Re: New Charter Paragraphs
"MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.bmwg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <2845723087023D4CB5114223779FA9C80178E0CD46@njfpsrvexg8.research.att.com> |
How about this combined version? Data Center Benchmarking: This work will define additional terms, benchmarks, and methods applicable to data center performance evaluations. This includes data center specific congestion scenarios, switch buffer analysis, microburst, head of line blocking, while also using a wide mix of traffic conditions. Some aspects from BMWG's past work are not meaningful when testing switches that implement new IEEE specifications in the area of data center bridging. For example, throughput as defined in RFC 1242 cannot be measured when testing devices that implement three new IEEE specifications: priority-based flow control (802.1Qbb); priority groups (802.1Qaz); and congestion notification (802.1Qau). This work will update RFC 2544 and exchange periodic Liaisons with relevant SDOs, especially at WG Last Call. ________________________________________ From: Lucien Avramov (lavramov) [[email protected]] Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 2:53 AM To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL); [email protected] Subject: Re: [bmwg] New Charter Paragraphs Hello BMWG! Suggesting some edits for the DC portion of the charter to include the benchmarking we have been talking and presenting at IEFT for the last year with Jacob Rapp: Data Center: -Bridging Some key concepts from BMWG's past work are not meaningful when testing switches that implement new IEEE specifications in the area of data center bridging. For example, throughput as defined in RFC 1242 cannot be measured when testing devices that implement three new IEEE specifications: priority-based flow control (802.1Qbb); priority groups (802.1Qaz); and congestion notification (802.1Qau). Since devices that implement these new congestion-management specifications should never drop frames, and since the metric of throughput distinguishes between non-zero and zero drop rates, no throughput measurement is possible using the existing methodology. The current emphasis is on the Priority Flow Control aspects of Data Center Bridging, and the work will include an investigation into whether TRILL RBridges require any specific treatment in the methodology. This work will update RFC 2544 and exchange periodic Liaisons with IEEE 802.1 DCB Task Group, especially at WG Last Call. -Benchmarking Data Center DUT: The purpose of this informational document is to establish definitions, discussion and measurement techniques specific to data center environments. It is also to introduce definition terminologies applicable to data center performance evaluations. With these established, a methodology and measurement techniques for network equipement in the data center are covered. This includes data center specific congestion scenarios, switch buffer analysis, microburst, head of line blocking, while also using a wide mix of traffic conditions. This complements the existing benchmarking RFCs by specifying data center centric benchmarking. Cheers, Lucien On 3/27/14, 12:53 PM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) wrote: > BMWG, > > As we close in on the re-charter text, we decided at our IETF-89 session > to keep Datacenter and VNF paragraphs separate. > > To that end, we already have a Datacenter-oriented paragraph in our charter, > but it needs editing -- please make suggestions! > > * Data Center Bridging Devices: > Some key concepts from BMWG's past work are not meaningful when testing > switches that implement new IEEE specifications in the area of data > center bridging. For example, throughput as defined in RFC 1242 cannot > be measured when testing devices that implement three new IEEE > specifications: priority-based flow control (802.1Qbb); priority groups > (802.1Qaz); and congestion notification (802.1Qau). > Since devices that implement these new congestion-management > specifications should never drop frames, and since the metric of > throughput distinguishes between non-zero and zero drop rates, no > throughput measurement is possible using the existing methodology. > The current emphasis is on the Priority Flow Control aspects of > Data Center Bridging, and the work will include an investigation > into whether TRILL RBridges require any specific treatment in the > methodology. This work will update RFC 2544 and exchange periodic > Liaisons with IEEE 802.1 DCB Task Group, especially at WG Last Call. > > > Also, here's the (slightly modified) text for VNF activity: > > * VNF and related Infrastructure Benchmarking > > Benchmarking Methodologies have reliably characterized many physical devices. > This work item extends and enhances the methods to virtual network functions (VNF) > and their unique supporting infrastructure. First, the new task space will be > considered to ensure that common issues are considered from the start. > Virtual routers, switches and platform capacity and performance characteristics > will follow, including comparisons between physical and virtual functions. > > Finally, I'll leave it to the authors to say more, but I noticed a new draft > on our tools page: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhuvan-bmwg-of-controller-benchmarking-00 > > take a look, is this something we should consider including on our ride? > > Comments by April 14th, please. > > regards, > Al/Sarah > bmwg co-chairs > > _______________________________________________ > bmwg mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg >