Subject: [ippm] Revised IPPM charter nearing publication - final comments?

From: "Matthew J Zekauskas" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2002 19:43:39 -0500

The revised charter has been through an IESG review, and the current
version is reproduced below.  If you have any comments before it
is officially published, send them to the chairs, the ADs, or the
mailing list.  I expect that the new charter should be official
within two weeks.

--Matt

========

draft 1.3 20020206

IP Performance Metrics (ippm)
-----------------------------
 
 Charter 
 Last Modified: 06-Feb-02
 
 Current Status: Active Working Group
 
 Chair(s):
     Merike Kaeo <[email-masked]>
     Matthew Zekauskas <[email-masked]>
 
 Transport Area Director(s): 
     Scott Bradner  <[email-masked]>
     Allison Mankin  <[email-masked]>
 
 Transport Area Advisor: 
     Allison Mankin  <[email-masked]>

 Technical Advisor:                          
     Andy Bierman <[email-masked]>       

 Mailing Lists: 
     General Discussion:[email-masked]
     To Subscribe:      [email-masked]
     Archive:           http://www.advanced.org/IPPM/archive/

Description of Working Group

Note: Andy Bierman serves as MIB advisor.

The IPPM WG will develop a set of standard metrics that can be applied
to the quality, performance, and reliability of Internet data delivery
services.  These metrics will be designed such that they can be
performed by network operators, end users, or independent testing
groups.  It is important that the metrics not represent a value
judgment (i.e. define "good" and "bad"), but rather provide unbiased
quantitative measures of performance.

Functions peripheral to Internet data delivery services, such as
NOC/NIC services, are beyond the scope of this working group.

The IPPM WG will produce documents that define specific metrics and
procedures for accurately measuring and documenting these metrics.
The metrics are:
  - connectivity
  - one-way delay and loss
  - round-trip delay and loss
  - delay variation
  - loss patterns
  - packet reordering
  - bulk transport capacity
  - link bandwidth capacity
This is the cumulative set, including the metrics already completed
and published.

The working group will closely review and then be guided by an          
IESG document on how metrics advance along the standards track within   
the IETF.  This document will also be relevant to the work of the       
benchmarking working group (BMWG).  The first draft of this document    
was discussed at IETF 51.

Additionally, the WG will produce Proposed Standard applicability
statement (AS) documents, comparable to applicability statements in
RFC 2026, that will focus on procedures for measuring the individual
metrics and how these metrics characterize features that are important
to different service classes, such as bulk transport, periodic
streams, or multimedia streams.  It is specifically out of scope for
this working group to actually characterize traffic, for example to
characterize a voice-over-IP stream.  Each AS document will discuss the
performance characteristics that are pertinent to a specified service
class; clearly identify the set of metrics that aid in the description
of those characteristics; specify the methodologies required to
collect said metrics; and lastly, present the requirements for the
common, unambiguous reporting of testing results.  Specific topics of
these AS documents must be approved by the Area Directors as charter
additions.

The WG will produce a protocol to enable communication among test
equipment that implements the one-way metrics.  The intent is to create
a protocol that provides a base level of functionality that will allow
different manufacturer's equipment that implements the metrics
according to a standard to interoperate.  A protocol requirements
document will guide the protocol design.

The WG will also produce a MIB to retrieve the results of IPPM
metrics, such as one-way delay and loss, to facilitate the
communication of metrics to existing network management systems. Thus,
the group will create a MIB that contains predominantly read only
variables.  If, after the protocol requirements document is finished,
the group decides that it is appropriate to add variables that control
the underlying measurements that the metrics report, such a control
structure may be added as a separate document, subject to review by
the IESG.

The intent of the WG is to cooperate with other appropriate standards
bodies and forums (such as T1A1.3, ITU-T SG 12 and SG 13) to promote
consistent approaches and metrics. Within the IETF process, IPPM
metrics definitions will be subject to as rigorous a scrutiny for
usefulness, clarity, and accuracy as other protocol standards.  The
IPPM WG will interact with other areas of IETF activity whose scope
intersect with the requirement of these specific metrics.  These
include working groups such as BMWG, RMONMIB, and TEWG.

Goals and Milestones:

Done Submit drafts of standard metrics for connectivity and
         treno-bulk-throughput.
Done Submit a framework document describing terms and notions used
         in the IPPM effort, and the creation of metrics by the working
         group to IESG for publication as an Informational RFC.
Done Submit documents on delay and loss to IESG for publication as
         standards-track RFCs.
Done Submit a document on connectivity to IESG for publication as
         a standards-track RFC.
Done Submit framework for bulk transfer capacity to the IESG for
         publication as a Informational RFC.

[Note to Secretariat:  above milestones already exist and go to DONE]

Done Create draft on requirements for a protocol to measure one-way
         delay and loss.

Feb-02 Submit draft on loss pattern sample metrics to the IESG for
         publication as an Informational RFC.

Feb-02 Submit draft on metrics for periodic streams to the IESG for
         publication as a Proposed Standard RFC.

Feb-02 Submit draft on IP delay variation to the IESG for publication
         as a Proposed Standard RFC.

Feb-02 Create initial draft on the definitions of link bandwidth capacity.

Feb-02 First draft for AS on one-way delay and loss. 

Mar-02 Create initial draft on a sensitivity analysis of one-way delay
         and loss metric parameters (companion to the AS).

Mar-02 Submit draft on One-Way Active Measurement Protocol Requirements
         to the IESG for consideration as an Informational RFC.

Mar-02 Create initial draft on a MIB for reporting IPPM metrics.

Apr-02 Create draft on a One-Way Active Measurement Protocol that
         satisfies the requirements document.

Apr-02 Create initial draft on comparing ITU and IETF IP performance
         metrics.

Apr-02 Create initial draft on a packet reordering metric.

Jun-02 Submit link bandwidth capacity definitions draft to the IESG, for
         consideration as an Informational RFC.

Jul-02 Submit draft on bulk transfer capacity metric based on the
         bulk transfer framework (CAP) to the IESG for Proposed Standard.   

Oct-02 Submit recommendation to the IESG on whether to advance, recycle,
         or deprecate RFCs 2678, 2679, 2680, and 2681 (connectivity, loss,
         & delay).

Oct-02 Submit draft on a packet reordering metric to the IESG for    
         Proposed Standard.

Dec-02 Submit AS for one-way delay and loss to the IESG for PS.       

Dec-02 Submit sensitivity analysis of one-way delay and loss, for
         consideration as an Informational RFC.

Feb-03 Submit draft on a MIB for reporting IPPM metrics to the IESG
          for Proposed Standard.                                        

Mar-03 Submit draft on the One-Way Active Measurement Protocol to
          the IESG for consideration as a PS.                  
 
Mar-03 Discuss rechartering or ending working group.

_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
[email-masked]
http://mailhost.advanced.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm