Subject: [bmwg] Document Action: 'Methodology for Benchmarking Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Devices: Basic session setup and registration' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-12.txt)

From: The IESG <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 06:22:51 -0800

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Methodology for Benchmarking Session Initiation Protocol (SIP)
   Devices: Basic session setup and registration'
  (draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-12.txt) as Informational RFC

This document is the product of the Benchmarking Methodology Working
Group.

The IESG contact persons are Joel Jaeggli and Benoit Claise.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth/

Technical Summary

All networking devices have a limited capacity to serve their
purpose. In some cases these limits can be ascertained by counting
physical features (e.g., interface card slots), but in other cases
standardized tests are required to be sure that all vendors count
their protocol-handling capacity in the same way, to avoid specmanship.
This draft addresses one such case, where the SIP session-serving 
capacity of a device can only be discovered and rigorously compared
with other devices through isolated laboratory testing.

This document describes the terminology for benchmarking Session
Initiation Protocol (SIP) performance as described in SIP
benchmarking terminology document.  The methodology and terminology
are to be used for benchmarking signaling plane performance with
varying signaling and media load.  Both scale and establishment rate
are measured by signaling plane performance.  The SIP Devices to be
benchmarked may be a single device under test or a system under
test.  Benchmarks can be obtained and compared for different
types of devices such as SIP Proxy Server, Session Border Controller,
and server paired with a media relay or Firewall/NAT device.

Working Group Summary

There were periods of intense and constructive feedback on this draft,
but also several pauses in progress during development. The most lively
discussions were prompted by presentation of actual test results using
the draft methods, which require significant time investment but are well-
worth the result. These drafts serve a useful purpose for the industry.

Document Quality

There are existing implementations of the method, as noted above.

Dale Worley conducted an early review, following BMWG's request
of the RAI area.  Dales's comments were addressed in version 05.
Henning Schulzrinne commented on the original work proposal.

Personnel

Al Morton is Shepherd, Joel Jaeggli is Responsible AD.