Subject: [bmwg] I-D Action: draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology-01.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 11:13:23 -0700

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
 This draft is a work item of the Benchmarking Methodology Working Group of the IETF.

        Title           : Data Center Benchmarking Terminology
        Authors         : Lucien Avramov
                          Jacob Rapp
	Filename        : draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology-01.txt
	Pages           : 15
	Date            : 2015-10-19

Abstract:
The purpose of this informational document is to establish definitions,
discussion and measurement techniques for data center benchmarking.
Also, it is to introduce new terminologies applicable to data center
performance evaluations. The purpose of this document is not to define
the test methodology, but rather establish the important concepts when
one is interested in benchmarking network equipment in the data center.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology/

There's also a htmlized version available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology-01

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-bmwg-dcbench-terminology-01

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: "Lucien Avramov (lavramov)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 11:17:15 -0700

BMWG,

This version -01 takes incorporates IETF 93 comments.

Section 3.3. has been added with:
'Inter-Packet Delay Variation as defined in RFC5481 (differences between 
two consecutive packets) MAY be used for this purpose. '

Thank you,
Lucien

On 10/19/15 11:13 AM, [email-masked] wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> bmwg mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg
>

---

From: "Lucien Avramov (lavramov)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 11:22:33 -0700

BMWG,

This version -01 also incorporates the following comment about the 
buffer size in section 6.1.1, stating that larger buffer is not 
equivalent of 'better and can cause issues with buffer bloat:

'The above definitions are not meant to comment on the ideal sizing of a 
buffer, rather on how to measure it. A larger buffer is not necessarily 
better and CAN cause issues with buffer bloat.'

Thank you,
Lucien