Hi Bill,
I am sorry, was on holidays and missed your answer ....
devices, the throughput measurement wouldn't be appropriate. Perhaps
the scope of this document should be specifically on network devices
that transit network traffic?
Yes, the intention was to make it specific for only network devices.
Will review the text to make sure it is clear.
Wouldn't a big consideration be the quality and accuracy of the flow
data? How would the accuracy of the generated flow be evaluated?
The
flow generating capabilities of a network device is certainly less
useful if the device's flow accuracy degrades when it is transiting
more traffic.
I would consider this out of the scope since to check that the testing
would
have to involve some external collector and the way those handle data
is even more complex than what happens on the network devices when
just registering the traffic.
I will think about it yet, but based on the testing we have done I
don't
quite see how to do it.
What about flow sampling? There is no reference to sampling in the
draft.
Yes, that should not be difficult to discuss.
Thank you for your comments.
Jan
The climate of Edinburgh is such that the weak
succumb young .... and the strong envy them.
Dr. Johnson
Jan,
I think a document on benchmarking flow analysis and export could be
valuable.
Questions:
- The draft assumes the device generating flow will be a transit
device (such as a router). What about flow generating devices that
passively monitor the network and are not transit devices? For such
devices, the throughput measurement wouldn't be appropriate. Perhaps
the scope of this document should be specifically on network devices
that transit network traffic?
- Wouldn't a big consideration be the quality and accuracy of the flow
data? How would the accuracy of the generated flow be evaluated? The
flow generating capabilities of a network device is certainly less
useful if the device's flow accuracy degrades when it is transiting
more traffic.
- What about flow sampling? There is no reference to sampling in the
draft.
Thanks,
Bill Cerveny
-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Novak (janovak)
Sent: 21 May 2008 11:45
To: 'bmwg at ietf.org'
Subject: FW: New Version Notification for
draft-janovak-bmwg-ipflow-meth-00
Hi,
I have worked for over 3 years in the IP Flow (RFC5101) testing area
(RFC3954 - Netflow) and during that time we have got numerous
requests
from various customers about Netflow performance. Every time
it started off a long discussion what was meant by the term
"netflow performance", how to measure it and deliver some
reproducible data.
We ended up compiling an internal document which we provided
to those asking the questions above. This IETF draft document
tries to specify IP Flow performance and some characteristics to
quantify and measure it in an implementation independent way.
I would appreciate the opinion of this working group if this bit
of work is deemed useful and worthwhile of accepting as the WG
document.
Thanks, Jan
The climate of Edinburgh is such that the weak
succumb young .... and the strong envy them.
Dr. Johnson
-----Original Message-----
From: IETF I-D Submission Tool [mailto:idsubmission at ietf.org]
Sent: 21 May 2008 11:34
To: Jan Novak (janovak)
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-janovak-bmwg-ipflow-meth-00
A new version of I-D, draft-janovak-bmwg-ipflow-meth-00.txt
has been successfuly submitted by Jan Novak and posted to the
IETF repository.
Filename: draft-janovak-bmwg-ipflow-meth
Revision: 00
Title: IP Flow Information Accounting and
Export Benchmarking Methodology
Creation_date: 2008-05-21
WG ID: Independent Submission
Number_of_pages: 19
Abstract:
This document provides methodology and framework for quantifying
performance implications of enabling selective monitoring of
IP flows on a network device and export of this information to
a collector as specified in [RFC5101].
The IETF Secretariat.
_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
bmwg at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg