled. and report this value, properly labeled.
7. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
Benchmarking activities as described in this memo are limited to Benchmarking activities as described in this memo are limited to
technology characterization using controlled stimuli in a laboratory technology characterization using controlled stimuli in a laboratory
environment, with dedicated address space and the other constraints environment, with dedicated address space and the other constraints
skipping to change at page 12, line 25 skipping to change at page 13, line 25
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
10.2. Informative References 10.2. Informative References
[I-D.vpolak-bmwg-plrsearch] [I-D.vpolak-bmwg-plrsearch]
Konstantynowicz, M. and V. Polak, "Probabilistic Loss Konstantynowicz, M. and V. Polak, "Probabilistic Loss
Ratio Search for Packet Throughput (PLRsearch)", draft- Ratio Search for Packet Throughput (PLRsearch)", draft-
vpolak-bmwg-plrsearch-02 (work in progress), July 2019. vpolak-bmwg-plrsearch-03 (work in progress), March 2020.
[I-D.vpolak-mkonstan-bmwg-mlrsearch] [I-D.vpolak-mkonstan-bmwg-mlrsearch]
Konstantynowicz, M. and V. Polak, "Multiple Loss Ratio Konstantynowicz, M. and V. Polak, "Multiple Loss Ratio
Search for Packet Throughput (MLRsearch)", draft-vpolak- Search for Packet Throughput (MLRsearch)", draft-vpolak-
mkonstan-bmwg-mlrsearch-02 (work in progress), July 2019. mkonstan-bmwg-mlrsearch-03 (work in progress), March 2020.
[OPNFV-2017] [OPNFV-2017]
Cooper, T., Morton, A., and S. Rao, "Dataplane Cooper, T., Morton, A., and S. Rao, "Dataplane
Performance, Capacity, and Benchmarking in OPNFV", June Performance, Capacity, and Benchmarking in OPNFV", June
2017, 2017,
<https://wiki.opnfv.org/download/attachments/10293193/ <https://wiki.opnfv.org/download/attachments/10293193/
VSPERF-Dataplane-Perf-Cap-Bench.pptx?api=v2>. VSPERF-Dataplane-Perf-Cap-Bench.pptx?api=v2>.
[RFC8239] Avramov, L. and J. Rapp, "Data Center Benchmarking [RFC8239] Avramov, L. and J. Rapp, "Data Center Benchmarking
Methodology", RFC 8239, DOI 10.17487/RFC8239, August 2017, Methodology", RFC 8239, DOI 10.17487/RFC8239, August 2017,
 End of changes. 34 change blocks. 
73 lines changed or deleted 118 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/