FW: [bmwg] Proposal on IPv6 Benchmarking

["Chip Popoviciu \(cpopovic\)" <cpopovic@cisco.com>]

Dear v6ops,

Cross posting this call from BMWG. The next version of the IPv6
Benchmarking draft will contain the changes recommended by the members
of v6ops as well. We would like to ask for you support of this draft, we
believe it is an important element in the process of IPv6 adoption.

Thank you for your help!

Best Regards,
Ciprian Popoviciu for the authors of the draft

-----Original Message-----
From: Al Morton [mailto:acmorton@att.com] 
Sent: Friday, August 25, 2006 4:20 PM
To: bmwg@ietf.org
Cc: Dan Romascanu
Subject: [bmwg] Proposal on IPv6 Benchmarking

BMWG,

The proponents of IPv6 Benchmarking have prepared a description of their
work effort in the form of a proposal, below.

BMWG discussed this work at the Montreal IETF-66 session, where there
was strong support and involved membership (see meeting minutes). The
related I-D can be found here:
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/bmwg/draft-popoviciu-bmwg-ipv6benchmarking-01.t
xt

Please weigh-in on whether this topic/draft should become part of BMWG's
chartered work, by

                    September 25, 2006

And, if you support the work, please say:

+  HOW you intend to support the development in BMWG,
    (by reviewing draft X by MM/DD/YY, for example),  or

+  WHY this work will be beneficial to BMWG's user community, or

+  Modifications that would make the proposal more useful
    (which we will discuss on the list), and

+  (anything else that's constructive)

And remember, we'd like to hear your opinion on the list, even if you
spoke in favor of this proposal at the meeting.

Thanks in advance for your efforts and commitment to BMWG!

Al
bmwg co-chair

========================================================================
=

Proposal for IPv6 Benchmarking Methodology


Summary:


This is a proposal for a BMWG work item that defines the IPv6
benchmarking requirements. It addresses the need for guidelines on
evaluating the performance of network elements handling IPv6 traffic by
itself or in conjunction with IPv4 traffic. While for the most part, the
IPv4 benchmarking methodology applies to IPv6 as well, the two protocols
are significantly different in certain aspects. These differences are
operationally important and for this reason, it is critical to
understand if network elements claiming support for IPv6 were designed
and optimized for its support. This proposed document follows the
structure of RFC2544 and complements it with recommendations that take
into consideration the
IPv6 protocol specifics.

Goal:

The objective of this work item is to prepare an Informational RFC that
complements RFC2544 with a set of benchmarks that address IPv6 specific
characteristics such as: addressing, header format changes, extension
header processing rules, etc. Based on the workgroup recommendations
thus far, this document will leverage existing terminology references
and structurally follows RFC2544.

Scope:

The focus of this effort is to benchmark aspects specific to the IPv6
protocol. It is complementary to, and not a replacement for RFC2544.
This document covers in detail the benchmark scenarios to be considered
for IPv6 and its co-existence with IPv4.

For all other benchmarks it shares with IPv4, it simply refers to
RFC2544. 
The list of media types mentioned in RFC2544 is updated with the
addition of Packet over SONET interfaces. This work effort will define
the size of the IPv6 Address space that should be dedicated to
benchmarking, and make that recommendation to IANA.

Motivation:

The accelerating interest in IPv6 and its adoption has dramatically
increased the need for IPv6 operational guidelines. Large scale IPv6
deployments are currently on-going or being planned. Since these
deployments are most often taking place over existing IPv4
infrastructure, the main challenges faced by designers and implementors
of services are: 
"How well do my network elements support IPv6" and "What is the impact
on
IPv4 of deploying IPv6?" Even those network operators that have a longer
term plan for deploying IPv6 are very mindful to use the regular
equipment upgrade process to make their infrastructure capable of
supporting IPv6.


The process of acquiring and planning for IPv6 capable equipment needs
to be matched with knowledge and standardized methods for evaluating its
IPv6 performance. Using only the existing IPv4 benchmarking
recommendations can hide the fact that a particular network element,
while minimally supporting IPv6, was not designed for high performance
and complete IPv6 support. This work builds on the RFC2544
recommendations by adding IPv6 specific benchmarks. It will enable the
engineering community to consistently perform evaluations of networking
equipment's IPv6 capabilities.


Schedule:

"IPv6 Benchmarking Methodology"

1) Consideration of list feedback on the proposal and current draft -
on-going

2) draft-popoviciu-bmwg-ipv6benchmarking-02.txt ready for WG list review
- 9/25

3) Present finalized version of the draft at IETF 67 and proceed with
the Working Group Last Call process


The document has been reviewed and discussed within BMWG and v6ops. With

the implementation and approval of the latest recommendations, we
believe 
this document will be ready for last call towards the end of this year.


_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
bmwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg