Network Working Group J. H. Dunn INTERNET-DRAFT C. E. Martin Expires: August, 1999 ANC, Inc. February, 1999 Terminology for Frame Relay Benchmarking Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet- Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. Abstract This memo discusses and defines terms associated with performance benchmarking tests and the results of these tests in the context of frame relay switching devices. The terms defined in this memo will be used in addition to terms defined in RFCs 1242, 1944 and 2285. This memo is a product of the Benchmarking Methodology Working Group (BMWG) of the Internet Engineering Task Force(IETF). 1. Introduction. This document provides terminology for Frame Relay switching devices. It extends terminology already defined for benchmarking network interconnect devices in RFCs 1242, 1944 and 2285 . Although some of the definitions in this memo may be applicable to a broader group of network interconnect devices, the primary focus of the terminology in this memo is on Frame Relay Signaling. Dunn & Martin [Page 1] INTERNET-DRAFT Frame Relay Benchmarking Terminology February 1999 This memo contains two major sections: Background and Definitions. Within the definitions section is a formal definitions subsection, provided as a courtesy to the reader, and a measurement definitions sub- section, which contains performance metrics with inherent units. The BMWG produces two major classes of documents: Benchmarking Terminology documents and Benchmarking Methodology documents. The Terminology documents present the benchmarks and other related terms. The Methodology documents define the procedures required to collect the benchmarks cited in the corresponding Terminology documents. 2. Existing Definitions RFC 1242 "Benchmarking Terminology for Network Interconnect Devices" should be consulted before attempting to make use of this document. RFC 1944 "Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect Devices" contains discussions of a number of terms relevant to the benchmarking of switching devices and should also be consulted. RFC 2285 "Benchmarking Terminology for LAN Switching Devices" contains a number of terms pertaining to traffic distributions and datagram interarrival. For the sake of clarity and continuity this RFC adopts the template for definitions set out in Section 2 of RFC 1242. Definitions are indexed and grouped together in sections for ease of reference. The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119. II. Definitions The definitions presented in this section have been divided into two groups. The first group is formal definitions, which are required in the definitions of the performance metrics but are not themselves strictly metrics. These definitions are subsumed from other work done in other working groups both inside and outside the IETF. They are provided as a courtesy to the reader. 1. Formal Definitions 1.1. Definition Format (from RFC1242) Term to be defined. Definition: The specific definition for the term. Discussion: A brief discussion of the term, its application and any restrictions on measurement procedures. Specification: The working group and document in which the term is Dunn & Martin [Page 2] INTERNET-DRAFT Frame Relay Benchmarking Terminology February 1999 specified. Listed in the references. 1.2. Frame Relay Related Definitions 1.2.1. Backward Explicit Congestion Notification (BECN): Definition: BECN is a bit in the frame relay header. The bit is set by a congested network node in any frame that is traveling in the reverse direction of the congestion. Discussion: Specification: FRF 1.2.2. Committed Information Rate (CIR): Definition: CIR is the transport speed the frame relay network will maintain between service locations when data is presented. Discussion: Specification: FRF 1.2.3. Discard Eligible: Definition: This is a 1-bit field in a frame relay header that provides a two level priority indicator, used to bias discard frames in the event of congestion toward lower priority frames. Similar to the CLP bit in ATM. Discussion: Specification: FRF 1.2.4. Forward Explicit Congestion Notification (FECN): Definition: FECN is a bit in the frame relay header. The bit is set by a congested network node in any frame that is traveling in the same direction of the congestion. Discussion: Specification: FRF 1.2.5. Frame: Definition: A logical grouping of information sent as a link-layer unit over a transmission medium. Dunn & Martin [Page 3] INTERNET-DRAFT Frame Relay Benchmarking Terminology February 1999 Discussion: Specification: FRF 1.2.6. Frame Relay: Definition: A high-performance interface for packet-switching networks; considered more efficient that X.25. Frame relay technology can handle "bursty" communications that have rapidly changing bandwidth requirements. Discussion: Specification: FRF 2. Performance Metrics 2.1. Definition Format (from RFC1242) Metric to be defined. Definition: The specific definition for the metric. Discussion: A brief discussion of the metric, its application and any restrictions on measurement procedures. Measurement units: Intrinsic units used to quantify this metric. This includes subsidiary units, e.g. microseconds are acceptable if the intrinsic unit is seconds. 2.2 Definitions 3. Security Considerations. As this document is solely for the purpose of providing terminology and describes neither a protocol nor an implementation, there are no security considerations associated with this document. 4. References 5. Editor's Addresses Jeffrey Dunn Advanced Network Consultants, Inc. 11241-B Skilift Court, Columbia, MD 21044 USA Phone: +1 (410) 730-6300, E-mail: Jeffrey.Dunn@worldnet.att.net Cynthia Martin Advanced Network Consultants, Inc. 11241-B Skilift Court, Columbia, MD 21044 USA Phone: +1 (410) 730-6300, E-mail: Cynthia.E.Martin@worldnet.att.net Dunn & Martin [Page 4] INTERNET-DRAFT Frame Relay Benchmarking Terminology February 1999 Dunn & Martin [Page 5]