draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-test-07.txt		draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-test-08.txt
	Network Working Group Z. Sarker		Network Working Group Z. Sarker
	Internet-Draft Ericsson AB		Internet-Draft Ericsson AB
	Intended status: Informational V. Singh		Intended status: Informational V. Singh
	Expires: April 25, 2019 callstats.io		Expires: May 30, 2019 callstats.io
	X. Zhu		X. Zhu
	M. Ramalho		M. Ramalho
	Cisco Systems		Cisco Systems
	October 22, 2018		November 26, 2018
	Test Cases for Evaluating RMCAT Proposals		Test Cases for Evaluating RMCAT Proposals
	draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-test-07		draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-test-08
	Abstract		Abstract
	The Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) is used to transmit media in		The Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) is used to transmit media in
	multimedia telephony applications. These applications are typically		multimedia telephony applications. These applications are typically
	required to implement congestion control. This document describes		required to implement congestion control. This document describes
	the test cases to be used in the performance evaluation of such		the test cases to be used in the performance evaluation of such
	congestion control algorithms.		congestion control algorithms in a controlled environment.
	Status of This Memo		Status of This Memo
	This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the		This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
	provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.		provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
	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 April 25, 2019.		This Internet-Draft will expire on May 30, 2019.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2018 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
	skipping to change at page 23, line 36 ¶		skipping to change at page 23, line 36 ¶
	- End time: 119s.		- End time: 119s.
	o Test Specific Information: none		o Test Specific Information: none
	5.7. Media Flow Competing with Short TCP Flows		5.7. Media Flow Competing with Short TCP Flows
	In this test case, one or more congestion controlled media flow		In this test case, one or more congestion controlled media flow
	shares the bottleneck link with multiple short-lived TCP flows.		shares the bottleneck link with multiple short-lived TCP flows.
	Short-lived TCP flows resemble the on/off pattern observed in the web		Short-lived TCP flows resemble the on/off pattern observed in the web
	traffic, wherein clients ( for example -browsers) connect to a server		traffic, wherein clients (for example, browsers) connect to a server
	and download a resource (typically a web page, few images, text		and download a resource (typically a web page, few images, text
	files, etc.) using several TCP connections. This scenario shows the		files, etc.) using several TCP connections. This scenario shows the
	performance of a multimedia application when several browser windows		performance of a multimedia application when several browser windows
	are active. The test case measures the adaptivity of the candidate		are active. The test case measures the adaptivity of the candidate
	algorithm to competing web traffic, it addresses the requirements 1.E		algorithm to competing web traffic, it addresses the requirements 1.E
	in [I-D.ietf-rmcat-cc-requirements].		in [I-D.ietf-rmcat-cc-requirements].
	Depending on the number of short TCP flows, the cross-traffic either		Depending on the number of short TCP flows, the cross-traffic either
	appears as a short burst flow or resembles a long TCP flow. The		appears as a short burst flow or resembles a long TCP flow. The
	intention of this test is to observe the impact of short-term burst		intention of this test is to observe the impact of short-term burst
	skipping to change at page 30, line 12 ¶		skipping to change at page 30, line 12 ¶
	+ Number of sources : Zero (0)		+ Number of sources : Zero (0)
	7. Wireless Access Links		7. Wireless Access Links
	Additional wireless network (both cellular network and WiFi network)		Additional wireless network (both cellular network and WiFi network)
	specific test cases are defined in [I-D.ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests].		specific test cases are defined in [I-D.ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests].
	8. Security Considerations		8. Security Considerations
	The evaluations of the test cases are intended to run in a controlled		The security considerations in [I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria] and the
	lab environment. Hence, the applications, simulators and network		relevant congestion control algorithms apply. The principles for
	nodes should be well-behaved and should not impact the desired		congestion control are described in [RFC2914], and in particular any
	results. In case the evaluations are not done in a controlled		new method MUST implement safeguards to avoid congestion collapse of
	environment, the security considerations in		the Internet.
	[I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria] and the relevant congestion control
	algorithms apply. It is important to take appropriate caution to		The evaluation of the test cases are intended to be run in a
			controlled lab environment. Hence, the applications, simulators and
			network nodes ought to be well-behaved and should not impact the
			desired results. It is important to take appropriate caution to
	avoid leaking non-responsive traffic from unproven congestion		avoid leaking non-responsive traffic from unproven congestion
	avoidance techniques onto the open Internet.		avoidance techniques onto the open Internet.
	9. IANA Considerations		9. IANA Considerations
	There are no IANA impacts in this memo.		There are no IANA impacts in this memo.
	10. Acknowledgements		10. Acknowledgements
	Much of this document is derived from previous work on congestion		Much of this document is derived from previous work on congestion
	skipping to change at page 30, line 41 ¶		skipping to change at page 30, line 44 ¶
	The content and concepts within this document are a product of the		The content and concepts within this document are a product of the
	discussion carried out in the Design Team.		discussion carried out in the Design Team.
	11. References		11. References
	11.1. Normative References		11.1. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria]		[I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria]
	Singh, V., Ott, J., and S. Holmer, "Evaluating Congestion		Singh, V., Ott, J., and S. Holmer, "Evaluating Congestion
	Control for Interactive Real-time Media", draft-ietf-		Control for Interactive Real-time Media", draft-ietf-
	rmcat-eval-criteria-07 (work in progress), May 2018.		rmcat-eval-criteria-08 (work in progress), November 2018.
	[I-D.ietf-rmcat-video-traffic-model]		[I-D.ietf-rmcat-video-traffic-model]
	Zhu, X., Cruz, S., and Z. Sarker, "Video Traffic Models		Zhu, X., Cruz, S., and Z. Sarker, "Video Traffic Models
	for RTP Congestion Control Evaluations", draft-ietf-rmcat-		for RTP Congestion Control Evaluations", draft-ietf-rmcat-
	video-traffic-model-05 (work in progress), July 2018.		video-traffic-model-06 (work in progress), November 2018.
	[I-D.ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests]		[I-D.ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests]
	Sarker, Z., Johansson, I., Zhu, X., Fu, J., Tan, W., and		Sarker, Z., Johansson, I., Zhu, X., Fu, J., Tan, W., and
	M. Ramalho, "Evaluation Test Cases for Interactive Real-		M. Ramalho, "Evaluation Test Cases for Interactive Real-
	Time Media over Wireless Networks", draft-ietf-rmcat-		Time Media over Wireless Networks", draft-ietf-rmcat-
	wireless-tests-05 (work in progress), June 2018.		wireless-tests-05 (work in progress), June 2018.
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,		DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
	skipping to change at page 32, line 5 ¶		skipping to change at page 32, line 10 ¶
	[HEVC-seq]		[HEVC-seq]
	HEVC, "Test Sequences",		HEVC, "Test Sequences",
	http://www.netlab.tkk.fi/~varun/test_sequences/ .		http://www.netlab.tkk.fi/~varun/test_sequences/ .
	[I-D.ietf-rmcat-cc-requirements]		[I-D.ietf-rmcat-cc-requirements]
	Jesup, R. and Z. Sarker, "Congestion Control Requirements		Jesup, R. and Z. Sarker, "Congestion Control Requirements
	for Interactive Real-Time Media", draft-ietf-rmcat-cc-		for Interactive Real-Time Media", draft-ietf-rmcat-cc-
	requirements-09 (work in progress), December 2014.		requirements-09 (work in progress), December 2014.
			[RFC2914] Floyd, S., "Congestion Control Principles", BCP 41,
			RFC 2914, DOI 10.17487/RFC2914, September 2000,
			<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2914>.
	[RFC5681] Allman, M., Paxson, V., and E. Blanton, "TCP Congestion		[RFC5681] Allman, M., Paxson, V., and E. Blanton, "TCP Congestion
	Control", RFC 5681, DOI 10.17487/RFC5681, September 2009,		Control", RFC 5681, DOI 10.17487/RFC5681, September 2009,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5681>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5681>.
	[xiph-seq]		[xiph-seq]
	Xiph.org, "Video Test Media",		Xiph.org, "Video Test Media",
	http://media.xiph.org/video/derf/ .		http://media.xiph.org/video/derf/ .
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
End of changes. 10 change blocks.
	15 lines changed or deleted		22 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/