draft-ietf-bmwg-fib-meth-00.txt   draft-ietf-bmwg-fib-meth-01.txt 
Benchmarking Methodology Working Group G. Trotter INTERNET-DRAFT G. Trotter
Internet Draft Agilent Technologies Benchmarking Methodology Working Group Agilent Technologies
Document: <draft-ietf-bmwg-fib-meth-00.txt> January 2002 Expires: August 2003 February 2003
Category: Informational
Methodology for Forwarding Information Base (FIB) based Router Methodology for Forwarding Information Base (FIB) based Router
Performance Performance
<draft-ietf-bmwg-fib-meth-01.txt>
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026 [1]. all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026 [1].
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
skipping to change at page 2, line 4 skipping to change at page 2, line 4
4. Router Setup....................................................3 4. Router Setup....................................................3
5. Test Setup......................................................3 5. Test Setup......................................................3
6. Methodology Of Route Advertisements.............................3 6. Methodology Of Route Advertisements.............................3
7. Table Size......................................................4 7. Table Size......................................................4
8. Table Composition...............................................5 8. Table Composition...............................................5
9. Offered Packet Load.............................................5 9. Offered Packet Load.............................................5
10. Packet Format/Size.............................................6 10. Packet Format/Size.............................................6
11. Determining The Maximum Fib Size...............................6 11. Determining The Maximum Fib Size...............................6
12. Methodology....................................................7 12. Methodology....................................................7
12.1 Baseline Measurements.........................................7 12.1 Baseline Measurements.........................................7
FIB-based Router Performance September, 2001 FIB-based Router Performance February, 2003
12.2 Maximum Fib Size Test.........................................7 12.2 Maximum Fib Size Test.........................................7
12.3 Fib Size Impact On Packet Forwarding Performance..............8 12.3 Fib Size Impact On Packet Forwarding Performance..............8
13. Security Considerations........................................9 13. Security Considerations........................................9
14. References.....................................................9 14. References.....................................................9
15. Acknowledgments................................................9 15. Acknowledgments................................................9
16. Author's Addresses.............................................9 16. Author's Addresses.............................................9
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
skipping to change at page 3, line 5 skipping to change at page 3, line 5
This methodology takes into account two key features of a FIB - the This methodology takes into account two key features of a FIB - the
FIB size and the FIB prefix distribution. FIB size and the FIB prefix distribution.
This methodology does not specify a particular means of populating a This methodology does not specify a particular means of populating a
FIB - a routing protocol should be used, although a FIB could be FIB - a routing protocol should be used, although a FIB could be
manually entered into a router. One implication of this is that manually entered into a router. One implication of this is that
there needs to be protocol-independent means for determining when a there needs to be protocol-independent means for determining when a
router's FIB has been fully populated (described in 12.2). router's FIB has been fully populated (described in 12.2).
FIB-based Router Performance September, 2001 FIB-based Router Performance February, 2003
Once a FIB of a particular size and prefix distribution is entered Once a FIB of a particular size and prefix distribution is entered
into the router, [3] style measurements are performed in order to into the router, [3] style measurements are performed in order to
gauge the effect of the FIB on packet FIB-dependent throughput, FIB- gauge the effect of the FIB on packet FIB-dependent throughput, FIB-
dependent latency and FIB-dependent frame loss rate. dependent latency and FIB-dependent frame loss rate.
4. Router Setup 4. Router Setup
This is an out-of-service methodology. The router should be This is an out-of-service methodology. The router should be
configured realistically. That is, it should be configured with configured realistically. That is, it should be configured with
skipping to change at page 4, line 4 skipping to change at page 4, line 4
6.2 Prevention of Route Aggregation 6.2 Prevention of Route Aggregation
Routes should be advertised into the router in such a manner as to Routes should be advertised into the router in such a manner as to
prevent route aggregation. Routes may be aggregated as follows. If prevent route aggregation. Routes may be aggregated as follows. If
100 routes are advertised on a single interface within a common 100 routes are advertised on a single interface within a common
prefix of 192.47.0.0, and no other advertisements on any other prefix of 192.47.0.0, and no other advertisements on any other
interface have a prefix of 192.47.0.0, then the router may enter a interface have a prefix of 192.47.0.0, then the router may enter a
single /16 entry into the FIB, directing all traffic with a single /16 entry into the FIB, directing all traffic with a
192.47.0.0 prefix to a particular interface. Care must be taken to 192.47.0.0 prefix to a particular interface. Care must be taken to
FIB-based Router Performance September, 2001 FIB-based Router Performance February, 2003
prevent this from occurring, as it will result in smaller than prevent this from occurring, as it will result in smaller than
intended FIBs being entered within the router under test. intended FIBs being entered within the router under test.
As an example of a means of router advertisement designed to prevent As an example of a means of router advertisement designed to prevent
route aggregation, consider the advertisement of 16 /16 prefixes route aggregation, consider the advertisement of 16 /16 prefixes
into a 4-port router in the diagram below: into a 4-port router in the diagram below:
+---------------+ +---------------+
1.1,2.1,3.1,4.1 -----| |----- 1.3,2.3,3.3,4.3 1.1,2.1,3.1,4.1 -----| |----- 1.3,2.3,3.3,4.3
skipping to change at page 5, line 5 skipping to change at page 5, line 5
and lost packets may indicate that the FIB is full, and not that the and lost packets may indicate that the FIB is full, and not that the
router is still learning routes. router is still learning routes.
7. Table Size 7. Table Size
This methodology does not specify FIB sizes to be installed within This methodology does not specify FIB sizes to be installed within
the router under test. However, it is expected that this the router under test. However, it is expected that this
methodology will be used through to the maximum possible FIB size methodology will be used through to the maximum possible FIB size
purported to be supported by the router under test. purported to be supported by the router under test.
FIB-based Router Performance September, 2001 FIB-based Router Performance February, 2003
This methodology recommends starting with a small FIB size - a This methodology recommends starting with a small FIB size - a
single network per physical interface - in order to perform a basic single network per physical interface - in order to perform a basic
performance benchmark on the router under test. Subsequent tests performance benchmark on the router under test. Subsequent tests
will increase the FIB by size 'N'. The FIB will be increased will increase the FIB by size 'N'. The FIB will be increased
through to the maximum size possible (see section 11 for a through to the maximum size possible (see section 11 for a
discussion of determining the maximum possible FIB size). discussion of determining the maximum possible FIB size).
8. Table Composition 8. Table Composition
skipping to change at page 6, line 5 skipping to change at page 6, line 5
| | | |
| | | |
1.2,2.2,3.2,4.2 -----|B D|----- 1.4,2.4,3.4,4.4 1.2,2.2,3.2,4.2 -----|B D|----- 1.4,2.4,3.4,4.4
+---------------+ +---------------+
In this diagram, packets sent into interface A must be directed to a In this diagram, packets sent into interface A must be directed to a
destination address present in each network advertised on ports B, C destination address present in each network advertised on ports B, C
and D. That is, the "transmit packet list" for packets sent into and D. That is, the "transmit packet list" for packets sent into
port A must be: port A must be:
FIB-based Router Performance September, 2001 FIB-based Router Performance February, 2003
1.2.0.1 1.2.0.1
1.3.0.1 1.3.0.1
1.4.0.1 1.4.0.1
2.2.0.1 2.2.0.1
2.3.0.1 2.3.0.1
2.4.0.1 2.4.0.1
3.2.0.1 3.2.0.1
3.3.0.1 3.3.0.1
3.4.0.1 3.4.0.1
skipping to change at page 7, line 5 skipping to change at page 7, line 5
packet and repeat until packets are no longer forwarded to the newly packet and repeat until packets are no longer forwarded to the newly
added network. Care must be taken to ensure that packets continue added network. Care must be taken to ensure that packets continue
to be forwarded to all advertised networks, even while new networks to be forwarded to all advertised networks, even while new networks
are added - a router may "age-out" old entries in order to ensure are added - a router may "age-out" old entries in order to ensure
that its FIB is filled with current entries. that its FIB is filled with current entries.
The absence of packets received at a particular network is The absence of packets received at a particular network is
indicative of entries not being present within the FIB, and thus indicative of entries not being present within the FIB, and thus
indicates that the FIB has filled. indicates that the FIB has filled.
FIB-based Router Performance September, 2001 FIB-based Router Performance February, 2003
If the approximate FIB size is known in advance, a larger number of If the approximate FIB size is known in advance, a larger number of
routes can be advertised into the router, then the maximum table routes can be advertised into the router, then the maximum table
size can be found incrementally from this point. size can be found incrementally from this point.
When using IP packets to discover the maximum sized FIB supported by When using IP packets to discover the maximum sized FIB supported by
the DUT, IP packets should be sent in at a rate that is the DUT, IP packets should be sent in at a rate that is
significantly below that of the maximum measured throughput of the significantly below that of the maximum measured throughput of the
router discovered during baseline measurements (see section 12.1). router discovered during baseline measurements (see section 12.1).
skipping to change at page 8, line 4 skipping to change at page 8, line 4
Procedure: Initially, advertise a single network on every port as Procedure: Initially, advertise a single network on every port as
per section 12.1. Establish a traffic mesh between all advertised per section 12.1. Establish a traffic mesh between all advertised
networks as per section 9. Transmit IP packets through the DUT to networks as per section 9. Transmit IP packets through the DUT to
all advertised networks at a rate well below the maximum throughput all advertised networks at a rate well below the maximum throughput
rate of the router, discovered in section 12.1. Ensure that packet rate of the router, discovered in section 12.1. Ensure that packet
loss is zero (indicating that packets are being forwarded to all loss is zero (indicating that packets are being forwarded to all
advertised networks). advertised networks).
Repeatedly advertise additional networks into the DUT and add these Repeatedly advertise additional networks into the DUT and add these
networks into the traffic mesh established through the DUT to the networks into the traffic mesh established through the DUT to the
FIB-based Router Performance September, 2001 FIB-based Router Performance February, 2003
advertised networks. Stop when packet loss is detected, or when an advertised networks. Stop when packet loss is detected, or when an
ICMP destination unreachable message with a code value of 0 (network ICMP destination unreachable message with a code value of 0 (network
unreachable) or 6 (destination network unknown) is received. This unreachable) or 6 (destination network unknown) is received. This
will indicate that the FIB has filled (or, that the DUT is unable to will indicate that the FIB has filled (or, that the DUT is unable to
add additional entries into the FIB). The test should continue in add additional entries into the FIB). The test should continue in
order to establish increasing packet loss as a consequence of order to establish increasing packet loss as a consequence of
increasing networks advertised into the DUT. increasing networks advertised into the DUT.
Reporting Format: The results should be reported as a single number Reporting Format: The results should be reported as a single number
skipping to change at page 9, line 4 skipping to change at page 9, line 4
} }
Reporting Format: Results will be reported as a series of [3]-style Reporting Format: Results will be reported as a series of [3]-style
graphs, with a separate set of graphs for each individual FIB size / graphs, with a separate set of graphs for each individual FIB size /
FIB composition test. Results could be overlaid onto a single set FIB composition test. Results could be overlaid onto a single set
of graphs. of graphs.
It may be useful to create a set of graphs to aid in direct It may be useful to create a set of graphs to aid in direct
interpretation of this test. One recommended graph would be, for a interpretation of this test. One recommended graph would be, for a
particular frame size, a graph of the appropriate metric on the y- particular frame size, a graph of the appropriate metric on the y-
FIB-based Router Performance September, 2001 FIB-based Router Performance February, 2003
axis (FIB-dependent throughput, FIB-dependent latency, FIB-dependent axis (FIB-dependent throughput, FIB-dependent latency, FIB-dependent
packet loss) versus the FIB size, with overlaid lines for each FIB packet loss) versus the FIB size, with overlaid lines for each FIB
composition. composition.
13. Security Considerations 13. Security Considerations
As this document is solely for the purpose of providing metric As this document is solely for the purpose of providing metric
methodology and describes neither a protocol nor a protocol's methodology and describes neither a protocol nor a protocol's
implementation, there are no security considerations associated with implementation, there are no security considerations associated with
this document. this document.
14. References 14. Informative References
1 Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP 1 Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP
9, RFC 2026, October 1996. 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
2 Trotter, G., " Terminology for Forwarding Information Base (FIB) 2 Trotter, G., " Terminology for Forwarding Information Base (FIB)
based Router Performance", RFC 3222, December, 2001. based Router Performance", RFC 3222, December, 2001.
3 Bradner, S., McQuaid, J., "Benchmarking Methodology for Network 3 Bradner, S., McQuaid, J., "Benchmarking Methodology for Network
Interconnect Devices", RFC 2544, March 1999 Interconnect Devices", RFC 2544, March 1999
15. Acknowledgements 15. Acknowledgements
skipping to change at page 10, line 5 skipping to change at page 10, line 5
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph
are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English. English.
FIB-based Router Performance September, 2001 FIB-based Router Performance February, 2003
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This
document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS
IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK
FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT
NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN
WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
 End of changes. 

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.23, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/