IP Performance Metrics (ippm)
Last Modified: 2009-03-03
Additional information is available at tools.ietf.org/wg/ippm
Chair(s):
Transport Area Director(s):
Transport Area Advisor:
Mailing Lists:
General Discussion: ippm@ietf.orgTo Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm
In Body: subscribe
Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ippm/current/maillist.html
Description of Working Group:
The IPPM WG has developed a set of standard metrics that can beapplied to the quality, performance, and reliability of Internet data
delivery services. These metrics are designed such that they can be
performed by network operators, end users, or independent testing
groups. It is important that the metrics not represent a value judgment
(i.e. define "good" and "bad"), but rather provide unbiased quantitative
measures of performance.
Functions peripheral to Internet data delivery services, such as NOC/NIC
services, are beyond the scope of this working group.
The IPPM WG has produced documents that define specific metrics and
procedures for accurately measuring and documenting these metrics. This
is the current list of fundamental metrics and the existing set of
derived metrics.
- connectivity
- one-way delay and loss
- round-trip delay.
- delay variation
- loss patterns
- packet reordering
- bulk transport capacity
- link bandwidth capacity
- packet duplication
The working group will advance these metrics along the standards track
within the IETF. The WG will document the process of moving documents along
the standards track, based on draft-bradner-metricstest. As this process
is likely to be needed by other groups as well (in particular BMWG,
PMOL), the group will collaborate with other groups in order to ensure
that there
is consensus amongst all groups expected to use the process.
Additionally, the WG will produce Proposed Standard AS documents,
comparable to applicability statements in RFC 2026, that will focus on
procedures
for measuring the individual metrics and how these metrics characterize
features that are important to different service classes, such as bulk
transport,
periodic streams, packet bursts or multimedia streams. Each AS
document will discuss the performance characteristics that are
pertinent to a specified service class; clearly identify the set of
metrics that
aid in the description of those characteristics; specify the methodologies
required to collect said metrics; and lastly, present the requirements
for the common, unambiguous reporting of testing results. The AS
documents can also discuss the use of the metrics to verify performance
expectations,
such as SLA's, report results to specific user groups or investigate
network problems. The focus is, again, to define how this should be
done, not
to define a value judgment. The WG may define additional statistics for
its metrics if needed. Specific topics of these AS documents must be
approved by the Area Directors as charter additions.
The WG will work on documents describing how to compose and decompose
the results of its metrics over time or space.
The WG has produced protocols to enable communication among test
equipment that implements the one- and two-way metrics (OWAMP and TWAMP
respectively). OWAMP and TWAMP will be advanced along the standards
track. Further
development of these protocols will also be done inside the WG.
The metrics developed by the WG were developed inside an active
measurement context, that is, the devices used to measure the metrics
produce their own traffic. However, most metrics can be used inside a
passive context as well. No work is planned is this area though,
this may be changed with AD approval.
The intent of the WG is to cooperate with other appropriate standards
bodies and forums (such as ATIS IIF, ITU-T SG 12, 13 and 15, MEF) to
promote consistent approaches and metrics. Within the IETF process, IPPM
metrics
definitions will be subject to as rigorous a scrutiny for usefulness,
clarity, and accuracy as other protocol standards. The IPPM WG will
interact with other areas of IETF activity whose scope intersect with
the requirement of these specific metrics. The WG will, on request, provide
input to other IETF WG on the use of these metrics.
Goals and Milestones:
| Done | Submit drafts of standard metrics for connectivity and treno-bulk-throughput. | |
| Done | Submit a framework document describing terms and notions used in the IPPM effort, and the creation of metrics by the working group to IESG for publication as an Informational RFC. | |
| Done | Submit documents on delay and loss to IESG for publication as Informational RFCs. | |
| Done | Submit a document on connectivity to IESG for publication as an Informational RFC. | |
| Done | Submit a document on bulk-throughput to IESG for publication as an Informational RFC. | |
| Done | Submit draft on loss pattern sample metrics to the IESG for publication as an Informational RFC. | |
| Done | Submit draft on metrics for periodic streams to the IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC. | |
| Done | Submit draft on IP delay variation to the IESG for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC. | |
| Done | First draft for AS on one-way delay and loss. | |
| Done | Submit draft on One-Way Active Measurement Protocol Requirements to the IESG for consideration as an Informational RFC. | |
| Done | Create initial draft on a MIB for reporting IPPM metrics. | |
| Done | Create initial draft on a packet reordering metric. | |
| Done | Create draft on a One-Way Active Measurement Protocol that satisfies the requirements document. | |
| Done | Submit draft on the One-Way Active Measurement Protocol to the IESG for consideration as a PS. | |
| Done | Submit draft on implementation reports for RFCs 2678-2681 to the IESG | |
| Done | Submit initial draft on framework for Composition and Aggregation Metrics | |
| Done | Submit draft on the One-Way Active Measurement Protocol to the IESG for consideration as a PS | |
| Done | Submit draft on a packet reordering metric to the IESG for Proposed Standard | |
| Done | Submit initial applicability statement for the IPPM and ITU Jitter Measurements to the WG | |
| Done | Submit link bandwidth capacity definitions draft to the IESG, for consideration as an Informational RFC | |
| Done | Submit draft on storing results of traceroute measurements to the IESG | |
| Done | Submit draft on Two-way active measurements protocol (TWAMP) to the IESG for consideration as proposed standard | |
| Done | Develop new charter text | |
| Done | Delay Variation Applicability Statement (Informational) to IESG Review | |
| Mar 2009 | Assemble editorial team to work on the process draft (WG version of draft-bradner-metricstest) | |
| Mar 2009 | -00 version of SLA validation draft | |
| Apr 2009 | Submit draft on spatial composition of metrics to the IESG | |
| Apr 2009 | Submit draft on Temporal Aggregation of Metrics to the IESG | |
| Apr 2009 | Submit draft on spatial decomposition and multicast metrics to the IESG | |
| Apr 2009 | Submit "more TWAMP" draft to IESG | |
| Jun 2009 | Initial version of process draft | |
| Nov 2009 | Submit other TWAMP extensions draft to IESG. | |
| Dec 2009 | Final version of process draft | |
| Mar 2010 | Implementation report based on process draft | |
| Jun 2010 | Revise charter |
Internet-Drafts:
IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) for spatial and multicast (114131 bytes)Spatial Composition of Metrics (51711 bytes)
Framework for Metric Composition (37438 bytes)
Reporting IP Performance Metrics to Users (61812 bytes)
A One-Way Packet Duplication Metric (25153 bytes)
More Features for TWAMP (17188 bytes)
TWAMP Reflect Octets Feature (39316 bytes)
Individual Session Control Feature for TWAMP (37409 bytes)
Request For Comments:
Framework for IP Performance Metrics (RFC 2330) (94387 bytes)IPPM Metrics for Measuring Connectivity (RFC 2678) (18087 bytes)
A One-way Delay Metric for IPPM (RFC 2679) (43542 bytes)
A One-way Packet Loss Metric for IPPM (RFC 2680) (32266 bytes)
A Round-trip Delay Metric for IPPM (RFC 2681) (44357 bytes)
A Framework for Defining Empirical Bulk Transfer Capacity Metrics (RFC 3148) (36041 bytes)
One-way Loss Pattern Sample Metrics (RFC 3357) (30570 bytes)
IP Packet Delay Variation Metric for IPPM (RFC 3393) (47731 bytes)
Network performance measurement for periodic streams (RFC 3432) (52493 bytes)
A One-way Active Measurement Protocol Requirements (RFC 3763) (23360 bytes)
IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) metrics registry (RFC 4148) (23074 bytes)
A One-way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP) (RFC 4656) (132303 bytes)
Packet Reordering Metrics (RFC 4737) (94699 bytes)
Defining Network Capacity (RFC 5136) (30682 bytes)
A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP) (RFC 5357) (61960 bytes)
Information Model and XML Data Model for Traceroute Measurements (RFC 5388) (156801 bytes)
Packet Delay Variation Applicability Statement (RFC 5481) (92218 bytes)
