Subject: Re: Duration

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 18 Jun 1999 09:52:40 -0400

I have to agree with Kevin on the 30 second test durations as the most
common used in the industry.  We use 30 seconds for most of our performance
testing, which was a decision we based on what the Tolly group and other
testing organizations used.  From my calculations wire speed buffering of
1518 byte frames at 100mbits on just one port in one direction is about
125MB for 10 seconds.  I don't see any reason why 30 seconds isn't enough
for testing.
I think that the burst test covers the throughput test for durations longer
then 30 or 60 seconds.  The throughput test establishes that the devices
forwards or doesn't forward wirespeed, and using the rate asumming there is
no loss the burst will find how long wirespeed or less is sustainable.

IMHO
Stephen Mayo
3Com Corp, S2 Division
[email-masked]

"Debby and Gene Stopp" <[email-masked]> on 06/18/99 12:30:11 AM

Sent by:  "Debby and Gene Stopp" <[email-masked]>

To:   [email-masked]
cc:    (Steven Mayo/C/US/3Com)
Subject:  Re: Duration

I think that 30 seconds is probably a good compromise from the original
suggestion of 10 seconds.  We also need to remember that the duration is a
SHOULD, not a MUST, thereby allowing each DUT/SUT vendor a little bit of
flexibility when running their tests.
Sorry, David - I just don't think 1 second is long enough to get good,
repeatable and reliable measurements.  We've seen in the field a number of
devices that appear to behave very nicely for durations of 10 seconds; when
we up the durations to 30 or 60 seconds these devices sometimes just fall
over.
Anyone for a good compromise?  ;)
Debby Stopp
Ixia Communications
[email-masked]
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Dubray <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked] <[email-masked]>
Date: Thursday, June 17, 1999 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: Duration

>
>Fowarded from David Newman ([email-masked]):
>
>There was a duration thread on this list some time back, I think in
>spring '98.
>
>If memory serves the consensus was that test runs of 30 seconds were
>considered
>OK. One post in particular I remember was from Scott Bradner, coauthor
>of RFC
>2544, saying he used 30 seconds in all testing. I just checked RFC 2285
>and I
>don't see anything there, but Bob Mandeville's comment at the time was
>that he
>too uses 30 seconds (before midnight).
>
>Seriously, even 30 seconds might be way too long on high-speed networks.
>At
>gigabit speeds a device would need nearly 1 Gbyte of buffering *per
>port* to
>hold 10 seconds' worth of traffic. And that's a best-case calculation,
>assuming
>64-byte frames and half-duplex traffic. The amount of memory needed
>would be
>higher with longer frames and full-duplex settings.
>
>Anyone for a 1-second duration?
>
>;-)
>
>dn
>