Re: New Charter Paragraphs

Hi Al,

This looks good to me, I think we should not restrict the charter to 
only update 2544, I would extend this to : RFC1242, RFC2432, RFC2544, 
RFC2889 and RFC3918 as per our drafts for the data center benchmarking 
mention in the abstract sections:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-dcbench-def-01.txt
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-bmwg-dcbench-methodology-02.txt

Cheers,
Lucien


On 4/18/14, 9:36 AM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) wrote:
> 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
>>