Adam Roach's No Objection on draft-ietf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv-03: (with COMMENT)

Adam Roach <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.bmwg
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Adam Roach has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv-03: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bmwg-vswitch-opnfv/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I think this is a variation on the issue that Alissa calls out, but I'm having
a hard time reconciling:

   It's unlikely that the virtual switch will be the only application
   running on the System Under Test (SUT), so CPU utilization, Cache
   utilization, and Memory footprint should also be recorded for the
   virtual implementations of internetworking functions.

...with...

   Further, benchmarking is performed on a "black-box" basis, relying
   solely on measurements observable external to the DUT/SUT.

Please add text that clarifies how the metrics that 3.1 says should be recorded
in section 3.1 relate to benchmarking.
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.