IP Performance Metrics (ippm)

Last Modified: 2009-04-22

Additional information is available at tools.ietf.org/wg/ippm

Chair(s):

  • Matthew Zekauskas <matt@internet2.edu>

  • Henk Uijterwaal <henk@ripe.net>

    Transport Area Director(s):

  • Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
  • Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>

    Transport Area Advisor:

  • Lars Eggert <lars.eggert@nokia.com>

    Mailing Lists:

    General Discussion: ippm@ietf.org
    To 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 be
    applied 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  -00 version of SLA validation draft
    Done  Assemble editorial team to work on the process draft (WG version of draft-bradner-metricstest)
    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
    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 (110339 bytes)
    Spatial Composition of Metrics (54209 bytes)
    Framework for Metric Composition (37168 bytes)
    Reporting IP Performance Metrics to Users (61812 bytes)
    More Features for the Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol - TWAMP (17267 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)
    A One-Way Packet Duplication Metric (RFC 5560) (25304 bytes)
    IETF Secretariat - Please send questions, comments, and/or suggestions to ietf-web@ietf.org.

    Return to working group directory.

    Return to IETF home page.