Subject: [PMOL] SIP Metrics draft: Timers wording
From: "Daryl Malas" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 18:04:35 -0600
List-Id: Performance Metrics at Other Layers <pmol.ietf.org>

Hello all,

Thank you for the extensive feedback at the IETF conference in Philly
regarding the SIP Performance Metrics draft.  During the session, there
were volunteers to provide me some verbiage for the draft regarding the
variability of timers relative to the draft.  For those who volunteered,
please send me your suggested wording, and I will include it in my next
revision of the draft.

Thank you,

Daryl

---------------------
Daryl Malas
CableLabs
[email-masked]
tel:+1-303-661-3302

_______________________________________________
PMOL mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pmol

Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2008 16:58:40 +0100
From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [PMOL] feedback on draft-morton-perf-metrics-framework-02
Sender: [email-masked]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--===============0661867438==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------070500030302070602010603"

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070500030302070602010603
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear all,

Here is my feedback after reading the draft.

- First of all, as mentioned during the WG meeting, the following 3 
items seem to be a structure for the draft.

   There are at least three phases in the development of performance
   standards.  They are:

   1.  Definition of a Performance Metric and its units of measure

   2.  Specification of a Method of Measurement

   3.  Specification of the Reporting Format

I understand it's not the case, so the focus of the document compared to 
these 3 points should be explained
- you mention "Performance Metrics Entity" in the abstract. If 
capitalized, doesn't it imply a definition?
The draft only mentions:

   This memo refers to a Performance Metrics Entity, or PM Entity, which
   may in future be a working group or directorate or a combination of
   these two.

You might to mention what its goal is.
- " (ii) the correlation between the metric and the quality of service / 
experience delivered to the user (person or other application)"
Ideally the metric is the quality of service/experience
- In  section 3.4.2,  an example of the Service Level Contract/Service 
Level Agreement would seem ideal, as the SLA must be clearly, including 
the way of metering it.
- 
- 3.4.4. Metric Definition Template

    Name
    Description
    Measurement
    Method
    Units of measurement
    Measurement or Sampling Interval
    Use and Applications
    Implementation
    Reporting Model

Which ones MUST/SHOULD be present? All of them?
- Section 3.7 "Reporting protocols typically introduce some limitations 
and assumptions with regard to the definition of a metric."
After discussing with Alan after the meeting, I understand what you want 
to say. However, I think it should be expanded.
- Section 3.12. I don't understand why we have the following excerpt in 
there:

   The key areas of variation between different metric users include:

   o  Suitability of passive measurements of live traffic, or active
      measurements using dedicated traffic

   o  Measurement in laboratory environment, or on a network of deployed
      devices

   o  Accuracy of the results

   o  Access to measurement points and configuration information

   o  Measurement topology (point-to-point, point-to-multipoint)

   o  Scale of the measurement system

   o  Measurements conducted on-demand, or continuously

   o  Required reporting formats

   ------------------- end of Al's sections, but more in 4.2 -----

_Editorial:_
- you might want to give a reference to RAQMON
- section 3.1 " Metrics are intended for use in measuring the 
performance of an application, network or service." while section 3.2 
mentions "A metric is a measure of an observable behavior of an 
application, protocol or other system."
- realign

   (i) Description of metric The description should explain (ii) Metric
   use and applications (iii) Implementation (iv) Reporting Model

Regards, Benoit.

--------------070500030302070602010603
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Dear all,<br>
<br>
Here is my feedback after reading the draft.<br>
<br>
- First of all, as mentioned during the WG meeting, the following 3
items seem to be a structure for the draft.<br>
<pre>   There are at least three phases in the development of performance
   standards.  They are:

   1.  Definition of a Performance Metric and its units of measure

   2.  Specification of a Method of Measurement

   3.  Specification of the Reporting Format</pre>
I understand it's not the case, so the focus of the document compared
to these 3 points should be explained <br>
- you mention "Performance Metrics Entity" in the abstract. If
capitalized, doesn't it imply a definition?<br>
The draft only mentions: <br>
<pre>   This memo refers to a Performance Metrics Entity, or PM Entity, which
   may in future be a working group or directorate or a combination of
   these two.</pre>
You might to mention what its goal is.<br>
- " (ii) the correlation between the metric and the quality of service
/ experience delivered to the user (person or other application)"<br>
Ideally the metric is the quality of service/experience<br>
- In&nbsp; section 3.4.2,&nbsp; an example of the Service Level Contract/Service
Level Agreement would seem ideal, as the SLA must be clearly, including
the way of metering it.<br>
-&nbsp; <br>
- 3.4.4. Metric Definition Template<br>
<br>
<blockquote> Name<br>
Description<br>
Measurement<br>
Method<br>
Units of measurement<br>
Measurement or Sampling Interval<br>
Use and Applications<br>
Implementation<br>
Reporting Model<br>
</blockquote>
Which ones MUST/SHOULD be present? All of them?<br>
- Section 3.7 "Reporting protocols typically introduce some limitations
and assumptions with regard to the definition of a metric."<br>
After discussing with Alan after the meeting, I understand what you
want to say. However, I think it should be expanded.<br>
- Section 3.12. I don't understand why we have the following excerpt in
there:<br>
<pre>   The key areas of variation between different metric users include:

   o  Suitability of passive measurements of live traffic, or active
      measurements using dedicated traffic

   o  Measurement in laboratory environment, or on a network of deployed
      devices

   o  Accuracy of the results

   o  Access to measurement points and configuration information

   o  Measurement topology (point-to-point, point-to-multipoint)

   o  Scale of the measurement system

   o  Measurements conducted on-demand, or continuously

   o  Required reporting formats

   ------------------- end of Al's sections, but more in 4.2 -----
</pre>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<u>Editorial:</u><br>
- you might want to give a reference to RAQMON<br>
- section 3.1 " Metrics are intended for use in measuring the
performance of an application, network or service." while section 3.2
mentions "A metric is a measure of an observable behavior of an
application, protocol or other system."<br>
- realign <br>
<pre>   (i) Description of metric The description should explain (ii) Metric
   use and applications (iii) Implementation (iv) Reporting Model

</pre>
Regards, Benoit.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------070500030302070602010603--

--===============0661867438==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
PMOL mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pmol

--===============0661867438==--

Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 10:53:55 -0400
To: [email-masked]
From: Al Morton <[email-masked]>
Subject: [PMOL] Remote Participation URLs
Sender: [email-masked]

For those who wish to participate remotely, we have:

Start time:  Today, March 11, 13:00 EDT  (GMT-4:00)

Much of the info below is available on the tools team agenda:
http://tools.ietf.org/agenda/71/

Jabber Instructions
http://www.ietf.org/meetings/text_conf.html
Jabber Room
[email-masked]

Slides, there may be updates (scroll down to pmol in OPS area)
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/71/materials.html

Unicast Audio
http://videolab.uoregon.edu/events/ietf/
pmol is on Channel 8 in Salon J

Al
pmol co-chair

_______________________________________________
PMOL mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pmol

To: [email-masked]
From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:45:01 -0800 (PST)
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [PMOL] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-pmol-sip-perf-metrics-00.txt
Sender: [email-masked]

--NextPart

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
directories.
This draft is a work item of the Performance Metrics for Other Layers Working Group of the IETF.

	Title		: SIP End-to-End Performance Metrics
	Author(s)	: D. Malas
	Filename	: draft-ietf-pmol-sip-perf-metrics-00.txt
	Pages		: 28
	Date		: 2008-2-25
	
This document defines a set of metrics and their usage to evaluate 
   the performance of end-to-end Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) based 
   services in both production and testing environments.  The purpose of 
   this document is to combine a set of common metrics, allowing 
   interoperable performance measurements, easing the comparison of 
   industry implementations.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pmol-sip-perf-metrics-00.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

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: Message/External-body;
	name="draft-ietf-pmol-sip-perf-metrics-00.txt";
	site="ftp.ietf.org";
	access-type="anon-ftp";
	directory="internet-drafts"

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID: <[email-masked]>

--NextPart
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
PMOL mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pmol

--NextPart--