Subject: RE: [bmwg] Updated draft on MPLS forwardingBenchmarking:draft-akhter-bmwg-mpls-meth-03.txt

From: "Rajiv Asati (rajiva)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 22:08:57 -0500

Hi Rajiv,

Thanks for your support. 

Good catch about the 2 or more label scenario (in section 6). That
excerpt was supposed to be deleted. Glad you pointed out. Your
suggestion regarding the section 6.4 and 6.5 is also worth
incorporating. 

Thanks again for your careful review and feedback. 

Cheers,
Rajiv

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rajiv Papneja [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 2:12 PM
> To: Aamer Akhter (aakhter)
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: [bmwg] Updated draft on MPLS 
> forwardingBenchmarking:draft-akhter-bmwg-mpls-meth-03.txt
> 
> Hello Aamer, Rajiv
> 
> Thanks for sending the pointer to your dradt for review. 
> Considering that
> there is an ongoing effort on LDP, and RSVP-TE convergence 
> benchmarking this
> work complements the two efforts. I do support this work, 
> however I do have
> a couple of minor comments: 
> 
> In the section 6, under the test setup you recommend for the 
> test cases
> involving 2 or more labels, the tester should emulate MPLS 
> services such as
> L3VPN, or L2VPN to ensure that two label stack is imposed 
> before the frame
> is offered to the DUT. IMHO, one may create traffic streams 
> with multiple
> labels rather than intorducing the complexity of L3VPN/L2VPN 
> configurations
> and deviating from the true forwarding benchmarking style 
> testing which this
> draft proposes. Similar to IP forwarding benchmarking using 
> static routes
> rather than enabling routing protocols on the DUT and tester 
> for throughput measurements.
> 
> For section 6.4 and 6.5 since there are control plane recovery is also
> important for correct traffic forwarding, the procedure should include
> verifying whether the MPLS sessions are started to ensure new 
> label bindings
> are exchanged rather than tester using stale entries to send 
> the traffic streams.
> 
> Regards,
> Rajiv
> 
> 
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Aamer Akhter (aakhter) [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> > Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 12:06 PM
> > To: [email-masked]
> > Subject: [bmwg] Updated draft on MPLS forwarding 
> > Benchmarking:draft-akhter-bmwg-mpls-meth-03.txt
> > 
> > Hello BMWG,
> > 
> > We would like to bring to your attention the updated draft on 
> > basic MPLS forwarding that we will be submitting to the IETF 
> > as an individual submission (once submissions opens up 
> > again). There have been significant changes since the last 
> > version of the draft including:
> > 
> > * removal of many test cases thought to be out of scope
> > * rewriting of many cases to be less verbose
> > * addition of reload tests
> > 
> > http://www.employees.org/~aamer/draft-akhter-bmwg-mpls-meth-03.txt
> > 
> >    Over the past several years MPLS networks have gained greater 
> >    popularity. However, there is no standard method to compare and 
> >    contrast the varying implementations and their strong and weak 
> >    points. This document proposes a methodology using 
> common criteria 
> >    for the comparison of various implementations of basic MPLS 
> >    forwarding devices.
> > 
> > If there are any concerns or changes that need to be made 
> > please do not hesitate to contact us.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Aamer Akhter
> > Rajiv Asati
> > 
> > ==================
> > 
> > 	Title		: MPLS Benchmarking Methodology
> > 	Author(s)	: Aamer Akhter and Rajiv Asati
> > 	Filename	: draft-akhter-bmwg-mpls-meth-03.txt
> > 	Pages		: 21
> > 	Date		: 2007-11-25
> > 	
> >    The purpose of this draft is to describe a methodology 
> specific to 
> >    the benchmarking of MPLS forwarding devices. The scope of this 
> >    benchmarking will be limited to various types of 
> packet-forwarding 
> >    and delay measurements. It builds upon the tenets set forth in 
> >    RFC2544 [RFC2544], RFC1242 [RFC1242] and other IETF Benchmarking 
> >  
> >    The BMWG produces two major classes of documents: Benchmarking 
> >    Terminology documents and Benchmarking Methodology 
> documents.  The 
> >    Terminology documents present the benchmarks and other related 
> >    terms. The Methodology documents define the procedures 
> required to 
> >    collect the benchmarks cited in the corresponding Terminology 
> >    documents.
> > 
> > A temporary URL for this Internet-Draft is:
> > http://www.employees.org/~aamer/draft-akhter-bmwg-mpls-meth-03.txt
> > 
> > --
> > Aamer Akhter / [email-masked]
> > Rajiv Asati / [email-masked]
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> bmwg mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg
> 

_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg