Subject: [Fwd: BOUNCE [email-masked]: Non-member submission from ["Robert Mandeville" <[email-masked]>]]

From: Kevin Dubray <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 07:54:08 -0400

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: BOUNCE [email-masked]:    Non-member submission
from ["Robert Mandeville" <[email-masked]>]
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 02:25:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]

Per the ongoing discussion on latency, a possible approach is as
follows:
- run a single latency test at 100% load for selected packet sizes
- use send and receive timestamps and sequence numbers on all packets
- report the minimum, average and maximum latencies on a thirty second
test
run.

The advantages of this approach are:
- a single test run to provide a complete set of latency results
- a minimum value for latency of the first few packets going through the
DUT
before buffers fill up. This time would correspond to
the low load latency that Jim rightly wants to see.
- a maximum latency value which would give an appreciation of the total
buffer depth
available on the DUT.
The average latency would give some indication of how quickly the buffer
fills
up. Jitter or latency variation could also be calculated as standard
deviation of the
delta values of per packet in and out timestamps.
Bob