[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [bmwg] WGLC on IPv6 Benchmarking
1. It looks like it is appropriate for the header of the
document to mention that it 'Updates RFC 2544 (when approved)'.
2. I believe that the title may be mis-leading as it talks
about IPv6 benchmarking without making clear that it is a complementary document
to RFC 2544 which deals with Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect
Devices. Folks who do search through an RFC repository may be led to
believe that the document covers specific aspects of IPv6 like IPv6
transition mechanisms and devices for example. I suggest to change the title in
something more explicit like ' Benchmarking Methodology for IPv6-capable
Network Interconnect Devices' or even 'IPv6 Aspects of Benchmarking Methodology
for Network Interconnect Devices' (or
similar).
3. Section 4.1.1 - We should include here the conclusions of the parallel
discussions that we had on the list concerning frame size. Those included to my
best recollection the note proposed by Chip:
> "Note: The recommended 1518 bytes frame size represents the maximum
size of an untagged Ethernet frame. According to the IEEE 802.3as standard, the
frame size can be increased up to 2048
bytes to accommodate frame tags."
Also I believe that mentioning jumbo frames should be made only in a
similar note, with explicit text that makes clear that jumbo frames are
currently out of the scope of the IEEE 802.3 standard.
4. The table in Appendix A.1 should include a row for
length 2048 as per IEEE 802.3as
5. Add IEEE 802.3 - 2005 and IEEE 802.3as as
Informative References.
Dan
BMWG:
A WG Last Call period for the Internet-Draft
on
"IPv6 Benchmarking
Methodology"
<draft-ietf-bmwg-ipv6-meth-02.txt>
will be open
from 14 July 2007 through 10 August 2007.
A URL for this Internet-Draft
is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-bmwg-ipv6-meth-02.txt
Version
02 incorporates changes suggested during development
prior to the draft
becoming a chartered item, and the recent
WGLC comments (closing on 20
March 2007).
The authors believe that all comments from the working
group
have been addressed, and have documented all comments and
resolutions
to date:
http://home.comcast.net/%7Eacmacm/BMWG/IPv6-meth-comment-resolution.pdf
They would also like to point out that their mixed traffic
methodology
has been proven with an actual test tool implementation of
their draft
recommendations.
This draft is continuing through the
BMWG Last Call Process. This is
the second Working Group Last Call.
See
http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/bmwg/current/msg00846.html
Please
express your opinion on whether or not this Internet-Draft
should be
submitted to the Area Directors for consideration to
publish the draft as
an Informational RFC. Send your comments
to this list or
acmorton at att.com
Al
bmwg chair
_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
bmwg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg