Return-Path: X-Original-To: pmol@ietf.org Delivered-To: pmol@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 30) id CB4203A69F7; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 07:22:01 -0700 (PDT) X-idtracker: yes From: The IESG To: IETF-Announce Message-Id: <20100921142201.CB4203A69F7@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 07:22:01 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 08:09:12 -0700 Cc: Internet Architecture Board , pmol mailing list , pmol chair , RFC Editor Subject: [PMOL] Protocol Action: 'Basic Telephony SIP End-to-End Performance Metrics' to Proposed Standard X-BeenThere: pmol@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics at Other Layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 14:22:01 -0000 The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Basic Telephony SIP End-to-End Performance Metrics ' as a Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Performance Metrics for Other Layers Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Dan Romascanu and Ron Bonica. A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pmol-sip-perf-metrics-07.txt Technical Summary SIP has become a widely-used standard among many service providers, vendors, and end users. Although there are many different standards for measuring the performance of signaling protocols, none of them specifically address SIP. The scope of this document is limited to the definitions of a standard set of metrics for measuring and reporting SIP performance from an end-to-end perspective. The metrics introduce a common foundation for understanding and quantifying performance expectations between service providers, vendors, and the users of services based on SIP. The intended audience for this document can be found among network operators, who often collect information on the responsiveness of the network to customer requests for services. Working Group Summary Working Group Consensus was smoothly achieved. Document Quality There are several implementations of earlier versions of the I-D, based on contacts with the authors. The document was reviewed by the SIPPING WG. The Contributors and Acknowledgements sections list many of the reviewers who deserve mention: Carol Davids, Marian Delkinov, Adam Uzelac, Jean-Francois Mule, Rich Terpstra, John Hearty and Dean Bayless. Personnel Vijay Gurbany is the document shepherd. Dan Romanscanu is the shepherding AD. Return-Path: X-Original-To: pmol@ietf.org Delivered-To: pmol@core3.amsl.com Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 57EEA3A6AE7; Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:30:02 -0700 (PDT) From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <20100920223002.57EEA3A6AE7@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 15:30:02 -0700 (PDT) Cc: pmol@ietf.org Subject: [PMOL] I-D Action:draft-ietf-pmol-sip-perf-metrics-07.txt X-BeenThere: pmol@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics at Other Layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 22:30:02 -0000 --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 : Basic Telephony SIP End-to-End Performance Metrics Author(s) : D. Malas, A. Morton Filename : draft-ietf-pmol-sip-perf-metrics-07.txt Pages : 28 Date : 2010-09-20 This document defines a set of metrics and their usage to evaluate the performance of end-to-end Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) for telephony services in both production and testing environments. The purpose of this document is to combine a standard 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-07.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-07.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2010-09-20152943.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart-- Return-Path: X-Original-To: pmol@core3.amsl.com Delivered-To: pmol@core3.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A85003A6A7D for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:15:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -100.085 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.085 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.377, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_MODEMCABLE=0.768, HOST_EQ_MODEMCABLE=1.368, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V8DxbMSheiUV for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:15:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ondar.cablelabs.com (ondar.cablelabs.com [192.160.73.61]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF6733A6A3F for ; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 14:14:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kyzyl.cablelabs.com (kyzyl [10.253.0.7]) by ondar.cablelabs.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id o8GLCubY030379; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:12:56 -0600 Received: from srvxchg.cablelabs.com (10.5.0.15) by kyzyl.cablelabs.com (F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com); Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:12:56 -0700 (MST) X-Virus-Status: clean(F-Secure/fsigk_smtp/303/kyzyl.cablelabs.com) Received: from srvxchg.cablelabs.com ([10.5.0.15]) by srvxchg ([10.5.0.15]) with mapi; Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:12:56 -0600 From: Daryl Malas To: "pmol@ietf.org" Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 15:12:54 -0600 Thread-Topic: [PMOL] Additional Comments - sip-perf-metrics-06 Thread-Index: ActV4+11skRvtjdo6kaRKAR42iGvfQ== Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/13.6.0.100712 acceptlanguage: en-US Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_C8B7E476EF75dmalascablelabscom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Approved: ondar Cc: Hadriel Kaplan , Robert Sparks Subject: [PMOL] Additional Comments - sip-perf-metrics-06 X-BeenThere: pmol@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance Metrics at Other Layers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 21:15:26 -0000 --_000_C8B7E476EF75dmalascablelabscom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable All, I received some additional questions and comments from Hadriel Kaplan, and = after some short exchanges here are the results of the discussion. We have= come to an agreement with the proposed changes. Please let us know if the= re are any concerns with these changes. >> Section 4.9.2. is titled "Failed session completion", but the example is= a >> failed session attempt or setup, I think. [DM] After looking over this, I agree with your point. This sub-section better fits with "Inaffective Session Attempt." >> Session Disconnect Delay will get skewed disproportionally if the failed >> disconnects (BYEs that never get a response) are included in it, since e= ach >> time that happens it'll be a 32-second time compared to milliseconds for= good >> cases. Isn't it better to only measure successful cases for time delay,= and >> count the failed ones in a counter instead (I don't see a counter for th= e >> failed ones). [DM] I think this metric is similar to SRD and should included the followin= g statement: "SDD is measured for both successful and failed session disconnects; however, SDD for session disconnects ending in a failure MUST NOT be combined in the same result with successful disconnects. The duration associated with success and failure results will likely vary substantially, and the desired output time associated with each will be significantly different in many cases." >> Why is section 4.9 Session Completion Ratio "only used when at least one >> proxy is involved in the dialog"?? > [DM] After reading through this metric, I am not sure of the value > associated with this statement. I think it can simply be removed. Regards, Daryl --_000_C8B7E476EF75dmalascablelabscom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable [PMOL] Additional Comments - sip-perf-metrics-06 All,

I received some additional questions and comments from Hadriel Kaplan, and = after some short exchanges here are the results of the discussion.  We= have come to an agreement with the proposed changes.  Please let us k= now if there are any concerns with these changes.

Regards,

Daryl --_000_C8B7E476EF75dmalascablelabscom_--