idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-term-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Looks like you're using RFC 2026 boilerplate. This must be updated to follow RFC 3978/3979, as updated by RFC 4748. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard == It seems as if not all pages are separated by form feeds - found 0 form feeds but 13 pages Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack an Abstract section. ** The document seems to lack an Introduction section. (A line matching the expected section header was found, but with an unexpected indentation: ' 1. Introduction' ) ** The document seems to lack a Security Considerations section. (A line matching the expected section header was found, but with an unexpected indentation: ' 4. Security Considerations' ) ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) ** The document seems to lack an Authors' Addresses Section. ** There are 380 instances of lines with control characters in the document. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year == Line 153 has weird spacing: '...pdating of th...' == The document doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet seems to have RFC 2119 boilerplate text. -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (April 2004) is 7315 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) -- Missing reference section? '1' on line 607 looks like a reference -- Missing reference section? '2' on line 611 looks like a reference -- Missing reference section? '3' on line 615 looks like a reference -- Missing reference section? '4' on line 618 looks like a reference Summary: 7 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 5 warnings (==), 6 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Network Working Group 2 INTERNET-DRAFT 3 Expires in: April 2004 4 Scott Poretsky 5 Quarry Technologies 7 Brent Imhoff 8 Wiltel Communications 10 October 2003 12 Terminology for Benchmarking 13 IGP Data Plane Route Convergence 15 17 Status of this Memo 19 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 20 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 22 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 23 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 24 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 25 Drafts. 27 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six 28 months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other 29 documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts 30 as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in 31 progress." 33 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 34 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt 36 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 37 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 39 Table of Contents 41 1. Introduction ...............................................2 42 2. Existing definitions .......................................2 43 3. Term definitions............................................3 44 3.1 Network Convergence.......................................3 45 3.2 Protocol Convergence......................................3 46 3.3 Route Convergence.........................................4 47 3.4 Convergence Event.........................................4 48 3.5 Full Convergence..........................................4 49 3.6 Convergence Packet Loss...................................5 50 3.7 Convergence Event Instant.................................5 51 3.8 Convergence Recovery Transition...........................6 52 3.9 Rate-Derived Convergence Time.............................6 53 3.10 Convergence Recovery Instant.............................7 54 3.11 Convergence Event Transition.............................7 55 3.12 Loss-Derived Convergence Time............................8 56 IGP Data Plane Route Convergence 58 3.13 Route Convergence Time...................................9 59 3.14 Restoration Convergence Time.............................9 60 3.15 Packet Sampling Interval.................................10 61 3.16 Local Interface..........................................10 62 3.17 Neighbor Interface.......................................10 63 3.18 Remote Interface.........................................11 64 3.19 Preferred Egress Interface...............................11 65 3.20 Next-Best Egress Interface...............................12 66 4. Security Considerations.....................................12 67 5. References..................................................12 68 6. Author's Address............................................12 69 7. Full Copyright Statement....................................13 71 1. Introduction 72 This draft describes the terminology for benchmarking IGP Route 73 Convergence. The motivation and applicability for this 74 benchmarking is provided in [1]. The methodology to be used for 75 this benchmarking is described in [2]. The methodology and 76 terminology to be used for benchmarking route convergence can be 77 applied to any link-state IGP such as ISIS [3] and OSPF [4]. The 78 data plane is measured to obtain black-box (externally observable) 79 convergence benchmarking metrics. The purpose of this document is 80 to introduce new terms required to complete execution of the IGP 81 Route Convergence Methodology [2]. 83 An example of Route Convergence as observed and measured from the 84 data plane is shown in Figure 1. The graph in Figure 1 shows 85 Forwarding Rate versus Time. Time 0 on the X-axis is on the far 86 right of the graph. The components of the graph and metrics are 87 defined in the Term Definitions section of this document. 89 Recovery Convergence Event Time = 0sec 90 Maximum ^ ^ ^ 91 Forwarding Rate--> ----\ Packet /--------------- 92 \ Loss /<----Convergence 93 Convergence------->\ / Event Transition 94 Recovery Transition \ / 95 \_____/<------100% Packet Loss 97 X-axis = Time 98 Y-axis = Forwarding Rate 100 Figure 1. Convergence Graph 102 2. Existing definitions 103 For the sake of clarity and continuity this RFC adopts the template 104 for definitions set out in Section 2 of RFC 1242. Definitions are 105 indexed and grouped together in sections for ease of reference. 106 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 107 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in 108 this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119. 110 IGP Data Plane Route Convergence 112 3. Term Definitions 114 3.1 Network Convergence 116 Definition: 117 The completion of updating of all routing tables, including the 118 FIB, in all routers throughout the network. 120 Discussion: 121 Network Convergence can be approximated to the sum of Route 122 Convergence for all routers in the network. Network Convergence 123 can only be determined by the occurrence of packet loss or stale 124 forwarding due to an out-of-date FIB. 126 Measurement Units: 127 N/A 129 Issues: 130 None 132 See Also: 133 Protocol Convergence 134 Route Convergence 136 3.2 Protocol Convergence 138 Definition: 139 The completion of updating a router's RIB and the forwarding of 140 an route update message (LSA for OSPF/LSP for ISIS) to a 141 neighboring peer. 143 Discussion: 144 Protocol Convergence considers only the Control Plane. IGP 145 messaging is used to verify and measure convergence. Updating 146 of the FIB, hardware updating, rerouting of traffic, and packet 147 loss are not considered. 149 Measurement Units: 150 N/A 152 Issues: 153 Protocol Convergence does not consider updating of the FIB, 154 hardware updating, rerouting of traffic, and resulting packet 155 loss. Protocol Convergence is only a partial measurement of 156 Route Convergence. 158 See Also: 159 Network Convergence 160 Route Convergence 161 IGP Data Plane Route Convergence 163 3.3 Route Convergence 165 Definition: 166 The completion of the router's FIB becoming fully converged. 168 Discussion: 169 Route Convergence is the action of all components of the router 170 being updated with the most recent route change(s) including the 171 RIB and FIB, along with software and hardware tables. Route 172 Convergence can be observed externally by the rerouting of data 173 Traffic to a new egress interface. 175 Measurement Units: 176 N/A 178 Issues: 179 None 181 See Also: 182 Network Convergence 183 Protocol Convergence 184 Full Convergence 185 Convergence Event 187 3.4 Convergence Event 189 Definition: 190 The occurrence of a planned or unplanned action in the network 191 that results in a change to an entry in the route table. 193 Discussion: 194 Convergence Events include link loss, routing protocol session 195 loss, router failure, and better next-hop. 197 Measurement Units: 198 N/A 200 Issues: 201 None 203 See Also: 204 Convergence Packet Loss 205 Convergence Event Instant 207 3.5 Full Convergence 209 Definition: 210 Route Convergence for an entire route table. 212 Discussion: 213 When benchmarking convergence it is useful to measure 214 The time to convergence an entire route table. For example, 215 IGP Data Plane Route Convergence 217 A Convergence Event can produced for an OSPF table of 5000 218 routes so that the time to converge routes 1 through 5000 219 is measured. 221 Measurement Units: 222 N/A 224 Issues: 225 None 227 See Also: 228 Network Convergence 229 Protocol Convergence 230 Route Convergence 231 Convergence Event 233 3.6 Convergence Packet Loss 235 Definition: 236 The amount of packet loss produced by a Convergence Event 237 until Route Convergence occurs. 239 Discussion: 240 Packet loss can be observed as a reduction of forwarded 241 traffic from the maximum forwarding rate. 243 Measurement Units: 244 number of packets 246 Issues: 247 None 249 See Also: 250 Route Convergence 251 Convergence Event 252 Rate-Derived Convergence Time 253 Loss-Derived Convergence Time 255 3.7 Convergence Event Instant 257 Definition: 258 The time instant that a Convergence Event occurs. 260 Discussion: 261 Convergence Event Instant is observable from the data 262 plane as the precise time that the device under test begins 263 to exhibit packet loss. 265 Measurement Units: 266 hh:mm:ss:uuu 267 IGP Data Plane Route Convergence 269 Issues: 270 None 272 See Also: 273 Route Convergence 274 Convergence Event 275 Convergence Packet Loss 276 Convergence Recovery Instant 278 3.8 Convergence Recovery Instant 280 Definition: 281 The time instant that Route Convergence occurs. 283 Discussion: 284 Convergence Recovery Instant is observable from the data 285 plane as the precise time that the device under test no 286 longer exhibits packet loss. 288 Measurement Units: 289 hh:mm:ss:uuu 291 Issues: 292 None 294 See Also: 295 Route Convergence 296 Convergence Packet Loss 297 Convergence Event Instant 299 3.9 Rate-Derived Convergence Time 301 Definition: 302 The amount of time for Convergence Packet Loss to 303 persist upon occurrence of a Convergence Event until 304 occurrence of Route Convergence. 306 Discussion: 308 Rate-Derived Convergence Time can be measured as the time 309 difference from the Convergence Event Instant to the 310 Convergence Reovery Instant, as shown with Equation 1. 312 (eq 1) Rate-Derived Convergence Time = 313 Convergence Recovery Instant - Convergence Event Instant. 315 Rate-Derived Convergence Time can be measured at the maximum 316 forwarding rate. 318 Measurement Units: 319 seconds/milliseconds 320 IGP Data Plane Route Convergence 322 Issues: 323 None 325 See Also: 326 Route Convergence 327 Convergence Packet Loss 328 Loss-Derived Convergence Time 330 3.10 Loss-Derived Convergence Time 332 Definition: 333 The amount of time it takes for Route Convergence to 334 complete as calculated from the amount of packet loss 335 and known forwarding rate. 337 Discussion: 338 It can be calculated from packet loss that occurs due 339 to a Convergence Event and Route Convergence, as shown 340 with Equation 2. 342 (eq 2) Loss-Derived Convergence Time = 343 Convergence Packets Loss / Forwarding Rate 345 NOTE: Units for this measurement are 346 packets / packets/second = seconds 348 Measurement Units: 349 seconds/milliseconds 351 Issues: 352 Loss-Derived Convergence time gives a better than 353 actual result when converging many routes simultaneously. 354 Because of this the preferred reporting metric in most 355 Cases is Rate-Derived Convergence Time. 357 See Also: 358 Route Convergence 359 Convergence Packet Loss 360 Rate-Derived Convergence Time 361 Convergence Event Transition 362 Convergence Recovery Transition 364 3.11 Convergence Event Transition 366 Definition: 367 The characteristic of A router in which forwarding rate 368 gradually reaches zero as output queues drain after a 369 network event. 371 IGP Data Plane Route Convergence 373 Discussion: 374 Rate-Derived Convergence Time ignores the Convergence Event 375 Transition. Loss-Derived Convergence Time based upon the amount 376 of packet loss takes the Convergence Event Transition into 377 account. The Convergence Event Transition is best observed for 378 Full Convergence. 380 Measurement Units: 381 seconds/milliseconds 383 Issues: 384 None 386 See Also: 387 Route Convergence 389 Convergence Event 390 Rate-Derived Convergence Time 391 Loss-Derived Convergence Time 392 Convergence Packet Loss 393 Convergence Recovery Transition 395 3.12 Convergence Recovery Transition 397 Definition: 398 The characteristic of a router in which forwarding rate 399 gradually rises to the maximum value as many routes 400 converge to recover from a network event. 402 Discussion: 403 Rate-Derived Convergence Time ignores the Route 404 Convergence Recovery Transition. Loss-Derived Convergence 405 Time based upon the amount of packet loss takes the 406 Convergence Recovery Transition into account. The 407 Convergence Recovery Transition is best observed for Full 408 Convergence. 410 Measurement Units: 411 seconds/milliseconds 413 Issues: 414 None 416 See Also: 417 Route Convergence 418 Rate-Derived Convergence Time 419 Loss-Derived Convergence Time 420 Convergence Packet Loss 421 Convergence Event Transition 422 IGP Data Plane Route Convergence 424 3.13 Route Convergence Time 426 Definition: 427 The amount of time it takes for Route Convergence to 428 complete as observed from rerouting traffic to a 429 new egress interface due to a change in next-hop without 430 packet loss. 432 Discussion: 433 Route Convergence Time is the IGP Route Convergence 434 benchmark to be used for network events that produce 435 a change in next-hop without packet loss. 437 Measurement Units: 438 seconds/milliseconds 440 Issues: 441 None 443 See Also: 444 Route Convergence 445 Rate-Derived Convergence Time 446 Loss-Derived Convergence Time 448 3.14 Restoration Convergence Time 450 Definition: 451 The amount of time for the router under test to restore 452 traffic to the original outbound port after recovery from 453 a Convergence Event. 455 Discussion: 456 Restoration Convergence Time is the amount of time to 457 Converge back to the original outbound port. This is achieved 458 by recovering from the Convergence Event, such as restoring 459 the failed link. Restoration Convergence Time is measured 460 using the Rate-Derived Convergence Time calculation technique, 461 as provided in Equation 1. It is possible, but not desired 462 to have the Restoration Convergence Time differ from the 463 Rate-Derived Convergence Time. 465 Measurement Units: 466 seconds or milliseconds 468 Issues: 469 None 471 See Also: 472 Convergence Event 473 Rate-Derived Convegence Time 474 IGP Data Plane Route Convergence 476 3.15 Packet Sampling Interval 478 Definition: 479 The rate at which the tester (test equipment) polls to make 480 measurements for arriving packet flows. 482 Discussion: 483 Metrics measured at the Packet Sampling Interval include 484 packets received and Convergence Packet Loss. 486 Measurement Units: 487 seconds or milliseconds 489 Issues: 490 Packet Sampling Interval can influence the Convergence Graph. 491 This is particularly true as Full Convergence less than 1 second 492 is achieved. The Convergence Event Transition and Convergence 493 Recovery Transition can become exaggerated when the Packet 494 Sampling Interval is too long. This will produce a larger than 495 actual Rate-Derived Convergence Time. Guidelines for use of 496 the Packet Sampling Interval are provided in [2]. 498 See Also: 499 Convergence Packet Loss 500 Convergence Event Transition 501 Convergence Recovery Transition 503 3.16 Local Interface 505 Definition: 506 An interface on the DUT. 508 Discussion: 509 None 511 Measurement Units: 512 N/A 514 Issues: 515 None 517 See Also: 518 Neighbor Interface 519 Remote interface 521 3.17 Neighbor Interface 522 Definition: 523 The interface on the neighbor router or tester that is 524 directly linked to the DUT's Local Interface. 526 Discussion: 527 None 528 IGP Data Plane Route Convergence 530 Measurement Units: 531 N/A 533 Issues: 534 None 536 See Also: 537 Local Interface 538 Remote interface 540 3.18 Remote Interface 542 Definition: 543 An interface on a neighboring router that is not directly 544 linked to any interface on the DUT. 546 Discussion: 547 None 549 Measurement Units: 550 N/A 552 Issues: 553 None 555 See Also: 556 Local interface 557 Neighbor Interface 559 3.19 Preferred Egress Interface 561 Definition: 562 The outbound interface on DUT to the preferred next-hop. 564 Discussion: 565 Preferred Egress Interface is the egress interface prior to 566 a Convergence Event 568 Measurement Units: 569 N/A 571 Issues: 572 None 574 See Also: 575 Next-Best Egress Interface 576 Convergence Event 577 IGP Data Plane Route Convergence 579 3.20 Next-Best Egress Interface 581 Definition: 582 The outbound interface on DUT to the second-best next-hop. 584 Discussion: 585 Next-Best Egress Interface is the egress interface after to 586 a Convergence Event 588 Measurement Units: 589 N/A 591 Issues: 592 None 594 See Also: 595 Preferred Egress Interface 596 Convergence Event 598 4. Security Considerations 600 Documents of this type do not directly effect the security of 601 the Internet or of corporate networks as long as benchmarking 602 is not performed on devices or systems connected to operating 603 networks. 605 5. References 607 [1] Poretsky, S., "Benchmarking Applicability for IGP Data Plane 608 Route Convergence", draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-app-01, 609 work in progress, October 2003. 611 [2] Poretsky, S., "Benchmarking Methodology for IGP Data Plane 612 Route Convergence", draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth-01, 613 work in progress, October 2003. 615 [3] Callon, R., "Use of OSI IS-IS for Routing in TCP/IP and Dual 616 Environments", RFC 1195, December 1990. 618 [4] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", RFC 2328, IETF, April 1998. 620 6. Author's Address 622 Scott Poretsky 623 Quarry Technologies 624 8 New England Executive Park 625 Burlington, MA 01803 626 USA 627 Phone: + 1 781 395 5090 628 EMail: sporetsky@quarrytech.com 629 IGP Data Plane Route Convergence 631 Brent Imhoff 632 WilTel Communications 633 3180 Rider Trail South 634 Bridgeton, MO 63045 USA 635 Phone: +1 314 595 6853 636 EMail: brent.imhoff@wcg.com 638 7. Full Copyright Statement 640 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights 641 Reserved. 643 This document and translations of it may be copied and 644 furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or 645 otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be 646 prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in 647 part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above 648 copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such 649 copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may 650 not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright 651 notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet 652 organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing 653 Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights 654 defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or 655 as required to translate it into languages other than English. 657 The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will 658 not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or 659 assigns. This document and the information contained herein is 660 provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE 661 INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, 662 EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY 663 THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY 664 RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS 665 FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.