Internet DRAFT - draft-vpolak-mkonstan-bmwg-mlrsearch
draft-vpolak-mkonstan-bmwg-mlrsearch
Benchmarking Working Group M. Konstantynowicz, Ed.
Internet-Draft V. Polak, Ed.
Intended status: Informational Cisco Systems
Expires: September 7, 2020 March 06, 2020
Multiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput (MLRsearch)
draft-vpolak-mkonstan-bmwg-mlrsearch-03
Abstract
This document proposes changes to [RFC2544], specifically to packet
throughput search methodology, by defining a new search algorithm
referred to as Multiple Loss Ratio search (MLRsearch for short).
Instead of relying on binary search with pre-set starting offered
load, it proposes a novel approach discovering the starting point in
the initial phase, and then searching for packet throughput based on
defined packet loss ratio (PLR) input criteria and defined final
trial duration time. One of the key design principles behind
MLRsearch is minimizing the total test duration and searching for
multiple packet throughput rates (each with a corresponding PLR)
concurrently, instead of doing it sequentially.
The main motivation behind MLRsearch is the new set of challenges and
requirements posed by NFV (Network Function Virtualization),
specifically software based implementations of NFV data planes.
Using [RFC2544] in the experience of the authors yields often not
repetitive and not replicable end results due to a large number of
factors that are out of scope for this draft. MLRsearch aims to
address this challenge in a simple way of getting the same result
sooner, so more repetitions can be done to describe the
replicability.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
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."
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 1]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 7, 2020.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. MLRsearch Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. MLRsearch Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Sample Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1. Input Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2. Initial Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3. Non-Initial Phases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. FD.io CSIT Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.1. Additional details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.1.1. FD.io CSIT Input Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.2. Example MLRsearch Run . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1. Terminology
o Frame size: size of an Ethernet Layer-2 frame on the wire,
including any VLAN tags (dot1q, dot1ad) and Ethernet FCS, but
excluding Ethernet preamble and inter-frame gap. Measured in
bytes.
o Packet size: same as frame size, both terms used interchangeably.
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 2]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
o Device Under Test (DUT): In software networking, "device" denotes
a specific piece of software tasked with packet processing. Such
device is surrounded with other software components (such as
operating system kernel). It is not possible to run devices
without also running the other components, and hardware resources
are shared between both. For purposes of testing, the whole set
of hardware and software components is called "system under test"
(SUT). As SUT is the part of the whole test setup performance of
which can be measured by [RFC2544] methods, this document uses SUT
instead of [RFC2544] DUT. Device under test (DUT) can be re-
introduced when analysing test results using whitebox techniques,
but this document sticks to blackbox testing.
o System Under Test (SUT): System under test (SUT) is a part of the
whole test setup whose performance is to be benchmarked. The
complete test setup contains other parts, whose performance is
either already established, or not affecting the benchmarking
result.
o Bi-directional throughput tests: involve packets/frames flowing in
both transmit and receive directions over every tested interface
of SUT/DUT. Packet flow metrics are measured per direction, and
can be reported as aggregate for both directions and/or separately
for each measured direction. In most cases bi-directional tests
use the same (symmetric) load in both directions.
o Uni-directional throughput tests: involve packets/frames flowing
in only one direction, i.e. either transmit or receive direction,
over every tested interface of SUT/DUT. Packet flow metrics are
measured and are reported for measured direction.
o Packet Loss Ratio (PLR): ratio of packets received relative to
packets transmitted over the test trial duration, calculated using
formula: PLR = ( pkts_transmitted - pkts_received ) /
pkts_transmitted. For bi-directional throughput tests aggregate
PLR is calculated based on the aggregate number of packets
transmitted and received.
o Packet Throughput Rate: maximum packet offered load DUT/SUT
forwards within the specified Packet Loss Ratio (PLR). In many
cases the rate depends on the frame size processed by DUT/SUT.
Hence packet throughput rate MUST be quoted with specific frame
size as received by DUT/SUT during the measurement. For bi-
directional tests, packet throughput rate should be reported as
aggregate for both directions. Measured in packets-per-second
(pps) or frames-per-second (fps), equivalent metrics.
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 3]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
o Bandwidth Throughput Rate: a secondary metric calculated from
packet throughput rate using formula: bw_rate = pkt_rate *
(frame_size + L1_overhead) * 8, where L1_overhead for Ethernet
includes preamble (8 Bytes) and inter-frame gap (12 Bytes). For
bi-directional tests, bandwidth throughput rate should be reported
as aggregate for both directions. Expressed in bits-per-second
(bps).
o Non Drop Rate (NDR): maximum packet/bandwith throughput rate
sustained by DUT/SUT at PLR equal zero (zero packet loss) specific
to tested frame size(s). MUST be quoted with specific packet size
as received by DUT/SUT during the measurement. Packet NDR
measured in packets-per-second (or fps), bandwidth NDR expressed
in bits-per-second (bps).
o Partial Drop Rate (PDR): maximum packet/bandwith throughput rate
sustained by DUT/SUT at PLR greater than zero (non-zero packet
loss) specific to tested frame size(s). MUST be quoted with
specific packet size as received by DUT/SUT during the
measurement. Packet PDR measured in packets-per-second (or fps),
bandwidth PDR expressed in bits-per-second (bps).
o Maximum Receive Rate (MRR): packet/bandwidth rate regardless of
PLR sustained by DUT/SUT under specified Maximum Transmit Rate
(MTR) packet load offered by traffic generator. MUST be quoted
with both specific packet size and MTR as received by DUT/SUT
during the measurement. Packet MRR measured in packets-per-second
(or fps), bandwidth MRR expressed in bits-per-second (bps).
o Trial: a single measurement step. See [RFC2544] section 23.
o Trial duration: amount of time over which packets are transmitted
in a single measurement step.
2. MLRsearch Background
Multiple Loss Ratio search (MLRsearch) is a packet throughput search
algorithm suitable for deterministic systems (as opposed to
probabilistic systems). MLRsearch discovers multiple packet
throughput rates in a single search, with each rate associated with a
distinct Packet Loss Ratio (PLR) criteria.
For cases when multiple rates need to be found, this property makes
MLRsearch more efficient in terms of time execution, compared to
traditional throughput search algorithms that discover a single
packet rate per defined search criteria (e.g. a binary search
specified by [RFC2544]). MLRsearch reduces execution time even
further by relying on shorter trial durations of intermediate steps,
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 4]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
with only the final measurements conducted at the specified final
trial duration. This results in the shorter overall search execution
time when compared to a traditional binary search, while guaranteeing
the same results for deterministic systems.
In practice two rates with distinct PLRs are commonly used for packet
throughput measurements of NFV systems: Non Drop Rate (NDR) with
PLR=0 and Partial Drop Rate (PDR) with PLR>0. The rest of this
document describes MLRsearch for NDR and PDR. If needed, MLRsearch
can be adapted to discover more throughput rates with different pre-
defined PLRs.
Similarly to other throughput search approaches like binary search,
MLRsearch is effective for SUTs/DUTs with PLR curve that is
continuously flat or increasing with growing offered load. It may
not be as effective for SUTs/DUTs with abnormal PLR curves.
MLRsearch relies on traffic generator to qualify the received packet
stream as error-free, and invalidate the results if any disqualifying
errors are present e.g. out-of-sequence frames.
MLRsearch can be applied to both uni-directional and bi-directional
throughput tests.
For bi-directional tests, MLRsearch rates and ratios are aggregates
of both directions, based on the following assumptions:
o Traffic transmitted by traffic generator and received by SUT/DUT
has the same packet rate in each direction, in other words the
offered load is symmetric.
o SUT/DUT packet processing capacity is the same in both directions,
resulting in the same packet loss under load.
3. MLRsearch Overview
The main properties of MLRsearch:
o MLRsearch is a duration aware multi-phase multi-rate search
algorithm:
* Initial Phase determines promising starting interval for the
search.
* Intermediate Phases progress towards defined final search
criteria.
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 5]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
* Final Phase executes measurements according to the final search
criteria.
* Final search criteria are defined by following inputs:
+ PLRs associated with NDR and PDR.
+ Final trial duration.
+ Measurement resolution.
o Initial Phase:
* Measure MRR over initial trial duration.
* Measured MRR is used as an input to the first intermediate
phase.
o Multiple Intermediate Phases:
* Trial duration:
+ Start with initial trial duration in the first intermediate
phase.
+ Converge geometrically towards the final trial duration.
* Track two values for NDR and two for PDR:
+ The values are called lower_bound and upper_bound.
+ Each value comes from a specific trial measurement:
- Most recent for that transmit rate.
- As such the value is associated with that measurement's
duration and loss.
+ A bound can be valid or invalid:
- Valid lower_bound must conform with PLR search criteria.
- Valid upper_bound must not conform with PLR search
criteria.
- Example of invalid NDR lower_bound is if it has been
measured with non-zero loss.
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 6]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
- Invalid bounds are not real boundaries for the searched
value:
o They are needed to track interval widths.
- Valid bounds are real boundaries for the searched value.
- Each non-initial phase ends with all bounds valid.
- Bound can become invalid if it re-measured at a longer
trial duration in a sub-sequent phase.
* Search:
+ Start with a large (lower_bound, upper_bound) interval
width, that determines measurement resolution.
+ Geometrically converge towards the width goal of the phase.
+ Each phase halves the previous width goal.
- First measurement of the next phase will be internal
search which always gives a valid bound and brings the
width to the new goal.
- Only one bound then needs to be re-measured with new
duration.
* Use of internal and external searches:
+ External search:
- Measures at transmit rates outside the (lower_bound,
upper_bound) interval.
- Activated when a bound is invalid, to search for a new
valid bound by multiplying (for example doubling) the
interval width.
- It is a variant of "exponential search".
+ Internal search:
- A "binary search" that measures at transmit rates within
the (lower_bound, upper_bound) valid interval, halving
the interval width.
o Final Phase:
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 7]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
* Executed with the final test trial duration, and the final
width goal that determines resolution of the overall search.
o Intermediate Phases together with the Final Phase are called Non-
Initial Phases.
The main benefits of MLRsearch vs. binary search include:
o In general MLRsearch is likely to execute more trials overall, but
likely less trials at a set final trial duration.
o In well behaving cases, e.g. when results do not depend on trial
duration, it greatly reduces (>50%) the overall duration compared
to a single PDR (or NDR) binary search over duration, while
finding multiple drop rates.
o In all cases MLRsearch yields the same or similar results to
binary search.
o Note: both binary search and MLRsearch are susceptible to
reporting non-repeatable results across multiple runs for very bad
behaving cases.
Caveats:
o Worst case MLRsearch can take longer than a binary search e.g. in
case of drastic changes in behaviour for trials at varying
durations.
4. Sample Implementation
Following is a brief description of a sample MLRsearch
implementation, which is a simlified version of the existing
implementation.
4.1. Input Parameters
1. *maximum_transmit_rate* - Maximum Transmit Rate (MTR) of packets
to be used by external traffic generator implementing MLRsearch,
limited by the actual Ethernet link(s) rate, NIC model or traffic
generator capabilities.
2. *minimum_transmit_rate* - minimum packet transmit rate to be used
for measurements. MLRsearch fails if lower transmit rate needs
to be used to meet search criteria.
3. *final_trial_duration* - required trial duration for final rate
measurements.
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 8]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
4. *initial_trial_duration* - trial duration for initial MLRsearch
phase.
5. *final_relative_width* - required measurement resolution
expressed as (lower_bound, upper_bound) interval width relative
to upper_bound.
6. *packet_loss_ratio* - maximum acceptable PLR search criterion for
PDR measurements.
7. *number_of_intermediate_phases* - number of phases between the
initial phase and the final phase. Impacts the overall MLRsearch
duration. Less phases are required for well behaving cases, more
phases may be needed to reduce the overall search duration for
worse behaving cases.
4.2. Initial Phase
1. First trial measures at configured maximum transmit rate (MTR)
and discovers maximum receive rate (MRR).
* IN: trial_duration = initial_trial_duration.
* IN: offered_transmit_rate = maximum_transmit_rate.
* DO: single trial.
* OUT: measured loss ratio.
* OUT: MRR = measured receive rate. If loss ratio is zero, MRR
is set below MTR so that interval width is equal to the width
goal of the first intermediate phase.
2. Second trial measures at MRR and discovers MRR2.
* IN: trial_duration = initial_trial_duration.
* IN: offered_transmit_rate = MRR.
* DO: single trial.
* OUT: measured loss ratio.
* OUT: MRR2 = measured receive rate. If loss ratio is zero,
MRR2 is set above MRR so that interval width is equal to the
width goal of the first intermediate phase. MRR2 could end up
being equal to MTR (for example if both measurements so far
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 9]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
had zero loss), which was already measured, step 3 is skipped
in that case.
3. Third trial measures at MRR2.
* IN: trial_duration = initial_trial_duration.
* IN: offered_transmit_rate = MRR2.
* DO: single trial.
* OUT: measured loss ratio.
4.3. Non-Initial Phases
1. Main loop:
1. IN: trial_duration for the current phase. Set to
initial_trial_duration for the first intermediate phase; to
final_trial_duration for the final phase; or to the element
of interpolating geometric sequence for other intermediate
phases. For example with two intermediate phases,
trial_duration of the second intermediate phase is the
geometric average of initial_trial_duration and
final_trial_duration.
2. IN: relative_width_goal for the current phase. Set to
final_relative_width for the final phase; doubled for each
preceding phase. For example with two intermediate phases,
the first intermediate phase uses quadruple of
final_relative_width and the second intermediate phase uses
double of final_relative_width.
3. IN: ndr_interval, pdr_interval from the previous main loop
iteration or the previous phase. If the previous phase is
the initial phase, both intervals are formed by a (correctly
ordered) pair of MRR2 and MRR. Note that the initial phase
is likely to create intervals with invalid bounds.
4. DO: According to the procedure described in point 2., either
exit the phase (by jumping to 1.7.), or calculate new
transmit rate to measure with.
5. DO: Perform the trial measurement at the new transmit rate
and trial_duration, compute its loss ratio.
6. DO: Update the bounds of both intervals, based on the new
measurement. The actual update rules are numerous, as NDR
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 10]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
external search can affect PDR interval and vice versa, but
the result agrees with rules of both internal and external
search. For example, any new measurement below an invalid
lower_bound becomes the new lower_bound, while the old
measurement (previously acting as the invalid lower_bound)
becomes a new and valid upper_bound. Go to next iteration
(1.3.), taking the updated intervals as new input.
7. OUT: current ndr_interval and pdr_interval. In the final
phase this is also considered to be the result of the whole
search. For other phases, the next phase loop is started
with the current results as an input.
2. New transmit rate (or exit) calculation (for point 1.4.):
1. If there is an invalid bound then prepare for external
search:
+ IF the most recent measurement at NDR lower_bound transmit
rate had the loss higher than zero, then the new transmit
rate is NDR lower_bound decreased by two NDR interval
widths.
+ Else, IF the most recent measurement at PDR lower_bound
transmit rate had the loss higher than PLR, then the new
transmit rate is PDR lower_bound decreased by two PDR
interval widths.
+ Else, IF the most recent measurement at NDR upper_bound
transmit rate had no loss, then the new transmit rate is
NDR upper_bound increased by two NDR interval widths.
+ Else, IF the most recent measurement at PDR upper_bound
transmit rate had the loss lower or equal to PLR, then the
new transmit rate is PDR upper_bound increased by two PDR
interval widths.
2. Else, if interval width is higher than the current phase
goal:
+ IF NDR interval does not meet the current phase width
goal, prepare for internal search. The new transmit rate
is a in the middle of NDR lower_bound and NDR upper_bound.
+ IF PDR interval does not meet the current phase width
goal, prepare for internal search. The new transmit rate
is a in the middle of PDR lower_bound and PDR upper_bound.
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 11]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
3. Else, if some bound has still only been measured at a lower
duration, prepare to re-measure at the current duration (and
the same transmit rate). The order of priorities is:
+ NDR lower_bound,
+ PDR lower_bound,
+ NDR upper_bound,
+ PDR upper_bound.
4. Else, do not prepare any new rate, to exit the phase. This
ensures that at the end of each non-initial phase all
intervals are valid, narrow enough, and measured at current
phase trial duration.
5. FD.io CSIT Implementation
The only known working implementation of MLRsearch is in the open-
source code running in Linux Foundation FD.io CSIT project
[FDio-CSIT-MLRsearch] as part of a Continuous Integration /
Continuous Development (CI/CD) framework.
MLRsearch is also available as a Python package in [PyPI-MLRsearch].
5.1. Additional details
This document so far has been describing a simplified version of
MLRsearch algorithm. The full algorithm as implemented in CSIT
contains additional logic, which makes some of the details (but not
general ideas) above incorrect. Here is a short description of the
additional logic as a list of principles, explaining their main
differences from (or additions to) the simplified description, but
without detailing their mutual interaction.
1. Logarithmic transmit rate.
* In order to better fit the relative width goal, the interval
doubling and halving is done differently.
* For example, the middle of 2 and 8 is 4, not 5.
2. Optimistic maximum rate.
* The increased rate is never higher than the maximum rate.
* Upper bound at that rate is always considered valid.
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 12]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
3. Pessimistic minimum rate.
* The decreased rate is never lower than the minimum rate.
* If a lower bound at that rate is invalid, a phase stops
refining the interval further (until it gets re-measured).
4. Conservative interval updates.
* Measurements above the current upper bound never update a
valid upper bound, even if drop ratio is low.
* Measurements below the current lower bound always update any
lower bound if drop ratio is high.
5. Ensure sufficient interval width.
* Narrow intervals make external search take more time to find a
valid bound.
* If the new transmit increased or decreased rate would result
in width less than the current goal, increase/decrease more.
* This can happen if the measurement for the other interval
makes the current interval too narrow.
* Similarly, take care the measurements in the initial phase
create wide enough interval.
6. Timeout for bad cases.
* The worst case for MLRsearch is when each phase converges to
intervals way different than the results of the previous
phase.
* Rather than suffer total search time several times larger than
pure binary search, the implemented tests fail themselves when
the search takes too long (given by argument _timeout_).
7. Pessimistic external search.
* Valid bound becoming invalid on re-measurement with higher
duration is frequently a sign of SUT behaving in non-
deterministic way (from blackbox point of view). If the final
width interval goal is too narrow compared to width of rate
region where SUT is non-deterministic, it is quite likely that
there will be multiple invalid bounds before the external
search finds a valid one.
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 13]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
* In this case, external search can be sped up by increasing
interval width more rapidly. As only powers of two ensure the
subsequent internal search will not result in needlessly
narrow interval, a parameter _doublings_ is introduced to
control the pessimism of external search. For example three
doublings result in interval width being multiplied by eight
in each external search iteration.
5.1.1. FD.io CSIT Input Parameters
1. *maximum_transmit_rate* - Typical values: 2 * 14.88 Mpps for 64B
10GE link rate, 2 * 18.75 Mpps for 64B 40GE NIC (specific model).
2. *minimum_transmit_rate* - Value: 2 * 10 kpps (traffic generator
limitation).
3. *final_trial_duration* - Value: 30 seconds.
4. *initial_trial_duration* - Value: 1 second.
5. *final_relative_width* - Value: 0.005 (0.5%).
6. *packet_loss_ratio* - Value: 0.005 (0.5%).
7. *number_of_intermediate_phases* - Value: 2. The value has been
chosen based on limited experimentation to date. More
experimentation needed to arrive to clearer guidelines.
8. *timeout* - Limit for the overall search duration (for one
search). If MLRsearch oversteps this limit, it immediatelly
declares the test failed, to avoid wasting even more time on a
misbehaving SUT. Value: 600 (seconds).
9. *doublings* - Number of dublings when computing new interval
width in external search. Value: 2 (interval width is
quadroupled). Value of 1 is best for well-behaved SUTs, but
value of 2 has been found to decrease overall search time for
worse-behaved SUT configurations, contributing more to the
overall set of different SUT configurations tested.
5.2. Example MLRsearch Run
The following table shows data from a real test run in CSIT (using
the default input values as above). The first column is the phase,
the second is the trial measurement performed (aggregate
bidirectional offered load in megapackets per second, and trial
duration in seconds). Each of last four columns show one bound as
updated after the measurement (duration truncated to save space).
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 14]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
Loss ratio is not shown, but invalid bounds are marked with a plus
sign.
+-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| Phase | Trial | NDR lower | NDR upper | PDR lower | PDR upper |
+-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
| init. | 37.50 | N/A | 37.50 1. | N/A | 37.50 1. |
| | 1.00 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| init. | 10.55 | +10.55 1. | 37.50 1. | +10.55 1. | 37.50 1. |
| | 1.00 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| init. | 9.437 | +9.437 1. | 10.55 1. | +9.437 1. | 10.55 1. |
| | 1.00 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| int 1 | 6.053 | 6.053 1. | 9.437 1. | 6.053 1. | 9.437 1. |
| | 1.00 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| int 1 | 7.558 | 7.558 1. | 9.437 1. | 7.558 1. | 9.437 1. |
| | 1.00 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| int 1 | 8.446 | 8.446 1. | 9.437 1. | 8.446 1. | 9.437 1. |
| | 1.00 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| int 1 | 8.928 | 8.928 1. | 9.437 1. | 8.928 1. | 9.437 1. |
| | 1.00 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| int 1 | 9.179 | 8.928 1. | 9.179 1. | 9.179 1. | 9.437 1. |
| | 1.00 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| int 1 | 9.052 | 9.052 1. | 9.179 1. | 9.179 1. | 9.437 1. |
| | 1.00 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| int 1 | 9.307 | 9.052 1. | 9.179 1. | 9.179 1. | 9.307 1. |
| | 1.00 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| int 2 | 9.115 | 9.115 5. | 9.179 1. | 9.179 1. | 9.307 1. |
| | 5.48 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| int 2 | 9.243 | 9.115 5. | 9.179 1. | 9.243 5. | 9.307 1. |
| | 5.48 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| int 2 | 9.179 | 9.115 5. | 9.179 5. | 9.243 5. | 9.307 1. |
| | 5.48 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| int 2 | 9.307 | 9.115 5. | 9.179 5. | 9.243 5. | +9.307 5. |
| | 5.48 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 15]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
| int 2 | 9.687 | 9.115 5. | 9.179 5. | 9.307 5. | 9.687 5. |
| | 5.48 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| int 2 | 9.495 | 9.115 5. | 9.179 5. | 9.307 5. | 9.495 5. |
| | 5.48 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| int 2 | 9.401 | 9.115 5. | 9.179 5. | 9.307 5. | 9.401 5. |
| | 5.48 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| final | 9.147 | 9.115 5. | 9.147 30 | 9.307 5. | 9.401 5. |
| | 30.0 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| final | 9.354 | 9.115 5. | 9.147 30 | 9.307 5. | 9.354 30 |
| | 30.0 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| final | 9.115 | +9.115 30 | 9.147 30 | 9.307 5. | 9.354 30 |
| | 30.0 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| final | 8.935 | 8.935 30 | 9.115 30 | 9.307 5. | 9.354 30 |
| | 30.0 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| final | 9.025 | 9.025 30 | 9.115 30 | 9.307 5. | 9.354 30 |
| | 30.0 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| final | 9.070 | 9.070 30 | 9.115 30 | 9.307 5. | 9.354 30 |
| | 30.0 | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| final | 9.307 | 9.070 30 | 9.115 30 | 9.307 30 | 9.354 30 |
| | 30.0 | | | | |
+-------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+
6. IANA Considerations
No requests of IANA.
7. Security Considerations
Benchmarking activities as described in this memo are limited to
technology characterization of a DUT/SUT using controlled stimuli in
a laboratory environment, with dedicated address space and the
constraints specified in the sections above.
The benchmarking network topology will be an independent test setup
and MUST NOT be connected to devices that may forward the test
traffic into a production network or misroute traffic to the test
management network.
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 16]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
Further, benchmarking is performed on a "black-box" basis, relying
solely on measurements observable external to the DUT/SUT.
Special capabilities SHOULD NOT exist in the DUT/SUT specifically for
benchmarking purposes. Any implications for network security arising
from the DUT/SUT SHOULD be identical in the lab and in production
networks.
8. Acknowledgements
Many thanks to Alec Hothan of OPNFV NFVbench project for thorough
review and numerous useful comments and suggestions.
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[RFC2544] Bradner, S. and J. McQuaid, "Benchmarking Methodology for
Network Interconnect Devices", RFC 2544,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2544, March 1999,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2544>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
9.2. Informative References
[FDio-CSIT-MLRsearch]
"FD.io CSIT Test Methodology - MLRsearch", February 2020,
<https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/introduction/
methodology_data_plane_throughput/
methodology_mlrsearch_tests.html>.
[PyPI-MLRsearch]
"MLRsearch 0.3.0, Python Package Index", February 2020,
<https://pypi.org/project/MLRsearch/0.3.0/>.
Authors' Addresses
Maciek Konstantynowicz (editor)
Cisco Systems
Email: mkonstan@cisco.com
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 17]
Internet-DraMultiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput March 2020
Vratko Polak (editor)
Cisco Systems
Email: vrpolak@cisco.com
Konstantynowicz & Polak Expires September 7, 2020 [Page 18]
