1 / 7

Sub-IP Layer Protection Mechanism Performance Benchmarking: Metrics and Methodologies

This document outlines common terminology and metrics for benchmarking performance of sub-IP layer protection mechanisms, focusing on standards applicable at the IP layer. It details methodologies relevant for various mechanisms like MPLS Fast Reroute, Automatic Protection Switching, and VRRP while introducing new methods of failover time calculation. The document accounts for different failure modes and provides updates on existing definitions and methodology changes. It culminates in a collaborative effort by the BMWG team to refine and align benchmarking practices.

thaddeus-nicoli
Télécharger la présentation

Sub-IP Layer Protection Mechanism Performance Benchmarking: Metrics and Methodologies

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Sub-IP Layer Protection Mechanism Performance Benchmarkingdraft-ietf-bmwg-protection-term-02.txtdraft-ietf-bmwg-protection-meth-02.txtBMWG, IETF-69ChicagoJuly 2007Author Team: Poretsky, Papneja, Karthik, Vapiwala, LeRoux, Rao

  2. Scope of Work Item • Common terminology and metrics for benchmarking the performance of sub-IP layer protection mechanisms • Benchmarks are measured at the IP-Layer • avoids dependence on specific sub-IP protection mechanisms. • Terminology applied to separate Methodology documents for different sub-IP layer protection mechanisms • Multi-Protocol Label Switching Fast Reroute (MPLS-FRR) • Automatic Protection Switching (APS) • Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP) • Stateful High Availability (HA) Methodology For MPLS Protection Benchmarking draft-ietf-bmwg-protection-meth-02.txt Benchmarking Terminology For Protection Performance draft-ietf-bmwg-protection-term-02.txt . . . Other Methodologies

  3. Terminology Changes from Rev 01 to 02 • Added new method for Failover Time calculation • Timestamp-Based Method (TBM) • Requires Payload to include Timestamp and Sequence Number • Accounts for multiple failure modes: Loss, Reorder, Duplicate • Existing Methods were retained: • Time-Based Loss Method (TBLM) • Packet-Based Loss Method (PBLM) • Section 2, Existing Definitions, updated to include more terms: Out-of-order Packet [RFC 4689, section 3.3.2] Duplicate Packet [RFC 4689, section 3.3.3] Packet Loss [BMWG I-D, section 3.5] Packet Reordering [RFC 4737, section 3.3] • Introduction updated to better explain sequence of events Failover Event -> Failure Detection -> Failover -> Restoration (Failover Recovery) -> Reversion (optional). • Cleaned-up some definitions based upon reviewers comments 3.3.4 Restoration 3.3.5 Reversion 3.4.4 Merge Node 3.4.5 Point of Local Repair • Successfully PASS the NITs Checker

  4. Methodology Changes from Rev 01 to 02 • Applied the new method to calculate failover - Timestamp Based Method (TBM) • All other comments are previously incorporated.

  5. Acknowledgements • Thanks to BMWG-ers for support shown in the work item • The authors wish to thank the following for their invaluable input to the merged document • Curtis Villamizar • Jean Philippe Vasseur • Karu Ratnam • Arun Gandhi • Thanks to Agilent Technologies for their comments on this work item and for conforming to the methodology we proposed

  6. Next Steps • Incorporate any new comments from meeting and mailing list • Ready for WGLC?

  7. New Draft standing to become the WG item – draft - papneja - mpls - protection - meth - merge - 00 . txt June 2006 Backup SlideHistory/Background And Progress So Far Terminology For Protection Benchmarking Benchmarking Methodology for MPLS Protection draft - kimura - protection - term - 00 . txt - October 2002 Mechanisms draft - kimura - protection - term - 01 . txt - April 2003 draft - poretsky - mpls - protection - meth - 00 June 2003 Parallel Efforts draft - kimura - protection - term - 02 . txt – October 2003 draft - poretsky - mpls - protection - meth - 01 Oct . 2003 draft - kimura - protection - term - 02 . txt – April 2005 draft - poretsky - mpls - protection - meth - 02 Feb 2004 draft - poretsky - mpls - protection - meth - 03 draft - poretsky - mpls - protection - meth - 04 Created single work item July 2005 with common Terminology Common Terminology created With Effort led by Kimura - san Received numerous comments for additional test cases and benchmarking metrics Terminology For Protection e l b a Benchmarking – July 2005 c i l p p A draft - poretsky - protection - term - 00 . txt Created draft - poretsky - mpls - protection - meth - 05 Feb 2006 December 2005 More Protection Scenarios Proposed Under Final WG Item draft-vapiwala-bmwg-frr-failover-meth-00.txt Work Group Item 1. draft-ietf-bmwg-protection-meth-02.txt 2. draft-ietf-bmwg-protection-term-02.txt Mailing List Decision to Merge The two Efforts – Followed by action item from Dallas IETF WG Item Final Decision 1 . Significant Interest in the effort 2 . Interest has reached peak 3 . Formal Proposal Submitted to the Mailing list 4 . Significant support received / 5 . New Merged Draft Submitted

More Related