Re: Second WGLC: draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology and methodology

Marius Georgescu <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.bmwg
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Dear Al and Authors,

I read both documents and generally I find them ready for the IESG review.
However, I have two suggestions that I think could improve https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-methodology-02 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-methodology-02>.

1. Section 1.2. Methodology format and repeatability recommendation

I think recommending a concrete number of iterations would be better. Maybe specifying an accuracy figure can be a good alternative.
For instance, the relative standard deviation SHOULD be below 10%. 

2. "- The repeatability of the test needs to be indicated:” found in Sections 3.3, 4.3 and so on

As with suggestion 1., I think a minimum number of iterations should be recommended. 
In terms of variation, I think that the “percentage of variation” should be clarified with a calculation formula. 

From what I understood, a simple relative change formula is intended:
                                                  x  - x_ref
Relative change (x, x_ref) = —————————— * 100
                                                      x_ref              
Where x_ref is the average and x are either min or max.
The result would look something like (-10% , +15%, X). 

I hope this helps,
Marius


> On Sep 14, 2016, at 03:42, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> BMWG:
> 
> A WG Last Call period for the Internet-Drafts on
> Data Center Benchmarking Terminology and Methodology:
> 
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology-05
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-methodology-02
> 
> will be open from 13 September 2016 through 27 September 2016.
> 
> The first WGLC closed on 8 April 2016 with comments.
> 
> These drafts are continuing the BMWG Last Call Process. See
> http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/bmwg/current/msg00846.html
> 
> Please read and express your opinion on whether or not these
> Internet-Drafts should be forwarded to the Area Directors for
> publication as Informational RFCs.  Send your comments
> to this list or to the co-chairs [email protected] and [email protected]
> 
> for the co-chairs,
> Al
> 
> _______________________________________________
> bmwg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg

_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.