Re: WG ADOPTION: dcbench-def and dcbench-methodology

I would like +1 support as well. 

I also have a comment related to Section 1.2. 
Regarding the text “The recommendation is to perform enough iterations of the given test to make sure the result is accurate” , I was wondering if a specific number of iterations wouldn’t be a better choice, and maybe expressing some measurement error ( e.g. standard error of the mean for the chosen number of iterations). 

Best regards,
Marius
 
On Mar 6, 2015, at 13:54, Bhuvan (Veryx Technologies) <[email protected]> wrote:

> I express my support for this document.
> 
> Best regards,
> Bhuvan
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bmwg [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)
> Sent: 04 March 2015 01:53
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [bmwg] WG ADOPTION: dcbench-def and dcbench-methodology
> 
> BMWG,
> 
> We've been discussing a draft for Data Center Benchmarking for some time.
> 
> Our new charter includes Data Center Benchmarking, so we ask everyone to
> take a look (by March 18th) and express comments/support.
> 
> The latest drafts are here:
> 
>          http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-dcbench-def-02.txt
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bmwg-dcbench-methodology-03.txt
> 
> regards,
> Al
> bmwg co-chair
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> bmwg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> bmwg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg