From mailman-admin@ietf.org Tue Apr 1 13:32:13 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA07045 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 13:32:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h31Iu5K06593 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 13:56:05 -0500 Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 13:56:05 -0500 Message-ID: <20030401185605.29326.76815.Mailman@www1.ietf.org> Subject: ietf.org mailing list memberships reminder From: mailman-owner@www1.ietf.org To: ippm-archive@ietf.org X-No-Archive: yes X-Ack: no Sender: mailman-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mailman-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mailman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk This is a reminder, sent out once a month, about your ietf.org mailing list memberships. It includes your subscription info and how to use it to change it or unsubscribe from a list. You can visit the URLs to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. In addition to the URL interfaces, you can also use email to make such changes. For more info, send a message to the '-request' address of the list (for example, ippm-request@ietf.org ) containing just the word 'help' in the message body, and an email message will be sent to you with instructions. *************************************************************************** Note Well All statements related to the activities of the IETF and addressed to the IETF are subject to all provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026, which grants to the IETF and its participants certain licenses and rights in such statements. Such statements include verbal statements in IETF meetings, as well as written and electronic communications made at any time or place, which are addressed to * the IETF plenary session, * any IETF working group or portion thereof, * the IESG, or any member thereof on behalf of the IESG, * the IAB or any member thereof on behalf of the IAB, * any IETF mailing list, including the IETF list itself, any working group or design team list, or any other list functioning under IETF auspices, * the RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function Statements made outside of an IETF meeting, mailing list or other function, that are clearly not intended to be input to an IETF activity, group or function, are not subject to these provisions. *************************************************************************** If you have questions, problems, comments, etc, send them to mailman-owner@www1.ietf.org. Thanks! Passwords for ippm-archive@lists.ietf.org: List Password // URL ---- -------- ippm@ietf.org wurudu https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/options/ippm/ippm-archive%40lists.ietf.org From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 1 16:11:56 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA15285 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:11:56 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h31LZoO20830 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:35:50 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h31LZnK20827 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:35:49 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA15270 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:11:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h31LYDK20715; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:34:13 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h31LQoK20355 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:26:50 -0500 Received: from exch-connector.netcomsystems.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA14990 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:02:25 -0500 (EST) Received: by exch-connector.netcomsystems.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) id ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 13:04:45 -0800 Message-ID: <629E717C12A8694A88FAA6BEF9FFCD441E5489@brigadoon.spirentcom.com> From: "Perser, Jerry" To: "IPPM (E-mail)" Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2003 13:04:42 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Subject: [ippm] RFC3393 selection function question Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , I have a question about Type-P-One-way-ipdv selection function F. In section 2.2 it discuss a parameter "F, a selection function defining unambiguously the two packets from the stream selected for the metric." Can F be "two consecutively received packets?" Looking at Figure 1 in section 2.2, if packet P(j) is lost, is "ddT = dTk - dTi" still valid? I can not think of a reason why not, but I wanted a second opinion. Thanks in advance. Jerry. ___________________________________________________________ Jerry Perser Spirent Communications Director of Test Methodology SmartBits Division Phone: 818.676.2320 26750 Agoura Road Lab: 818.676.2337 Calabasas, CA, 91302 Cell: 818.292.6457 Corp: 818.676.2300 _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 1 16:46:07 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA16780 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:46:07 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h31MA2b24688 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:10:02 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h31MA2K24685 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:10:02 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA16771 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:45:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h31M8bK24625; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:08:37 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h31M5EK23751 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:05:14 -0500 Received: from emerson.torrentnet.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA16629 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:40:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from imperial.torrentnet.com (imperial.torrentnet.com [198.78.51.109]) by emerson.torrentnet.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id h31LhAa00396; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:43:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from malibu.torrentnet.com (malibu.torrentnet.com [198.78.51.100]) by imperial.torrentnet.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id h31LhAg17951; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:43:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from malibu.torrentnet.com (chimento@localhost) by malibu.torrentnet.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id h31LhAq12579; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:43:10 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200304012143.h31LhAq12579@malibu.torrentnet.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.3.1 01/18/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: "Perser, Jerry" cc: "IPPM (E-mail)" Subject: Re: [ippm] RFC3393 selection function question In-reply-to: jerry.perser's message of Tue, 01 Apr 2003 13:04:42 -0800. <629E717C12A8694A88FAA6BEF9FFCD441E5489@brigadoon.spirentcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 16:43:09 -0500 From: Philip Chimento Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Jerry: Well, yes and no. The idea was to give some flexibility to the definition so that groups such as the ITU that wanted to define IPDV as max_delay-min_delay might do so. So you could define a selection function that selects every 3rd packet. But the selection function, once chosen, is fixed. So in the case you bring up, if your selection function is contiguous packet pairs, then it is fixed and if you lose a packet, you lose 2 samples (see discussion of lost packets in the RFC). As the RFC says, you have to make explicit exactly what the selection function is so that anyone using your measurements knows exactly what they mean. Regards, Phil Chimento -- Phil Chimento Ericsson IPI Phone: 240-314-3597 7301 Calhoun Place chimento@torrentnet.com Rockville, Md. 20855 ----------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 1 17:07:00 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA17850 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:07:00 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h31MUuW25802 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:30:56 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h31MUtK25799 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:30:55 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA17826 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:06:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h31MT9K25704; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:29:09 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h31MObK25423 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:24:37 -0500 Received: from kcmso2.proxy.att.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA17359 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:00:09 -0500 (EST) Received: from hogpa.mt.att.com ([135.16.74.2]) by kcmso2.proxy.att.com (AT&T IPNS/MSO-4.0) with ESMTP id h31M2YKN022947; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 16:02:34 -0600 (CST) Received: from acmortonw.att.com by hogpa.mt.att.com (8.8.8+Sun/ATTEMS-1.4.1 sol2) id RAA13331; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:02:32 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20030401165441.00a72b10@135.16.74.2> X-Sender: acm1@135.16.74.2 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 17:02:22 -0500 To: Philip Chimento , "Perser, Jerry" From: Al Morton Subject: Re: [ippm] RFC3393 selection function question Cc: "IPPM (E-mail)" In-Reply-To: <200304012143.h31LhAq12579@malibu.torrentnet.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , I agree, Phil. Using "consecutive received packets" would have variable pairings, depending on loss. The selection function applies at the sending side, is that correct? Al At 04:43 PM 04/01/2003 -0500, Philip Chimento wrote: >Hi Jerry: >Well, yes and no. The idea was to give some flexibility to the >definition so that groups such as the ITU that wanted to define IPDV as >max_delay-min_delay might do so. So you could define a selection >function that selects every 3rd packet. But the selection function, >once chosen, is fixed. So in the case you bring up, if your selection >function is contiguous packet pairs, then it is fixed and if you lose a >packet, you lose 2 samples (see discussion of lost packets in the RFC). >As the RFC says, you have to make explicit exactly what the selection >function is so that anyone using your measurements knows exactly what >they mean. > >Regards, Phil Chimento > >-- >Phil Chimento Ericsson IPI >Phone: 240-314-3597 7301 Calhoun Place >chimento@torrentnet.com Rockville, Md. 20855 >----------------------------------------------------- > >_______________________________________________ >ippm mailing list >ippm@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 1 17:11:44 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA18038 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:11:44 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h31MZdh26159 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:35:39 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h31MZdK26156 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:35:39 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA18025 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:11:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h31MYlK26062; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:34:47 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h31MT3K25695 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:29:03 -0500 Received: from emerson.torrentnet.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA17757 for ; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:04:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from imperial.torrentnet.com (imperial.torrentnet.com [198.78.51.109]) by emerson.torrentnet.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id h31M6wa00599; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:06:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from malibu.torrentnet.com (malibu.torrentnet.com [198.78.51.100]) by imperial.torrentnet.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id h31M6vg19644; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:06:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from malibu.torrentnet.com (chimento@localhost) by malibu.torrentnet.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id h31M6vH13749; Tue, 1 Apr 2003 17:06:57 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <200304012206.h31M6vH13749@malibu.torrentnet.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.3.1 01/18/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: Al Morton cc: "Perser, Jerry" , "IPPM (E-mail)" Subject: Re: [ippm] RFC3393 selection function question In-reply-to: acmorton's message of Tue, 01 Apr 2003 17:02:22 -0500. <5.1.0.14.0.20030401165441.00a72b10@135.16.74.2> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2003 17:06:57 -0500 From: Philip Chimento Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Al: Yes. That was the intent. Perhaps it should have been clearer. Regards, Phil _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Wed Apr 2 11:21:13 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA15782 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:21:13 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h32GjUF22661 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:45:30 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h32GjUK22658 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:45:30 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA15774 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:20:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h32GhrK22497; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:43:53 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h32Ct0K02053 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 07:55:00 -0500 Received: from mailhost.advanced.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA06976 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 07:30:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from zctfs063.nortelnetworks.com (zctfs063.nortelnetworks.com [47.164.128.120]) by mailhost.advanced.org (8.12.6/8.12.6/Debian-8) with ESMTP id h32CWbCN020485 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 07:32:38 -0500 Received: from zctfc040.europe.nortel.com (zctfc040.europe.nortel.com [47.164.129.95]) by zctfs063.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.5/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h32CWZv11997 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 14:32:35 +0200 (MEST) Received: by zctfc040.europe.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <2A5AW0SK>; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 14:32:33 +0200 Message-ID: From: "Johan Claes" To: "'ippm@advanced.org'" Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 14:32:32 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2F913.EE6F0706" X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS-ng (Milter interface) Subject: [ippm] Overview doc of IP metrics? Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2F913.EE6F0706 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hi, is there anybody in the possession of an overview presentation and implementation status of IP metrics (delay, jitter, packet loss) needed to deliver and measure against (real-time or non real time ) SLA's. The IPPM website http://www.advanced.org/IPPM/index.html contains mainly text and RFC doc's Thanks *************************************************************************** Johan Claes Carrier Data Networks EMEA Wireless Segment ************************************************************************** ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2F913.EE6F0706 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Overview doc of IP metrics?

Hi, is there anybody in the possession = of an overview presentation and implementation status of IP metrics = (delay, jitter, packet loss) needed to deliver and measure against = (real-time or non real time ) SLA's. The IPPM website http://www.advanced.org/IPPM/index.html contains = mainly text and RFC doc's

Thanks

*********************************************************= ******************
Johan Claes
Carrier Data Networks EMEA
Wireless Segment
*********************************************************= *****************


------_=_NextPart_001_01C2F913.EE6F0706-- _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Wed Apr 2 11:37:32 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA16772 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:37:31 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h32H1n124017 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:01:49 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h32H1nK24011 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:01:49 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA16749 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:37:00 -0500 (EST) Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h32H0xK23955; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:00:59 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h32Gq5K23160 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:52:05 -0500 Received: from mailhost.advanced.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA16029 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:27:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from birch.ripe.net (birch.ripe.net [193.0.1.96]) by mailhost.advanced.org (8.12.6/8.12.6/Debian-8) with ESMTP id h32GTgCN026883 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 11:29:43 -0500 Received: from laptop.6bone.nl (cow.ripe.net [193.0.1.239]) by birch.ripe.net (8.12.9/8.11.6) with SMTP id h32GTgRp010839; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 18:29:42 +0200 Received: (nullmailer pid 80292 invoked by uid 1000); Wed, 02 Apr 2003 16:29:28 -0000 Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 18:29:28 +0200 From: Mark Santcroos To: Johan Claes Cc: "'ippm\@advanced\.org'" Subject: Re: [ippm] Overview doc of IP metrics? Message-ID: <20030402162928.GA80275@laptop.6bone.nl> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-Handles: MS6-6BONE, MS18417-RIPE X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS-ng (Milter interface) Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Apr 02, 2003 at 02:32:32PM +0200, Johan Claes wrote: > Hi, is there anybody in the possession of an overview presentation and > implementation status of IP metrics (delay, jitter, packet loss) needed to > deliver and measure against (real-time or non real time ) SLA's. The IPPM > website http://www.advanced.org/IPPM/index.html contains mainly text and RFC > doc's http://www.ripe.net/ttm/Documents/ It has a whole bunch of documents, papers and presentations about the RIPE TTM project implementing above mentioned RFC's. It will probably also contain what you are looking for. Mark -- Mark Santcroos RIPE Network Coordination Centre http://www.ripe.net/home/mark/ New Projects Group/TTM _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Wed Apr 2 12:11:49 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA19104 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:11:49 -0500 (EST) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h32Ha8a28094 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:36:08 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h32Ha7K28091 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:36:07 -0500 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA19083 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:11:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h32HYPK27831; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:34:25 -0500 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h32HV4K27562 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:31:04 -0500 Received: from basie.internet2.edu (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA18573 for ; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:06:14 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8624A7B49F; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:08:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from aa107.internet2.edu (aa107.internet2.edu [207.75.164.107]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95F5E7B492; Wed, 2 Apr 2003 12:08:40 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2003 12:07:34 -0500 From: Matthew J Zekauskas To: ippm@ietf.org Cc: Merike Kaeo Message-ID: <852634463.1049285254@localhost> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12pre8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [ippm] draft minutes of the IPPM meeting at IETF56 Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Minutes (as well as all presentations) are available at http://people.internet2.edu/~matt/IPPM/Meetings/ietf56/ Let me know if you have any comments on the minutes; I believe they are due this Friday... --Matt _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Mon Apr 7 11:18:59 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA23492 for ; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:18:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h37FNGq19141 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:23:16 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h37FNG819138 for ; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:23:16 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA23479 for ; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:18:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h37FEq818619; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:14:52 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h37F9I818383 for ; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:09:18 -0400 Received: from mailhost.advanced.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA23071 for ; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:04:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from apollo.cran.uhp-nancy.fr (apollo.cran.uhp-nancy.fr [193.50.39.1]) by mailhost.advanced.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Debian-1) with ESMTP id h37F4MOO023590 for ; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 11:04:23 -0400 Received: from laplace.cran.u-nancy.fr (laplace.cran.uhp-nancy.fr [193.50.39.8]) by apollo.cran.uhp-nancy.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3/KitJF.server) with ESMTP id RAA20838 for ; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 17:04:24 +0200 (METDST) Received: from bleriot.cran.uhp-nancy.fr ([193.50.39.122]) by laplace.cran.u-nancy.fr (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with ESMTP id HCZBBX00.V90 for ; Mon, 7 Apr 2003 17:07:09 +0200 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.1.20030407164500.00a77930@laplace.cran.uhp-nancy.fr> X-Sender: michaut@laplace.cran.uhp-nancy.fr X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2003 17:08:07 +0200 To: ippm@advanced.org From: Fabien Michaut Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-20E45FE2; boundary="=======51E6B47=======" X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS-ng (Milter interface) Subject: [ippm] Calibration error calculation for rtt metric Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --=======51E6B47======= Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-20E45FE2; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I have a question concerning the calculation of the calibration error in RFC 2681 related to roundtrip delay metric. The proposed calibration scheme is the following : e = calibration error such that the reported value is in the range (true value -e) to (true value +e) at least 95 percent of the time. and e = systematic error + random error Here the error can be bounded by determining all the individual uncertainties : 2*Rsource + Hinitial + Hfinal + Hrefl. Rsource is the clock-related uncertainties, Hinitial and Hfinal are the host-related uncertainties, Hrefl is the "Dst producing a response" uncertainties. The proposed calibration consists in : 1. Using a known, isolated LAN in a lab, 2. Sending small test packets In this case, we can approximate the roundtrip time to be zero. Then the measured delay contains only systematic and random error to a 95% confidence. One way to compute the systematic error and the random error is to repeat the experiment many times. The systematic error would then be the median. The 95% confidence interval would be the range from the 2.5th percentile to the 97.5th percentile of these deviations from the true value. The calibration error "e" could then be taken to be the largest absolute value of these two numbers, plus the clock-related uncertainty. So the question is : Why do we have to add the clock-related uncertainty. Isn't it already included in the measured delay? Thanks, Fabien --=======51E6B47======= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-avg=cert; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-20E45FE2 Content-Disposition: inline --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.467 / Virus Database: 266 - Release Date: 01/04/2003 --=======51E6B47=======-- _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 8 16:52:40 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01667 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 16:52:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h38KvWv29213 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 16:57:32 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h38KvW829210 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 16:57:32 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01650 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 16:52:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h38Kk8828554; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 16:46:08 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h38Kef828286 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 16:40:41 -0400 Received: from exch-connector.netcomsystems.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01086 for ; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 16:35:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: by exch-connector.netcomsystems.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) id ; Tue, 8 Apr 2003 13:37:51 -0700 Message-ID: <629E717C12A8694A88FAA6BEF9FFCD441E5495@brigadoon.spirentcom.com> From: "Perser, Jerry" To: "IPPM (E-mail)" Subject: RE: [ippm] RFC3393 selection function question Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2003 13:37:51 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2655.55) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , After rereading RFC3393, I agree the intent was between 2 consecutive transmitted packets. The question I have is, what's wrong with making the selective function between 2 consecutive received packets? I see advantages to this, but no disadvantages. I'll introduce two abbreviations for the following discussion. IPDV-TX is per RFC3393. IPDV-RX is an alternative selection function based on received packets. Both metric will return the same results unless there is reordering, duplicate, or loss. Under reordering IPDV-TX and IPDV-RX will return the same set of numbers, just in a different order. Evaluate the examples in draft-ietf-ippm-reordering-02.txt, both IPDV-TX and IPDV-RX return the same set of numbers. Under duplicate, IPDV-TX only looks at only the first instance, where IPDV-RX gives a result for each and every pair of received packets. The reason for the duplicate is unknown, but at least you can study the effects of delay with IPDV-RX. Loss is the most interesting case. IPDV-TX is blind when there is loss. Suppose you are measuring IPDV over a high speed link. During the measurement it switches to low speed (i.e. delay goes from 1mS to 500mS). The switch over also introduces loss. IPDV-TX will never see this variation of 499mS (500mS - 1mS). I am looking for disadvantages to IPDV-RX. Jerry. > -----Original Message----- > From: Philip Chimento [mailto:chimento@torrentnet.com] > Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2003 2:07 PM > To: Al Morton > Cc: Perser, Jerry; IPPM (E-mail) > Subject: Re: [ippm] RFC3393 selection function question > > > Hi Al: Yes. That was the intent. Perhaps it should have been clearer. > Regards, Phil > _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Thu Apr 10 19:20:39 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA11533 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:20:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3ANQXe24385 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:26:33 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3ANQX824382 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:26:33 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA11513 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:20:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 193l4s-0005C4-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:03:30 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 193l4s-0005C1-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:03:30 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3ANIN824004; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:18:23 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3AKov812607 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:50:57 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA06223 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:44:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 193ieM-0004HB-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:27:58 -0400 Received: from mailhost.advanced.org ([12.29.241.3] ident=root) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 193ieL-0004H8-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:27:57 -0400 Received: from sark.cc.gatech.edu (sark.cc.gatech.edu [130.207.7.23]) by mailhost.advanced.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Debian-1) with ESMTP id h3AKlAOO023553 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:47:10 -0400 Received: from tokyo.cc.gatech.edu (tokyo.cc.gatech.edu [130.207.114.15]) by sark.cc.gatech.edu (8.12.9/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h3AKl9DN027519; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:47:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (dovrolis@localhost) by tokyo.cc.gatech.edu (8.12.9/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h3AKl78J024458; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:47:08 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 16:47:07 -0400 (EDT) From: Constantine Dovrolis To: ippm@advanced.org cc: Manish Jain , Ravi Shanker Prasad Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS-ng (Milter interface) Subject: [ippm] pathrate & pathload Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , We would like to announce a new release of our bandwidth estimation tools: pathrate and pathload. Pathrate measures end-to-end capacity (aka bottleneck bandwidth), while Pathload measures end-to-end available bandwidth. Both tools are available at: http://www.pathrate.org The major differences in the new versions: Pathrate - 2.3.0 ---------------- * The tool has been also tested in Gigabit Ethernet paths. We added functionality to deal with interrupt coalescion at the receiver. * A "quick termination" mode (option -Q) was added for an estimate after just a few seconds. Useful for frequent light-weight measurements. * Support for netlogger output format. Pathload - 1.1.0 ---------------- * The previous version was able to measure available bandwidth only in the 2Mbps-120Mbps range. The latest version has been successfully tested in both low bandwidth paths (dial-up, DSL, cable modems), and in high bandwidth paths (OC-3, OC-12, GigEthernet). If the receiver does interrupt coalescion, the tool can only report a lower bound on the available bandwidth. * The tool can now automatically choose an appropriate bandwidth resolution (previously this was a user-specified parameter). * Support for netlogger output format. Enjoy, Constantinos, Manish, and Ravi. _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Apr 11 09:10:02 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA11307 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 09:10:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3BDGDP25066 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 09:16:13 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3BDGD825063 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 09:16:13 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA11270 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 09:09:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 193y1V-00025Z-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 08:52:53 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 193y1U-00025W-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 08:52:52 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3BD3u823663; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 09:03:56 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3BAYv813549 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 06:34:57 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA05975 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 06:28:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 193vVU-0000nX-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 06:11:40 -0400 Received: from mailhost.advanced.org ([12.29.241.3] ident=root) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 193vVT-0000nU-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 06:11:39 -0400 Received: from doarim.bgu.ac.il (bgusoft.bgu.ac.il [132.72.138.92]) by mailhost.advanced.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Debian-1) with ESMTP id h3BAUpOO012958 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 06:30:52 -0400 Received: from gatekeeper1.bgu.ac.il ([132.72.138.92]) by doarim.bgu.ac.il with ESMTP id <20030411103049.BEJA10842.doarim@gatekeeper1.bgu.ac.il> for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 13:30:49 +0300 Received: from gatekeeper1.bgu.ac.il (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gatekeeper1.bgu.ac.il (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA01225 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 13:30:49 +0300 (IDT) Received: from LYANDRES1 ([132.72.51.127]) by gatekeeper1.bgu.ac.il (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id NAA01211 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2003 13:30:48 +0300 (IDT) Message-ID: <000801c30015$6ac82280$7f334884@LYANDRES1> From: "Vladimir Lyandres" To: Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 12:30:47 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0005_01C30026.2E2611F0" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS-ng (Milter interface) Subject: [ippm] (no subject) Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C30026.2E2611F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dear all, may be somebody can explain me whether instant samples from correlated = continuois process taken by poisson pulses with mutually independent random magnitudes are mutually = independent?=20 VL =20 ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C30026.2E2611F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="windows-1255" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear all,
 
may be somebody can explain me = whether instant=20 samples from correlated continuois process taken by poisson
pulses with mutually independent random = magnitudes=20 are mutually independent? 
 
VL  
------=_NextPart_000_0005_01C30026.2E2611F0-- _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Sun Apr 13 23:17:23 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA11131 for ; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:17:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3E3Oop03564 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:24:50 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3E3On803561 for ; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:24:49 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA11110 for ; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:16:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 194uVB-000773-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:19:25 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 194uVB-00076z-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:19:25 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3E3Mw803504; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:22:58 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3E3Fp803311 for ; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:15:51 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA10932; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:07:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 194uMV-00074T-00; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:10:27 -0400 Received: from basie.internet2.edu ([207.75.164.22]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 194uMU-00074Q-00; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:10:26 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B8587B4A6; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:10:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from slip-12-65-37-142.mis.prserv.net (slip-32-103-128-178.ny.us.prserv.net [32.103.128.178]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id D52B77B4A3; Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:10:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2003 23:09:10 -0400 From: Matthew J Zekauskas To: minutes@ietf.org Cc: Matt Zekauskas , Merike Kaeo , ippm@ietf.org Message-ID: <398028985.1050275350@localhost> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.2.1 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12pre8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [ippm] Minutes for IPPM at IETF 56 / San Francisco Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit IP Performance Metrics WG (ippm) Tuesday, March 18, 2003 at 15:45 to 16:45 ========================================= The meeting was moderated by the working group chairs, Matt Zekauskas and Merike Kaeo. Dave McDysan took notes, which were edited into these minutes by the chairs. Thanks also to Simon Leinen, who scribed the meeting into Jabber; some of his notes were used while generating this text. AGENDA: 1. Agenda bashing, Working Group Milestones Status 2. One-way Metric Applicability Statement 3. Discussion on One-Way Active Measurements Protocol 4. Discussion on Packet Reordering 5. IPPM Reporting MIB 6. IPPM Metrics Registry 1. Agenda bashing & Working Group Milestones Status There were no suggestions to modify the agenda. Slides presented by Matt Z noted a new RFC, and overviewed the current work. Matt called for Implementation Reports to move to existing metrics to draft standard - send Email to a chair if you know of an implementation. (Advancement requires an advancing metrics RFC approved by the transport ADs and the IESG first, however; that work is currently in the Transport WG.) Matt noted there were a number of milestones that had no progress. If no interest is expressed, they will be dropped from the charter. We are looking for people to contribute on the following topics (assuming the group still feels they are worthwhile): * parameter sensitivity * ITU (e.g., Y.1540) vs IETF metrics Al Morton indicated that these are similar, recommend dropping this item from the charter * Path bottleneck definitions, * CAP (or other BTC metric) 2. One-way Metric Applicability Statement --Henk Uijterwaal Henk noted that there were no comments on the draft since the Atlanta meeting, and that perhaps it just wasn't time to do this work. However, Merike has been working to see if there was interest in the provider community, and today Henk and Merike met with people from two providers and they were interested in moving the work forward. They were looking for specific questions; Henk and Merike will identify areas where input is needed from people, and they will send questions off to providers. They would welcome help. 3. Discussion on One-Way Active Measurements Protocol -- Stanislav Shalunov First, the requirements document. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-owdp-reqs-06.txt The requirements document passed WG last call, and IESG comments are being addressed. Steve Bellovin was worried about replay attacks; but in some sense that is what we want to measure... we would like to measure duplication, which may or may not be malicious. Similarly, an attacker could add delay and we would like to measure that as well. We do have a requirement that traffic is hard to spot, for example there should be no fixed port number. It would be non-trivial to place OWDP traffic in a separate queue. Allison Mankin came to the mike as AD. She mentioned that authorization text for control protocol design needs to be strengthened - it needs to be more than IP address per current draft. OWAMP needs strong authentication for users since it is a powerful protocol. Anonymous identity wording was also problematic. Stanislav clarified that cryptographic authentication implementation is required; however, a user could request a less secure authentication (e.g., based on IP addresss) Allison, Stanislav, Merike to agree on wording -- could be along lines of clarifying mandatory implementation but optional invocation in the security considerations section. Next, we moved to the current OWAMP protocol specification. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-owdp-06.txt There are changes in the current draft based upon implementation experience, they are shown in the slides. Three new items: First, advertise server uptime at the beginning of each connection (helps with long-term monitoring) -- this disambiguates between whether the other end crashed or the network failed. Second, stop-sessions now supplies number of packets sent in each appropriate session to help decide if the last packet was lost. Third, the algorithm to compute exponentially distributed pseudo-random deviates was documented, and sample code supplied to ensure that all implementations generate the same sequence. Vectors will be added to allow code testing. 4. Discussion on Packet Reordering -- Al Morton http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-reordering-02.txt As background, group asked to review Stanislav's n-reordering draft. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-shalunov-reordering-definition-02. txt There was an independent draft from Colorado State also submitted, but none of the authors were at meeting. A minority of people in the room had read the draft. Al gave a 'tutorial' on reordering. He noted that the independent draft -- a "density" metric -- took into account lost packets, and was therefore not acceptable. Out of order packets can be viewed as "early" or "late". "Late" packets trigger reordering computation at the receiver. We had trouble merging all metrics to section 4.2, in particular we could not include Stanislav's n-reordering without change. However, there was significant editing to unify notation. A "gap" metric was added (section 4.4) based on a input from Jon Bennett, as the distance between the beginning of reordering events. Matt Mathis asked how this handle nested reordering events caused by multiple reordering events. e.g., the arrival is 1,2,4,5,6,7,9,10,11,8,3,12. Jon stated that this metric might be trying to keep track of too much state and structure. Authors to think about this and discuss. Al proposed to fix the problem (with merging the metrics) in the draft by reorganization. Keep section 3 (determining whether or not packet order is maintained), then to quantify the extent of the changes split into two sections: Sec 4 - Metrics leaning to network characterization (frequency, distance, and a metric for multiple events (e.g., reordering gap). Sec 5 - Metrics primarily for receiver assessment. n-reordering goes here (n=3 predicts NewReno TCP unnecessary retransmissions). Potentially a modified version of the reordering density metric proposed. Matt noted that we should be discerning when adding metrics; there should be a good reason for adding another. A question from the group asked if reordering distance referred to a distribution or average. Al noted that it depends on whether you are talking about singleton metrics or statistics. The questioner clarified that he was assuming there are multiple samples. Stanslav mentioned mentioned that you can have a complete distribution if the number of values presented is small, and can then generate statistics. Al presented his idea of a potential fix to make n-reordering match the 4.2.3 singleton definition is to change "all" to "ANY" in Definition 1. The intent is to identify all packets that participate in a reordering event. [Chair note: We believe Al is looking to change the statement from universally quantified to existentially quantified. The proposed fix conveys this idea, but isn't correct mathematically (it has the same semantics as the original statement).] Greg Woodhouse asked if the measure is trying to quantify amount of effort (resources steps, memory) to restore order? Is it a hamming distance? Al Morton replied no, it is trying to quantify amount of buffer needed to restore order. Many metrics do not consider loss. Stanislav said that n-reordering was measuring the quantity of packets that are as good as lost for natural application behavior. Dave McDysan asked if the VoIP example dropped from Stanislav's draft? Stanislav answered that it was not intended to be dropped, will look at this again. Al Morton noted that what is important for VoIP is the time measure of reordering (a packet that arrives too late is as good as lost). In addition, VoIP jitter absorption buffers can reset. 5. IPPM Reporting MIB -- Jessie Jewitt http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-reporting-mib-02.txt See slides for detailed changes. Lots of editing for simplification, presentation, and to correct errors found when running SMILINT. They have a working prototype SNMP agent. TypeP was changed from an octet string to snmpadminstring for readability. Added scalars to control what happens when a log is full; suspend, resume and wrap the log were defined based on previous CMIP experience. Comments are solicited. A number of changes were made to the tables, based on implementation and working group suggestions. See slides. A couple of open issues were noted. First, is there a need for a count parameter for TypeP now that it is text instead of binary? Second, is there a problem with spaces in TypePaddress? Perhaps it too needs a count parameter. There were no immediate comments on these issues. Andy Bierman had some comments on the MIB, which he will send in detail to the list. In the meeting, Andy noted that some of the changes were not consistent across ippm OwnerString, SnmpAdminString. There is also still overlap with the control provided by the owners and shared-owners table and VACM. [A standard SNMPv3 access control method.] Emile noted that in the module compliance section this control is not mandatory if VACM is used; Andy did not feel that would be enough to get approved. The recommendation is to remove this control. Andy noted that the MIB has been cleaned up substantially; and that this is a very heavyweight (from an implementation resource point of view) MIB. This is in the same category as RMON probes with a dedicated processor and significant storage. The limit of the index on history (64K entries) seemed artificially low; Andy suggested that some case study thinking should be done to see how quickly this would wrap. Why wasn't it just made a 32 bit quantity? 6. Metrics Registry discussion --Emile Stephan http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-02.txt Finally, and with only a few minutes remaining, Emile Stephan presented the changes to the metrics registry. See the slides for specific points. The biggest changes are with the tree (the "draft" subtree was removed), and instructions for draft authors that want to add a new metric to the registry were clarified. Emile thinks that the draft is stable, and is looking for a last call. He suggested that people review by mid-April, and then a last call should be issued. Andy Bierman noted that the registry looks good; it has been cleaned up. He also stated that RMON needs the registry. Matt said that a last-call will begin soon, and reiterated that the list will be moved to ietf.org (ippm@ietf.org) soon after this meeting. _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 15 10:36:19 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA29821 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:36:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3FEiSU08846 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:44:28 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FEiS808843 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:44:28 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA29814 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:35:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195RZj-0002q7-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:38:20 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195RZj-0002q3-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:38:19 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FEhP808726; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:43:25 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FEZ9807507 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:35:09 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA29365 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:26:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195RQi-0002ma-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:29:00 -0400 Received: from web15210.mail.bjs.yahoo.com ([202.3.77.140]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 195RQg-0002mX-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:28:59 -0400 Message-ID: <20030415142833.10045.qmail@web15210.mail.bjs.yahoo.com> Received: from [61.174.154.4] by web15210.mail.bjs.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 22:28:33 CST Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 22:28:33 +0800 (CST) From: =?gb2312?q?Jing=20Shen?= To: ippm@ietf.org Cc: end2end-interest@postel.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0-88215336-1050416913=:9202" Subject: [ippm] packet size distribution of Internet traffic Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --0-88215336-1050416913=:9202 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by www1.ietf.org id h3FEhP808726 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, I'm reading some paper on router arch., and found someone announced t= hat average packet size is about 1000b. But some other persons said the p= acket size distributes in a large spetrum and most of them are of 64byte = or 1024byte. I want to know is there any paper on this? thanks in advanc= e. =20 Jing Shen State Key Lab of CAD&CG ZheJiang University(YuQuan) HangZhou, ZheJiang Province 310027 P.R.China --------------------------------- Do You Yahoo!? "=D1=C5=BB=A2=D1=FB=C4=E3=B2=CE=D3=EBCCTV-2=B6=D4=BB=B0=BD=DA=C4=BF=B5=F7= =B2=E9=A3=BA=D2=C6=B6=AF=A1=A2=C1=AA=CD=A8=A1=A2=C1=E9=CD=A8=A3=AC=D2=AA=CB= =B5=B0=AE=C4=E3=B2=BB=C8=DD=D2=D7 --0-88215336-1050416913=:9202 Content-Type: text/html; charset=gb2312 X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by www1.ietf.org id h3FEhP808726 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,
 
I'm reading some paper on router arch., and found someone announced = that average packet size is about 1000b. But some other persons said the = packet size distributes in a large spetrum and most of them are of&n= bsp;64byte or 1024byte.
 
I want to know is there any paper on this?
 
thanks in advance.
 
 


Jing Shen

State Key Lab of CA= D&CG
ZheJiang University(YuQuan)
HangZhou, ZheJiang Province 31= 0027
P.R.China


Do You Yahoo!?
"=D1=C5=BB=A2=D1=FB=C4=E3=B2=CE=D3=EBCCTV-2=B6=D4=BB=B0= =BD=DA=C4=BF=B5=F7=B2=E9=A3=BA=D2=C6=B6=AF=A1=A2=C1=AA=CD=A8=A1=A2=C1=E9=CD= =A8=A3=AC=D2=AA=CB=B5=B0=AE=C4=E3=B2=BB=C8=DD=D2=D7 --0-88215336-1050416913=:9202-- _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 15 11:20:46 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA01208 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:20:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3FFSuv11562 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:28:56 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FFSu811559 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:28:56 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA01198 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:20:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195SGk-00033A-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:22:46 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195SGk-000337-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:22:46 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FFQR811437; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:26:27 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FF9n810693 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:09:49 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA00552 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:01:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195RyG-0002x5-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:03:40 -0400 Received: from smtp802.mail.sc5.yahoo.com ([66.163.168.181]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 195RyF-0002x0-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:03:39 -0400 Received: from adsl-63-202-182-219.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net (HELO agni) (bannai@pacbell.net@63.202.182.219 with login) by smtp-sbc-v1.mail.vip.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 15 Apr 2003 15:03:46 -0000 From: "Vinay Bannai" To: "Jing Shen" , Cc: Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 08:03:46 -0700 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0029_01C30325.8A363EF0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 In-Reply-To: <20030415142833.10045.qmail@web15210.mail.bjs.yahoo.com> Importance: Normal Subject: [ippm] RE: [e2e] packet size distribution of Internet traffic Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C30325.8A363EF0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by www1.ietf.org id h3FFQR811437 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Actually, I thought most packet size distributions in the internet had th= ree peaks. One at around 64 bytes (for TCP ACKs), one at around 1500 bytes (m= ax MTU of ethernets) and finally at around 576 bytes (for TCP implementation= s that don't use path MTU). Vinay -----Original Message----- From: end2end-interest-admin@postel.org [mailto:end2end-interest-admin@postel.org]On Behalf Of Jing Shen Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 7:29 AM To: ippm@ietf.org Cc: end2end-interest@postel.org Subject: [e2e] packet size distribution of Internet traffic Hi, I'm reading some paper on router arch., and found someone announced tha= t average packet size is about 1000b. But some other persons said the packe= t size distributes in a large spetrum and most of them are of 64byte or 1024byte. I want to know is there any paper on this? thanks in advance. Jing Shen State Key Lab of CAD&CG ZheJiang University(YuQuan) HangZhou, ZheJiang Province 310027 P.R.China -------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- -- Do You Yahoo!? "=D1=C5=BB=A2=D1=FB=C4=E3=B2=CE=D3=EBCCTV-2=B6=D4=BB=B0=BD=DA=C4=BF=B5=F7= =B2=E9=A3=BA=D2=C6=B6=AF=A1=A2=C1=AA=CD=A8=A1=A2=C1=E9=CD=A8=A3=AC=D2=AA=CB= =B5=B0=AE=C4=E3=B2=BB=C8=DD=D2=D7 ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C30325.8A363EF0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Actually, I thought most packet size distributions in the = internet had=20 three peaks. One at around 64 bytes (for TCP ACKs), one at around 1500 = bytes=20 (max MTU of ethernets) and finally at around 576 bytes (for TCP = implementations=20 that don't use path MTU).
 
Vinay
-----Original Message-----
From:=20 end2end-interest-admin@postel.org=20 [mailto:end2end-interest-admin@postel.org]On Behalf Of Jing=20 Shen
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 7:29 AM
To:=20 ippm@ietf.org
Cc: = end2end-interest@postel.org
Subject:=20 [e2e] packet size distribution of Internet = traffic

Hi,
 
I'm reading some paper on router arch., and found someone = announced that=20 average packet size is about 1000b. But some other persons said the = packet=20 size distributes in a large spetrum and most of them are=20 of 64byte or 1024byte.
 
I want to know is there any paper on this?
 
thanks in advance.
 
 


Jing Shen

State Key Lab of = CAD&CG
ZheJiang University(YuQuan)
HangZhou, ZheJiang = Province=20 310027
P.R.China


Do You Yahoo!?
"=D1=C5=BB=A2=D1=FB=C4=E3=B2=CE=D3=EBCCTV-2=B6=D4=BB=B0=BD= =DA=C4=BF=B5=F7=B2=E9=A3=BA=D2=C6=B6=AF=A1=A2=C1=AA=CD=A8=A1=A2=C1=E9=CD=A8= =A3=AC=D2=AA=CB=B5=B0=AE=C4=E3=B2=BB=C8=DD=D2=D7
<= /HTML> ------=_NextPart_000_0029_01C30325.8A363EF0-- _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 15 12:19:30 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03031 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:19:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3FGRgN16770 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:27:42 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FGRg816767 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:27:42 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03000 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:19:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195TBb-0003O7-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:21:31 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195TBa-0003O4-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:21:30 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FGQW816684; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:26:32 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FGNV816530 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:23:31 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA02898 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:14:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195T7Y-0003ML-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:17:20 -0400 Received: from rms21.rommon.net ([193.64.42.200]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195T7X-0003MI-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:17:19 -0400 Received: from PHE (h93.vuokselantie10.fi [193.64.42.147]) by rms21.rommon.net (8.12.6p2/8.12.6) with SMTP id h3FGHLqo073309; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 19:17:22 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from pete@he.iki.fi) Message-ID: <050a01c3036a$946e7730$932a40c1@PHE> From: "Petri Helenius" To: "Vinay Bannai" , "Jing Shen" , Cc: References: Subject: Re: [ippm] RE: [e2e] packet size distribution of Internet traffic Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 19:17:54 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0507_01C30383.B72DB150" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0507_01C30383.B72DB150 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The 576 peak seems to be mostly gone nowadays. It also should be noted that the packet travelling is 40 bytes, not 64. If you say 64 you should = also say 1514 so we would be comparing apples to apples. (packets travelling = in=20 Ethernet) Pete ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Vinay Bannai=20 To: Jing Shen ; ippm@ietf.org=20 Cc: end2end-interest@postel.org=20 Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 6:03 PM Subject: [ippm] RE: [e2e] packet size distribution of Internet traffic Actually, I thought most packet size distributions in the internet had = three peaks. One at around 64 bytes (for TCP ACKs), one at around 1500 = bytes (max MTU of ethernets) and finally at around 576 bytes (for TCP = implementations that don't use path MTU).=20 Vinay -----Original Message----- From: end2end-interest-admin@postel.org = [mailto:end2end-interest-admin@postel.org]On Behalf Of Jing Shen Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 7:29 AM To: ippm@ietf.org Cc: end2end-interest@postel.org Subject: [e2e] packet size distribution of Internet traffic Hi, I'm reading some paper on router arch., and found someone announced = that average packet size is about 1000b. But some other persons said the = packet size distributes in a large spetrum and most of them are of = 64byte or 1024byte. I want to know is there any paper on this?=20 thanks in advance. Jing Shen State Key Lab of CAD&CG ZheJiang University(YuQuan) HangZhou, ZheJiang Province 310027 P.R.China=20 -------------------------------------------------------------------------= --- Do You Yahoo!? = "=D1=C5=BB=A2=D1=FB=C4=E3=B2=CE=D3=EBCCTV-2=B6=D4=BB=B0=BD=DA=C4=BF=B5=F7= =B2=E9=A3=BA=D2=C6=B6=AF=A1=A2=C1=AA=CD=A8=A1=A2=C1=E9=CD=A8=A3=AC=D2=AA=CB= =B5=B0=AE=C4=E3=B2=BB=C8=DD=D2=D7 ------=_NextPart_000_0507_01C30383.B72DB150 Content-Type: text/html; charset="gb2312" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The 576 peak seems to be mostly gone = nowadays. It=20 also should be noted
that the packet travelling is 40 bytes, = not 64. If=20 you say 64 you should also
say 1514 so we would be comparing = apples to apples.=20 (packets travelling in
Ethernet)
 
Pete
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Vinay = Bannai=20
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 = 6:03=20 PM
Subject: [ippm] RE: [e2e] = packet size=20 distribution of Internet traffic

Actually, I thought most packet size distributions in the = internet had=20 three peaks. One at around 64 bytes (for TCP ACKs), one at around 1500 = bytes=20 (max MTU of ethernets) and finally at around 576 bytes (for TCP=20 implementations that don't use path MTU).
 
Vinay
-----Original Message-----
From: end2end-interest-admin@= postel.org=20 [mailto:end2end-interest-admin@postel.org]On Behalf Of Jing=20 Shen
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 7:29 AM
To: = ippm@ietf.org
Cc: end2end-interest@postel.org
Subject:=20 [e2e] packet size distribution of Internet = traffic

Hi,
 
I'm reading some paper on router arch., and found someone = announced=20 that average packet size is about 1000b. But some other persons said = the=20 packet size distributes in a large spetrum and most of them are = of 64byte or 1024byte.
 
I want to know is there any paper on this?
 
thanks in advance.
 
 


Jing Shen

State Key Lab = of=20 CAD&CG
ZheJiang University(YuQuan)
HangZhou, ZheJiang = Province=20 310027
P.R.China=20


Do You Yahoo!?
"=D1=C5=BB=A2=D1=FB=C4=E3=B2=CE=D3=EBCCTV-2=B6=D4=BB=B0=BD= =DA=C4=BF=B5=F7=B2=E9=A3=BA=D2=C6=B6=AF=A1=A2=C1=AA=CD=A8=A1=A2=C1=E9=CD=A8= =A3=AC=D2=AA=CB=B5=B0=AE=C4=E3=B2=BB=C8=DD=D2=D7
------=_NextPart_000_0507_01C30383.B72DB150-- _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 15 12:28:02 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03168 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:28:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3FGaEB17198 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:36:14 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FGaE817195 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:36:14 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03164 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:27:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195TJr-0003Qv-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:30:03 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195TJr-0003Qs-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:30:03 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FGZN817148; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:35:23 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FFo2813439 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:50:02 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA01820 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:41:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195Sb9-00039p-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:43:51 -0400 Received: from newman.nssi.telus.com ([208.38.59.87]) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 195Sb9-00039m-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 11:43:51 -0400 Received: (qmail 16815 invoked from network); 15 Apr 2003 15:43:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO abmsg003.corp.ads) (142.178.61.86) by 142.178.52.235 with SMTP; 15 Apr 2003 15:43:52 -0000 Received: from 142.178.55.76 by abmsg003.corp.ads with ESMTP (Tumbleweed MMS SMTP Relay (MMS v4.7);); Tue, 15 Apr 2003 09:43:51 -0600 X-Server-Uuid: 62333db7-76d7-4c1e-8695-ae6a73d58b85 Received: by tac_nt1.ent.agt.ab.ca with Internet Mail Service ( 5.5.2653.19) id ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 09:32:34 -0600 Message-ID: From: "Kris Foster" To: "'Jing Shen'" , ippm@ietf.org cc: end2end-interest@postel.org Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 09:37:08 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) X-WSS-ID: 1282F73D1008085-01-01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [ippm] RE: [e2e] packet size distribution of Internet traffic Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jing http://mailhost.advanced.org/archives/ippm/2001-August/001513.html http://www.caida.org/analysis/AIX/plen_hist/ Many people go with the IMIX distribution when testing, 7:4:1 (64 byte, 570 byte, 1518 byte). Kris -----Original Message----- From: Jing Shen [mailto:jshen_cad@yahoo.com.cn] Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 10:29 AM To: ippm@ietf.org Cc: end2end-interest@postel.org Subject: [e2e] packet size distribution of Internet traffic Hi, I'm reading some paper on router arch., and found someone announced that average packet size is about 1000b. But some other persons said the packet size distributes in a large spetrum and most of them are of 64byte or 1024byte. I want to know is there any paper on this? thanks in advance. Jing Shen State Key Lab of CAD&CG ZheJiang University(YuQuan) HangZhou, ZheJiang Province 310027 P.R.China Do You Yahoo!? "??????CCTV-2??????:????????,??????? _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 15 12:30:14 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03257 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:30:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3FGcQq18217 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:38:26 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FGcQ818214 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:38:26 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03236 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:29:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195TLy-0003S8-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:32:14 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195TLy-0003S5-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:32:14 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FGbT817871; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:37:29 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FGLt816322 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:21:55 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA02772 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:13:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195T60-0003KU-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:15:44 -0400 Received: from pmesmtp02.wcom.com ([199.249.20.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195T5z-0003KM-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:15:43 -0400 Received: from pmismtp04.wcomnet.com ([166.38.62.39]) by firewall.wcom.com (Iplanet MTA ) with ESMTP id <0HDE00JBV7SWPK@firewall.wcom.com> for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:14:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pmismtp04.wcomnet.com by pmismtp04.wcomnet.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 0.7 (built May 7 2002)) with SMTP id <0HDE00H017SG4F@pmismtp04.wcomnet.com> for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:14:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from durian ([166.60.2.77]) by pmismtp04.wcomnet.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.1 HotFix 0.7 (built May 7 2002)) with ESMTP id <0HDE00ELJ7SN67@pmismtp04.wcomnet.com> for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:14:47 +0000 (GMT) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 12:14:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Jambi Ganbar Subject: Re: [ippm] RE: [e2e] packet size distribution of Internet traffic In-reply-to: X-X-Sender: bigj@durian Cc: ippm@ietf.org Reply-to: jambi.ganbar@mci.com Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h3FGLt816323 Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by www1.ietf.org id h3FGbT817871 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h3FGcQ818214 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit An Average for packet size for "Internet" traffic is largely meaningless. A distribution is a more accurate way of looking at traffic. Caida.org has several papers and web pages discussing the topic and from what I have seen in a few networks they still hold true. Best Jambi vBNS Engineering (703) 886 1714 On Tue, 15 Apr 2003, Vinay Bannai wrote: > Actually, I thought most packet size distributions in the internet had three > peaks. One at around 64 bytes (for TCP ACKs), one at around 1500 bytes (max > MTU of ethernets) and finally at around 576 bytes (for TCP implementations > that don't use path MTU). > > Vinay > -----Original Message----- > From: end2end-interest-admin@postel.org > [mailto:end2end-interest-admin@postel.org]On Behalf Of Jing Shen > Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 7:29 AM > To: ippm@ietf.org > Cc: end2end-interest@postel.org > Subject: [e2e] packet size distribution of Internet traffic > > > Hi, > > I'm reading some paper on router arch., and found someone announced that > average packet size is about 1000b. But some other persons said the packet > size distributes in a large spetrum and most of them are of 64byte or > 1024byte. > > I want to know is there any paper on this? > > thanks in advance. > > > > > Jing Shen > > State Key Lab of CAD&CG > ZheJiang University(YuQuan) > HangZhou, ZheJiang Province 310027 > P.R.China > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > Do You Yahoo!? > "雅虎邀你参与CCTV-2对话节目调查：移动、联通、灵通，要说爱你不容易 > > _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 15 14:18:24 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05998 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:18:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3FIQda25147 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:26:39 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FIQd825144 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:26:39 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA05988 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:17:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195V2f-0003rh-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:20:25 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195V2f-0003re-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:20:25 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FIPf825106; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:25:41 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FI0l823257 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:00:47 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA05439 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 13:52:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195Ude-0003l8-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 13:54:34 -0400 Received: from login.caida.org ([192.172.226.78]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195Udd-0003l5-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 13:54:33 -0400 Received: from login.caida.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by login.caida.org (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h3FHse2e099269 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:54:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from dmoore@localhost) by login.caida.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h3FHserB099268; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:54:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 10:54:40 -0700 From: David Moore To: Jambi Ganbar Cc: ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] RE: [e2e] packet size distribution of Internet traffic Message-ID: <20030415105440.F46386@login.caida.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by login.caida.org id h3FHse2e099269 X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h3FI0p823260 Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by www1.ietf.org id h3FIPf825106 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h3FIQd825144 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Tue, Apr 15, 2003 at 12:14:22PM -0400, Jambi Ganbar wrote: > An Average for packet size for "Internet" traffic is largely meaningless. > A distribution is a more accurate way of looking at traffic. Caida.org has > several papers and web pages discussing the topic and from what I have seen in a > few networks they still hold true. http://www.caida.org/outreach/papers/2002/Frag/frag.pdf is the most recent caida paper I can think of with this information. figure 13 has a fairly representative CDF of packet size distribution from a wide variety of network types in March 2001. But it still seemed to be reasonably correct last time we looked. The trend has mostly been to reduction of the bump around 576 (default MTU) and increase at the high end (from path MTU discovery). As Jambi says, using average size not a good approach when 50% are small (<60 bytes) and 25% are large (>1000bytes). -- david > Best > Jambi > > vBNS Engineering > (703) 886 1714 > > On Tue, 15 Apr 2003, Vinay Bannai wrote: > > > Actually, I thought most packet size distributions in the internet had three > > peaks. One at around 64 bytes (for TCP ACKs), one at around 1500 bytes (max > > MTU of ethernets) and finally at around 576 bytes (for TCP implementations > > that don't use path MTU). > > > > Vinay > > -----Original Message----- > > From: end2end-interest-admin@postel.org > > [mailto:end2end-interest-admin@postel.org]On Behalf Of Jing Shen > > Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 7:29 AM > > To: ippm@ietf.org > > Cc: end2end-interest@postel.org > > Subject: [e2e] packet size distribution of Internet traffic > > > > > > Hi, > > > > I'm reading some paper on router arch., and found someone announced that > > average packet size is about 1000b. But some other persons said the packet > > size distributes in a large spetrum and most of them are of 64byte or > > 1024byte. > > > > I want to know is there any paper on this? > > > > thanks in advance. > > > > > > > > > > Jing Shen > > > > State Key Lab of CAD&CG > > ZheJiang University(YuQuan) > > HangZhou, ZheJiang Province 310027 > > P.R.China > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -- > > Do You Yahoo!? > > "雅虎邀你参与CCTV-2对话节目调查：移动、联通、灵通，要说爱你不容易 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > ippm mailing list > ippm@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 15 16:49:07 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA11209 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:49:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3FKvOE03492 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:57:24 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FKvO803489 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:57:24 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA11203 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:48:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195XOV-0004WU-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:51:07 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195XOV-0004WR-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:51:07 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FKsk803297; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:54:46 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3FKmQ803041 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:48:26 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA10996 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:39:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195XFp-0004TO-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:42:09 -0400 Received: from goku.engr.colostate.edu ([129.82.224.16]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195XFp-0004TL-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 16:42:09 -0400 Received: from engr.colostate.edu (zurix.engr.colostate.edu [129.82.224.183]) by goku.engr.colostate.edu (8.12.8/8.12.0.Beta7) with ESMTP id h3FKfqww006835 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:41:52 -0600 (MDT) Message-ID: <3E9C6E31.8000001@engr.colostate.edu> Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:40:17 -0600 From: Nischal M Piratla User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.1) Gecko/20020823 Netscape/7.0 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ippm@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ECS-MailScanner: Found to be clean Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [ippm] Reorder Density Java Applet - ref: metric to measure packet reordering. Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all, Here is a link that will take you to a Java Applet for the display of Reorder Density metric for any given sequence of numbers. http://www.engr.colostate.edu/ece/Research/cnrl/Reorder_Density.html You should be able to enter any sequence of numbers with spaces or commas between the numbers. We have used ptplot in building this applet. We are currently working on the next version of the draft. Please feel free to send your comments on the draft and applet too! Thanks, Nischal Piratla *********************************************** Research Assistant Computer Networking Research Laboratory Department of Electrical and Computer Eng. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523 Voice: +1 970-491-7974 Fax: +1 970-491-2249 http://www.engr.colostate.edu/ece/Research/cnrl *********************************************** _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 15 23:08:12 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA20981 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:08:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3G3GbJ30166 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:16:37 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3G3Gb830160 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:16:37 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA20960 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:07:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195dJM-0006DK-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:10:12 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195dJL-0006DH-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:10:11 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3G3Bx829972; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:11:59 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3G38m829835 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:08:48 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA20777 for ; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 22:59:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195dBo-0006AW-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:02:24 -0400 Received: from mail.npd.ufsc.br ([150.162.2.2]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 195dBn-0006AT-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 15 Apr 2003 23:02:23 -0400 Received: from localhost (carlson@localhost) by mail.npd.ufsc.br (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA13434 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2003 00:01:55 -0300 Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 00:01:54 -0300 (GRNLNDST) From: Augusto Castelan Carlson To: ippm@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Subject: [ippm] measurement tools & SNMP agent Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi, looking the mailing list archive, I found some tools (pathchar, clink, nettime, etc.). I would like to know what tools you are using do measure the standard metric from the RFCs (RRT, delay variation, etc). At the email "[ippm] Minutes for IPPM at IETF 56 / San Francisco" I saw that people who develops the IPPM-REPORTING-MIB has a prototype SNMP Agent. This prototype get real measurement values? There is a way to access this prototype? Thank you! -- Augusto Castelan Carlson _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Thu Apr 17 07:31:59 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA16249 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:31:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3HBf3G27284 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:41:03 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3HBf3827281 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:41:03 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA16240 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:31:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1967eP-0006kJ-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:33:57 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1967eP-0006kE-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:33:57 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3HBdJ827181; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:39:19 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3HBZb826175 for ; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:35:37 -0400 Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA15774; Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:26:03 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200304171126.HAA15774@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: ippm@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 07:26:02 -0400 Subject: [ippm] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-03.txt Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IP Performance Metrics Working Group of the IETF. Title : IPPM metrics registry Author(s) : E. Stephan Filename : draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-03.txt Pages : 16 Date : 2003-4-16 This memo defines a registry of the IPPM working group metrics. It assigns an OBJECT IDENTIFIER to each metric currently standardized by the IPPM WG. It defines the rules for the identification of the metrics standardized in the future. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-03.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-03.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-03.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-4-16135636.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-03.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-03.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-4-16135636.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Apr 18 17:41:38 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA27840 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:41:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3ILpPC16552 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:51:25 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3ILpP816549 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:51:25 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA27822 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:41:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 196ddu-0001dN-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:43:34 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 196ddt-0001dJ-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:43:33 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3ILo6816428; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:50:06 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3ILhl816201 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:43:47 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA27686 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:33:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 196dWV-0001as-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:35:56 -0400 Received: from mailbox1.ucsd.edu ([132.239.1.53]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 196dWV-0001ap-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:35:55 -0400 Received: from smtp.ucsd.edu (smtp-a.ucsd.edu [132.239.1.49]) by mailbox1.ucsd.edu (8.12.9/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h3ILa680011292 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 14:36:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DocSavage (cse-air-dhcp-150.ucsd.edu [132.239.10.150]) by smtp.ucsd.edu (8.12.9/8.9.3) with ESMTP id h3ILZtM5012081 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 14:36:06 -0700 (PDT) From: "Stefan Savage" To: Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 14:35:50 -0700 Organization: UCSD Message-ID: <004e01c305f2$7e331f90$06a8a8c0@DocSavage> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 In-Reply-To: <3E9C6E31.8000001@engr.colostate.edu> Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Spamscanner: mailbox1.ucsd.edu (v1.2 Mar 17 2003 15:04:36, -99.9/5.0 2.43) X-Spam-Level: Level X-MailScanner: PASSED (v1.2.7 5751 h3ILa680011292 mailbox1.ucsd.edu) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h3ILhl816202 Subject: [ippm] Reordering Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit BTW, I noticed the recently discussion about reordering metrics and I thought some of you might be interested in some experience John Bellardo and I had recently trying to measure reordering: Bellardo & Savage, Measuring Packet Reordering, Internet Measurement Workshop, November 2002. http://www-cse.ucsd.edu/~savage/papers/IMW02.pdf Most of the paper is about how to build a tool using various TCP/IP hacks to extract measurements from existing systems and isn't relevant to this discussion. However, we also reported on some early experiences examining the distribution of the reordering process as a function of time. Whats interesting here is how sensitive reordering is to small time differences (even the serialization delay relating to differences in packet size). Given this, to sum up reordering with a single scalar metric (such as reordering density) seems like it only makes sense if the frequency dynamics of the test stream and the construction of the metric are specialized to the behavior of a particular application (e.g. TCP). It seems very hard to define a general metric that doesn't devolve to reporting the entire time-varying distribution. - Stefan P.S. If all of this is widely understood I apologize, I haven't been following the discussions here. _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Fri Apr 18 18:00:10 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA28149 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 18:00:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3IM9vM17979 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 18:09:57 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3IM9v817976 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 18:09:57 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA28109 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:59:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 196dvp-0001hT-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 18:02:06 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 196dvp-0001hQ-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 18:02:05 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3IM95817923; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 18:09:05 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3IM6B816987 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 18:06:11 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA28012 for ; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:55:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 196dsB-0001gG-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:58:19 -0400 Received: from almso2.att.com ([192.128.166.71] helo=almso2.proxy.att.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 196dsB-0001fm-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:58:19 -0400 Received: from hogpa.mt.att.com ([135.16.74.2]) by almso2.proxy.att.com (AT&T IPNS/MSO-4.0) with ESMTP id h3ILvOii015671; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:57:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from acmortonw.att.com by hogpa.mt.att.com (8.8.8p2+Sun/ATTEMS-1.4.1 sol2) id RAA28302; Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:57:23 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <5.2.1.1.0.20030418174818.00a8dc10@hogpa.mt.att.com> X-Sender: acm1@hogpa.mt.att.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.1 Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2003 17:57:00 -0400 To: "Stefan Savage" , From: Al Morton Subject: Re: [ippm] Reordering In-Reply-To: <004e01c305f2$7e331f90$06a8a8c0@DocSavage> References: <3E9C6E31.8000001@engr.colostate.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , At 02:35 PM 04/18/2003 -0700, Stefan Savage wrote: >BTW, I noticed the recently discussion about reordering metrics and I >thought some of you might be interested in some experience John Bellardo and >I had recently trying to measure reordering: At the last three meetings, I've made a call to add relevant references on reordering measurements to the draft. Thanks! >... >Given this, to sum up reordering with a single scalar metric (such as >reordering density) seems like it only makes sense if the frequency dynamics >of the test stream and the construction of the metric are specialized to the >behavior of a particular application (e.g. TCP). We recognize this in the current draft, but need to add more... It is a property shared with other metrics, e.g., IPDV. >- Stefan > >P.S. If all of this is widely understood I apologize not at all, there's more to understand here. Al _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Sun Apr 20 03:52:33 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA01127 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:52:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3K830g15642 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 04:03:00 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3K830815639 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 04:03:00 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA01115 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:52:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1979eb-0001sA-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:54:25 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1979eb-0001s6-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:54:25 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3K81q815309; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 04:01:53 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3K7vZ815193 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:57:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA01084 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:46:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1979ZN-0001rY-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:49:01 -0400 Received: from basie.internet2.edu ([207.75.164.22]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1979ZM-0001rV-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:49:01 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A81FB7B48A; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:49:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by basie.internet2.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id A82DF7B46D; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 03:49:18 -0400 (EDT) To: "Stefan Savage" Cc: Subject: Re: [ippm] Reordering References: <004e01c305f2$7e331f90$06a8a8c0@DocSavage> From: stanislav shalunov Date: 20 Apr 2003 03:49:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: <004e01c305f2$7e331f90$06a8a8c0@DocSavage> Message-ID: <87n0ilip6q.fsf@cain.internet2.edu> Lines: 13 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS 0.3.12pre8 Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Stefan, Thanks a lot for the pointer. I think we understand how important timing is. Is it, consequently, hopeless -- in your opinion -- to try to report reordering even for streams where each send time is specified with precision that far exceeds the serialization delay? I understand that trying to reproduce reordering using a different sender might well prove quite hard. -- Stanislav Shalunov http://www.internet2.edu/~shalunov/ Letters in this message are closer than they appear. _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Mon Apr 21 07:48:33 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA10417 for ; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 07:48:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3LBxZB23454 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 07:59:35 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3LBxZ823451 for ; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 07:59:35 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA10384 for ; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 07:48:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 197ZoX-0006yW-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 07:50:25 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 197ZoX-0006yS-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 07:50:25 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3LBwF823363; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 07:58:15 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3LBhD822791 for ; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 07:43:13 -0400 Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA09765; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 07:31:40 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200304211131.HAA09765@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: ippm@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 07:31:40 -0400 Subject: [ippm] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-04.txt Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IP Performance Metrics Working Group of the IETF. Title : IPPM metrics registry Author(s) : E. Stephan Filename : draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-04.txt Pages : 16 Date : 2003-4-18 This memo defines a registry of the IPPM working group metrics. It assigns an OBJECT IDENTIFIER to each metric currently standardized by the IPPM WG. It defines the rules for the identification of the metrics standardized in the future. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-04.txt To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-04.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-04.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-4-18131756.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-04.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ippm-metrics-registry-04.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2003-4-18131756.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Mon Apr 21 09:48:46 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA15289 for ; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 09:48:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3LDxnH31744 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 09:59:49 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3LDxn831741 for ; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 09:59:49 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA15257 for ; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 09:48:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 197bgq-0000Q2-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 09:50:36 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 197bgq-0000Pz-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 09:50:36 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3LDvK831599; Mon, 21 Apr 2003 09:57:20 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3L3hY817335 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:43:34 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA22356 for ; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:32:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 197S4g-0005Zs-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:34:34 -0400 Received: from mta4-0.mail.adelphia.net ([64.8.50.184] helo=mta4.adelphia.net) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 197S4g-0005Zi-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:34:34 -0400 Received: from DocSavage ([68.70.90.193]) by mta4.adelphia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.05.32 201-253-122-126-132-20030307) with ESMTP id <20030421033424.XRMN14677.mta4.adelphia.net@DocSavage>; Sun, 20 Apr 2003 23:34:24 -0400 From: "Stefan Savage" To: "'stanislav shalunov'" Cc: Subject: RE: [ippm] Reordering Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 20:34:10 -0700 Organization: UCSD Message-ID: <001101c307b6$df5ef350$06a8a8c0@DocSavage> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510 Importance: Normal X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-reply-to: <87n0ilip6q.fsf@cain.internet2.edu> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h3L3hY817336 Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I'm not completely sure I parse the question, but let me say this: I think its tough to measure reordering without talking about the underlying process you're trying to capture. To the best of my knowledge, the process that seems to dominate persistent reordering behavior arises from forwarding parallelism (either striped L2 or within the switch fabric itself). Such reordering is drive by temporary imbalances in parallel queues -- as a result it only manifests within a flow over relatively short intervals (no one notices reordering between flows). If this is the case then observations of reordering are _highly_ dependent on the spacing between probes (to wit, back-to-back small packets see more much more re-ordering than large packets spaced 30ms apart). The end result is that Web transfers will see much less reordering than flooded pings over the same path simply because differences in serialization delay smooth out the "noise" in the link load balancing algorithm. So what number makes sense to report? Well it depends on what the application _does_. Its not possible, to the best of my knowledge, to take one such measurement and successfully extrapolate to a different time scale. Moreover, there are a number of other processes that produce re-ordering on slightly longer time scales. Diffserv scheduling is one (you can go out of spec within a flow leading to a reordering process that is driven by a combination of load and the token bucket parameters for traffic class under test) and another is transient routing loops (these can cause very large reordering events). Given all this, I think reordering is a tough metric to measure in isolation. I think the two most reasonable approaches are to measure it across a range of time scales (i.e. produce the entire distribution) or specialize it to the time-scale of the most compelling applications (i.e. what is the probability of a reordering even spanning the xmit time of four SMSS-sized frames, thereby causing a false fast-retransmit in TCP). - Stefan -----Original Message----- From: stanislav shalunov [mailto:shalunov@internet2.edu] Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2003 12:49 AM To: Stefan Savage Cc: ippm@ietf.org Subject: Re: [ippm] Reordering Stefan, Thanks a lot for the pointer. I think we understand how important timing is. Is it, consequently, hopeless -- in your opinion -- to try to report reordering even for streams where each send time is specified with precision that far exceeds the serialization delay? I understand that trying to reproduce reordering using a different sender might well prove quite hard. -- Stanislav Shalunov http://www.internet2.edu/~shalunov/ Letters in this message are closer than they appear. _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 22 04:27:56 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA00074 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 04:27:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3M8dMH19019 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 04:39:22 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3M8dM819016 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 04:39:22 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA00069 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 04:27:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 197t9u-0007O5-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 04:29:46 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 197t9t-0007O1-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 04:29:45 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3M8YI817951; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 04:34:18 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3M8TK817779 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 04:29:20 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA29892 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 04:17:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 197t0C-0007L1-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 04:19:44 -0400 Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com ([144.254.74.5]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 197t0C-0007Ks-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 04:19:44 -0400 Received: from cisco.com (144.254.74.60) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 22 Apr 2003 10:19:32 +0100 Received: from cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ams-msg-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h3M8HilJ025104; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 10:17:45 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from JOEVANSW2K1 (ams-clip-vpn-dhcp4161.cisco.com [10.61.80.64]) by cisco.com (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA25530; Tue, 22 Apr 2003 09:19:33 +0100 (BST) From: "John Evans" To: "Stefan Savage" , "'stanislav shalunov'" Cc: Subject: RE: [ippm] Reordering Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 09:19:18 +0100 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <001101c307b6$df5ef350$06a8a8c0@DocSavage> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4910.0300 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Moreover, there are a number of other processes that produce > re-ordering on > slightly longer time scales. Diffserv scheduling is one >From RFC2597: "A DS node does not reorder IP packets of the same microflow if they belong to the same AF class". Changing the AF class (rather than drop precedence) within a uflow would be indicative of a poor Diffserv design or implementation. cheers John > -----Original Message----- > From: ippm-admin@ietf.org [mailto:ippm-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of > Stefan Savage > Sent: 21 April 2003 04:34 > To: 'stanislav shalunov' > Cc: ippm@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [ippm] Reordering > > > I'm not completely sure I parse the question, but let me say this: > > I think its tough to measure reordering without talking about the > underlying > process you're trying to capture. To the best of my knowledge, > the process > that seems to dominate persistent reordering behavior arises from > forwarding > parallelism (either striped L2 or within the switch fabric itself). Such > reordering is drive by temporary imbalances in parallel queues -- as a > result it only manifests within a flow over relatively short intervals (no > one notices reordering between flows). If this is the case then > observations of reordering are _highly_ dependent on the spacing between > probes (to wit, back-to-back small packets see more much more re-ordering > than large packets spaced 30ms apart). The end result is that Web > transfers will see much less reordering than flooded pings over the same > path simply because differences in serialization delay smooth out the > "noise" in the link load balancing algorithm. So what number > makes sense to > report? Well it depends on what the application _does_. Its not > possible, > to the best of my knowledge, to take one such measurement and successfully > extrapolate to a different time scale. > > Moreover, there are a number of other processes that produce > re-ordering on > slightly longer time scales. Diffserv scheduling is one (you can > go out of > spec within a flow leading to a reordering process that is driven by a > combination of load and the token bucket parameters for traffic > class under > test) and another is transient routing loops (these can cause very large > reordering events). > > Given all this, I think reordering is a tough metric to measure in > isolation. I think the two most reasonable approaches are to measure it > across a range of time scales (i.e. produce the entire distribution) or > specialize it to the time-scale of the most compelling applications (i.e. > what is the probability of a reordering even spanning the xmit > time of four > SMSS-sized frames, thereby causing a false fast-retransmit in TCP). > > - Stefan > > > -----Original Message----- > From: stanislav shalunov [mailto:shalunov@internet2.edu] > Sent: Sunday, April 20, 2003 12:49 AM > To: Stefan Savage > Cc: ippm@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [ippm] Reordering > > Stefan, > > Thanks a lot for the pointer. I think we understand how important > timing is. Is it, consequently, hopeless -- in your opinion -- to try > to report reordering even for streams where each send time is > specified with precision that far exceeds the serialization delay? I > understand that trying to reproduce reordering using a different > sender might well prove quite hard. > > -- > Stanislav Shalunov http://www.internet2.edu/~shalunov/ > > Letters in this message are closer than they appear. > > > _______________________________________________ > ippm mailing list > ippm@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Mon Apr 28 15:03:17 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA10395 for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 15:03:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3SJ7xC04281 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 15:07:59 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3SJ7w804278 for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 15:07:58 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA10380 for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 15:02:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19ADvw-0004lF-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 15:05:00 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19ADvw-0004lB-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 15:05:00 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3SJ6B803373; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 15:06:11 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3SJ1a803217 for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 15:01:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA10162 for ; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 14:56:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19ADpm-0004ie-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 14:58:38 -0400 Received: from emerson.torrentnet.com ([198.78.51.110]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19ADpl-0004ia-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 14:58:37 -0400 Received: from imperial.torrentnet.com (imperial.torrentnet.com [198.78.51.109]) by emerson.torrentnet.com (8.11.6p2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id h3SIx9O79737; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 14:59:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from malibu.torrentnet.com (malibu.torrentnet.com [198.78.51.100]) by imperial.torrentnet.com (8.11.6p2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id h3SIx9o22315; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 14:59:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from malibu.torrentnet.com (chimento@localhost) by malibu.torrentnet.com (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id h3SIx8F00577; Mon, 28 Apr 2003 14:59:09 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200304281859.h3SIx8F00577@malibu.torrentnet.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.3.1 01/18/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: "Perser, Jerry" cc: "IPPM (E-mail)" Subject: Re: [ippm] RFC3393 selection function question In-reply-to: jerry.perser's message of Tue, 08 Apr 2003 13:37:51 -0700. <629E717C12A8694A88FAA6BEF9FFCD441E5495@brigadoon.spirentcom.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 14:59:08 -0400 From: Philip Chimento Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi Jerry: Please excuse the lateness of the reply. I have been out of the office a lot in the past couple of weeks. > After rereading RFC3393, I agree the intent was between 2 consecutive > transmitted packets. The question I have is, what's wrong with making the > selective function between 2 consecutive received packets? > The basic problem is that you are measuring different things. There can be clusters of loss events or periodicities in the queue lengths of intermediate queues that will mask differences in delay variation and give you false results. > I see advantages to this, but no disadvantages. I'll introduce two > abbreviations for the following discussion. IPDV-TX is per RFC3393. IPDV-RX > is an alternative selection function based on received packets. > > Both metric will return the same results unless there is reordering, > duplicate, or loss. > This RFC is based on the one-way delay metric. We implicitly assume (and this really should have been stated explicitly) that the packets are sequence-numbered. They are in the Surveyor tool and I think also in the RIPE active measurment tool (right Henk?). In that case, re-ordering doesn't matter. We state in the RFC that in the case of duplicates, only the FIRST packet counts (i.e. if one of the packets in the packet pair is duplicated, only the first one with that sequence number is counted and used in the computation of delay variation). > > Loss is the most interesting case. IPDV-TX is blind when there is loss. > Suppose you are measuring IPDV over a high speed link. During the > measurement it switches to low speed (i.e. delay goes from 1mS to 500mS). > The switch over also introduces loss. IPDV-TX will never see this variation > of 499mS (500mS - 1mS). > If you are using the IPDV metric to detect a switchover in link speeds, I think that you are doing the wrong thing. It really isn't intended for that. You would do better in this case using one-way delay and look for discontinuities. If a single event in the network is associated with loss, yes, you will miss that event by throwing away the lost pairs. However, that is the right thing to do from a statistical point of view. The point of IPDV is to look at a longer time-scale phenomenon:i.e. how packet delay changes over time. You are really looking at a first derivative. Now, to take an example of why counting received packets can mislead. Suppose that we take the "jitter" definition given in the RFC (i.e. absolute value of samples). Pick your own units. Packet number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 One-way delay 3 X 7 5 3 1 3 5 7 9 X 5 3 1 3 IPDV samples - - 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 - - 2 2 2 Your proposal 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 2 2 IPDV average 2 Your proposal average 2.33 Now this may not seem to be a big difference, but it is a 16 percent relative error. I could have picked the numbers to make the difference arbitrarily large. Now, you can argue that loss is so infrequent that when you average, any error will be miniscule. Perhaps, but that also depends on network behaviour. A couple of consecutive loss events could throw the statistics off. >From a theoretical point of view, your proposal does not measure the phenomenon consistently. (It's like doing a survey and including only the samples that whose answers you like in your calculation of the results.) I think that throwing out the samples where one or more of the packets is lost is the only correct way to do it. Regards, Phil Chimento -- Phil Chimento Ericsson IPI Phone: 240-314-3597 7301 Calhoun Place chimento@torrentnet.com Rockville, Md. 20855 ----------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Tue Apr 29 19:35:51 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA16713 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 19:35:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3TNf7L07280 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 19:41:07 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3TNf6807277 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 19:41:06 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA16706 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 19:35:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19AefE-0001Sc-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 19:37:32 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19AefE-0001SY-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 19:37:32 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3TNdZ807142; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 19:39:35 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3TMfo801002 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:41:50 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA15064 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:36:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19Adjt-00013V-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:38:17 -0400 Received: from mailhost.advanced.org ([12.29.241.3] ident=root) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19Adjs-00013S-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:38:16 -0400 Received: from jaguar.icir.org (jaguar.icir.org [192.150.187.74]) by mailhost.advanced.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Debian-1) with ESMTP id h3TMcqIJ009880 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 18:38:53 -0400 Received: from jaguar.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by jaguar.icir.org (8.12.8p1/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h3TMcqEo072351 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 15:38:52 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from vern@jaguar.icir.org) Message-Id: <200304292238.h3TMcqEo072351@jaguar.icir.org> To: ippm@advanced.org Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 15:38:52 -0700 From: Vern Paxson X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS-ng (Milter interface) Subject: [ippm] final call for papers, Internet Measurement Conference 2003 Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , [apologies for multiple copies] The Internet Measurement Conference 2003 will be held October 27-29, 2003 in Miami, USA. This is the continuation of the 2001 and 2002 Internet Measurement Workshops. If potentially interested, please see the call for papers at: http://www.icir.org/vern/imc-2003/ Key dates: submissions due May 16 (must be registered by May 9), notification July 18, camera-ready due August 22. For questions relating to the program, contact the program committee chair, Mark Crovella . _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm From mailnull@www1.ietf.org Wed Apr 30 10:54:01 2003 Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA07080 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 10:54:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h3UExaT25285 for ippm-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 10:59:36 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3UExa825282 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 10:59:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA07028 for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 10:53:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19Aszm-00005E-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 10:55:42 -0400 Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=www1.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19Aszm-00005B-00 for ippm-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 10:55:42 -0400 Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3UEwD825174; Wed, 30 Apr 2003 10:58:13 -0400 Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h3U14R814923 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:04:27 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA19321 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 20:58:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19Afxr-00027s-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:00:51 -0400 Received: from mailhost.advanced.org ([12.29.241.3] ident=root) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19Afxq-00027p-00 for ippm@ietf.org; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:00:50 -0400 Received: from listserv.vt.edu (listserv.vt.edu [198.82.161.192]) by mailhost.advanced.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Debian-1) with ESMTP id h3U11NIJ013970 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:01:24 -0400 Received: from listserv.vt.edu (LOCALHOST [127.0.0.1]) by listserv.vt.edu (8.12.8/8.12.8/LISTSERV) with ESMTP id h3U0Z14p109612; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:00:13 -0400 Received: from LISTSERV.VT.EDU by LISTSERV.VT.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 5770896 for INFOCOM2004@LISTSERV.VT.EDU; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:00:12 -0400 Received: from vivi.cc.vt.edu (IDENT:mirapoint@vivi.cc.vt.edu [198.82.161.183]) by listserv.vt.edu (8.12.8/8.12.8/LISTSERV) with ESMTP id h3U10B3j062576 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:00:11 -0400 Received: from TomXP.vt.edu (thoupc2.ece.vt.edu [128.173.52.68]) by vivi.cc.vt.edu (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.2-CR) with ESMTP id BCJ95517; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:00:10 -0400 (EDT) X-Sender: hou@pop.vt.edu X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Approved-By: Thomas Hou Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20030429205415.032ed5c0@pop.vt.edu> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:00:16 -0400 Reply-To: thou@VT.EDU From: Thomas Hou To: INFOCOM2004@LISTSERV.VT.EDU X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS-ng (Milter interface) Subject: [ippm] INFOCOM 2004 Call for Papers Sender: ippm-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: ippm-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: ippm@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: IETF IP Performance Metrics Working Group List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Call For Papers - Infocom 2004 -------------------------------------------- IEEE INFOCOM 2004 The Conference on Computer Communications March 7 - 11, 2004, Hong Kong The Twenty-third Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies http://www.ieee-infocom.org/2004 Topics of Interest: -------------------------- Original papers are invited on recent advances in computer communications and networking. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following: - Ad hoc & sensor networks - Performance evaluation - Addressing & location management - Power control - Capacity planning - Pricing & billing - Cellular networks - Quality of service - Congestion control - Resource allocation - Content distribution - Routing - Multicast - Scheduling & buffer management - Multimedia protocols - Security & privacy - Network applications & services - Service overlay networks - Network architectures - Switches and switching - Network control by pricing - Topology inference - Network design & planning - Traffic analysis & control - Network management - Traffic engineering - Optical networks - Web performance - Peer-to-peer communications - Wireless LANs Executive Committee ------------------------------- General Chair: Victor O.K. Li, The University of Hong Kong Technical Program Co-Chairs: Marwan Krunz, University of Arizona Bo Li, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology International Vice Chairs: Jin-Fu Chang, National Chi-Nan University, Taiwan Jim Kurose, University of Massachusetts Amherst Lemin Li , University of Electronic Science and Technology of China Hiromi Okada , Kansai University, Japan Harry Rudin , IBM Research, Switzerland Izhak Rubin, UCLA Tutorial Co-Chairs: Wanjiun Liao, National Taiwan University, Taiwan Krishna M. Sivalingam, University of Maryland Baltimore County. Panel Co-Chairs: Kin Leung, Lucent Bell Labs Nicholas F. Maxemchuk, Columbia University. Keynote Speaker Chair: David Lee, Lucent Bell Labs, USA. Local Arrangement Co-Chairs: Paul Kwok, Open University of Hong Kong Jian-Liang Xu, Hong Kong Baptist University Finance Co-Chairs: Bruce Worthman, IEEE Comm Society Lawrence Yeung, The University of Hong Kong Publicity Co-Chairs: Mohsen Guizani, Western Michigan University Y. Thomas Hou , Virginia Tech Publication Co-Chairs: Steven Low, Caltech, USA. Zhengzhen Zhang, Waterridge Networks Internet Chair: Hui Zhang, Turin Networks Information Systems Co-Chairs: Jack Lee, The Chinese University of Hong Kong Jiangchuan Liu, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Corporate Patrons Chair: Hailson Yu, Versitech Ltd., Hong Kong Standing Committee Officers: Harvey A. Freeman, HeatSeekers Technology Partners Mark Karol, Avaya, Inc. Kazem Sohraby, Lucent Technolgies Important Dates: ------------------------ Full paper due: July 1, 2003 Notification of acceptance: October 30, 2003 Final version due: December 19, 2003 For information on paper submission instructions, please check http://www.ieee-infocom.org/2004 _______________________________________________ ippm mailing list ippm@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm