1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
|
<pre>Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) A. Morton
Request for Comments: 6985 AT&T Labs
Category: Informational July 2013
ISSN: 2070-1721
<span class="h1">IMIX Genome: Specification of Variable Packet Sizes</span>
<span class="h1">for Additional Testing</span>
Abstract
Benchmarking methodologies have always relied on test conditions with
constant packet sizes, with the goal of understanding what network
device capability has been tested. Tests with a constant packet size
reveal device capabilities but differ significantly from the
conditions encountered in operational deployment, so additional tests
are sometimes conducted with a mixture of packet sizes, or "IMIX"
("Internet Mix"). The mixture of sizes a networking device will
encounter is highly variable and depends on many factors. An IMIX
suited for one networking device and deployment will not be
appropriate for another. However, the mix of sizes may be known, and
the tester may be asked to augment the fixed-size tests. To address
this need and the perpetual goal of specifying repeatable test
conditions, this document defines a way to specify the exact
repeating sequence of packet sizes from the usual set of fixed sizes
and from other forms of mixed-size specification.
Status of This Memo
This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
published for informational purposes.
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents
approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet
Standard; see <a href="./rfc5741#section-2">Section 2 of RFC 5741</a>.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6985">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6985</a>.
<span class="grey">Morton Informational [Page 1]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-2" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6985">RFC 6985</a> IMIX Genome July 2013</span>
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp78">BCP 78</a> and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(<a href="http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info">http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info</a>) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
<a href="#section-1">1</a>. Introduction ....................................................<a href="#page-2">2</a>
<a href="#section-2">2</a>. Requirements Language ...........................................<a href="#page-3">3</a>
<a href="#section-3">3</a>. Scope and Goals .................................................<a href="#page-3">3</a>
<a href="#section-4">4</a>. Specification of the IMIX Genome ................................<a href="#page-4">4</a>
<a href="#section-5">5</a>. Specification of a Custom IMIX ..................................<a href="#page-6">6</a>
<a href="#section-6">6</a>. Reporting Long or Pseudorandom Packet Sequences .................<a href="#page-7">7</a>
<a href="#section-6.1">6.1</a>. Run-Length Encoding ........................................<a href="#page-7">7</a>
<a href="#section-6.2">6.2</a>. Table of Proportions .......................................<a href="#page-7">7</a>
<a href="#section-6.3">6.3</a>. Deterministic Algorithm ....................................<a href="#page-7">7</a>
<a href="#section-6.4">6.4</a>. Pseudorandom Length Algorithm ..............................<a href="#page-8">8</a>
<a href="#section-6.5">6.5</a>. Pseudorandom Sequence Algorithm ............................<a href="#page-8">8</a>
<a href="#section-7">7</a>. Security Considerations .........................................<a href="#page-8">8</a>
<a href="#section-8">8</a>. Acknowledgements ................................................<a href="#page-8">8</a>
<a href="#section-9">9</a>. References ......................................................<a href="#page-9">9</a>
<a href="#section-9.1">9.1</a>. Normative References .......................................<a href="#page-9">9</a>
<a href="#section-9.2">9.2</a>. Informative References .....................................<a href="#page-9">9</a>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-1" href="#section-1">1</a>. Introduction</span>
This memo defines a method to unambiguously specify the sequence of
packet sizes used in a load test.
Benchmarking methodologies [<a href="./rfc2544" title=""Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect Devices"">RFC2544</a>] have always relied on test
conditions with constant packet sizes, with the goal of understanding
what network device capability has been tested. Tests with the
smallest size stress the header processing capacity, and tests with
the largest size stress the overall bit-processing capacity. Tests
with sizes in between may determine the transition between these two
capacities.
<span class="grey">Morton Informational [Page 2]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-3" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6985">RFC 6985</a> IMIX Genome July 2013</span>
Streams of constant packet size differ significantly from the
conditions encountered in operational deployment, so additional tests
are sometimes conducted with a mixture of packet sizes. The set of
sizes used is often called an Internet Mix, or "IMIX" [<a href="#ref-Spirent" title=""Test Methodology Journal: IMIX (Internet Mix) Journal"">Spirent</a>]
[<a href="#ref-IXIA" title=""Testing PPPoX and L2TP Broadband Access Devices"">IXIA</a>] [<a href="#ref-Agilent" title=""The Journal of Internet Test Methodologies"">Agilent</a>].
The mixture of sizes a networking device will encounter is highly
variable and depends on many factors. An IMIX suited for one
networking device and deployment will not be appropriate for another.
However, the mix of sizes may be known, and the tester may be asked
to augment the fixed-size tests. The references above cite the
original studies and their methodologies. Similar methods can be
used to determine new size mixes present on a link or network. We
note that the architecture for IP Flow Information Export [<a href="./rfc5470" title=""Architecture for IP Flow Information Export"">RFC5470</a>]
provides one method to gather packet-size information on private
networks.
To address this need and the perpetual goal of specifying repeatable
test conditions, this memo proposes a way to specify the exact
repeating sequence of packet sizes from the usual set of fixed sizes:
the IMIX Genome. Other, less exact forms of size specification are
also recommended for extremely complicated or customized size mixes.
We apply the term "genome" to infer that the entire test packet-size
sequence can be replicated if this information is known -- a parallel
to the information needed for biological replication.
This memo takes the position that it cannot be proven for all
circumstances that the sequence of packet sizes does not affect the
test result; thus, a standardized specification of sequence is
valuable.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-2" href="#section-2">2</a>. Requirements Language</span>
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in <a href="./rfc2119">RFC 2119</a> [<a href="./rfc2119" title=""Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"">RFC2119</a>].
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-3" href="#section-3">3</a>. Scope and Goals</span>
This memo defines a method to unambiguously specify the sequence of
packet sizes that have been used in a load test, assuming that a
relevant mix of sizes is known to the tester and the length of the
repeating sequence is not very long (<100 packets).
The IMIX Genome will allow an exact sequence of packet sizes to be
communicated as a single-line name, resolving the current ambiguity
with results that simply refer to "IMIX". This aspect is critical
because no ability has been demonstrated to extrapolate results from
<span class="grey">Morton Informational [Page 3]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-4" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6985">RFC 6985</a> IMIX Genome July 2013</span>
one IMIX to another IMIX -- and certainly no ability to extrapolate
results to other circumstances -- even when the mix varies only
slightly from another IMIX.
While documentation of the exact sequence is ideal, the memo also
covers the case where the sequence of sizes is very long or may be
generated by a pseudorandom process.
It is a colossal non-goal to standardize one or more versions of the
IMIX. This topic has been discussed on many occasions on the BMWG
mailing list [<a href="#ref-IMIXonList">IMIXonList</a>]. The goal is to enable customization with
minimal constraints while fostering repeatable testing once the
fixed-size testing is complete. Thus, the requirements presented in
this specification, expressed in [<a href="./rfc2119" title=""Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"">RFC2119</a>] terms, are intended for
those performing/reporting laboratory tests to improve clarity and
repeatability.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-4" href="#section-4">4</a>. Specification of the IMIX Genome</span>
The IMIX Genome is specified in the following format:
IMIX - 123456...<a href="#page-x">x</a>
where each number is replaced by the letter corresponding to the size
of the packet at that position in the sequence. The following table
gives the letter encoding for the [<a href="./rfc2544" title=""Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect Devices"">RFC2544</a>] standard sizes (64, 128,
256, 512, 1024, 1280, and 1518 bytes) and "jumbo" sizes (2112, 9000,
and 16000 bytes). Note that the 4-octet Ethernet frame check
sequence may fail to detect bit errors in the larger jumbo frames
[<a href="#ref-Jumbo1" title=""Gigabit Ethernet Jumbo Frames, and why you should care"">Jumbo1</a>] [<a href="#ref-Jumbo2" title=""The Ethernet CRC limits packets to about 12 kBytes. (NOT)"">Jumbo2</a>].
+--------------+--------------------+
| Size (Bytes) | Genome Code Letter |
+--------------+--------------------+
| 64 | a |
| 128 | b |
| 256 | c |
| 512 | d |
| 1024 | e |
| 1280 | f |
| 1518 | g |
| 2112 | h |
| 9000 | i |
| 16000 | j |
| MTU | z |
+--------------+--------------------+
<span class="grey">Morton Informational [Page 4]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-5" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6985">RFC 6985</a> IMIX Genome July 2013</span>
For example, a five-packet sequence with sizes 64,64,64,1280,1518
would be designated:
IMIX - aaafg
If z (MTU) is used, the tester MUST specify the length of the MTU in
the report.
While this approach allows some flexibility, there are also
constraints.
o Packet sizes not defined by <a href="./rfc2544">RFC 2544</a> would need to be approximated
by those available in the table.
o The genome for very long sequences can become undecipherable by
humans.
Some questions testers must ask and answer when using the IMIX Genome
are:
1. Multiple source-destination address pairs: Is the IMIX sequence
applicable to each pair, across multiple pairs in sets, or across
all pairs?
2. Multiple tester ports: Is the IMIX sequence applicable to each
port, across multiple ports in sets, or across all ports?
The chosen configuration would be expressed in the following general
form:
+-------------------+------------------------+---------------------+
| Source Address + | Destination Address + | Corresponding IMIX |
| Port AND/OR Blade | Port AND/OR Blade | |
+-------------------+------------------------+---------------------+
| x.x.x.x Blade2 | y.y.y.y Blade3 | IMIX - aaafg |
+-------------------+------------------------+---------------------+
where testers can specify the IMIX used between any two entities in
the test architecture (and "Blade" is a component in a multi-
component device chassis).
<span class="grey">Morton Informational [Page 5]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-6" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6985">RFC 6985</a> IMIX Genome July 2013</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-5" href="#section-5">5</a>. Specification of a Custom IMIX</span>
This section describes how to specify an IMIX with locally selected
packet sizes.
The custom IMIX is specified in the following format:
CUSTOM IMIX - 123456...<a href="#page-x">x</a>
where each number is replaced by the letter corresponding to the size
of the packet at that position in the sequence. The tester MUST
complete the following table, giving the letter encoding for each
size used, where each set of three lower-case letters would be
replaced by the integer size in octets.
+--------------+--------------------+
| Size (Bytes) | Custom Code Letter |
+--------------+--------------------+
| aaa | A |
| bbb | B |
| ccc | C |
| ddd | D |
| eee | E |
| fff | F |
| ggg | G |
| etc. | up to Z |
+--------------+--------------------+
For example, a five-packet sequence with sizes
aaa=64,aaa=64,aaa=64,ggg=1020,ggg=1020 would be designated:
CUSTOM IMIX - AAAGG
<span class="grey">Morton Informational [Page 6]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-7" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6985">RFC 6985</a> IMIX Genome July 2013</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-6" href="#section-6">6</a>. Reporting Long or Pseudorandom Packet Sequences</span>
When the IMIX Genome cannot be used (when the sheer length of the
sequence would make the genome unmanageable), five options are
possible, as noted in the following subsections.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-6.1" href="#section-6.1">6.1</a>. Run-Length Encoding</span>
When a sequence can be decomposed into a series of short repeating
sequences, then a run-length encoding approach MAY be specified as
shown in the table below (using the single lower-case letter Genome
Codes from <a href="#section-4">Section 4</a>):
+------------------------------+----------------------+
| Count of Repeating Sequences | Packet-Size Sequence |
+------------------------------+----------------------+
| 20 | abcd |
| 5 | ggga |
| 10 | dcba |
+------------------------------+----------------------+
The run-length encoding approach is also applicable to the custom
IMIX as described in <a href="#section-5">Section 5</a> (where the single upper-case letter
Genome Codes would be used instead).
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-6.2" href="#section-6.2">6.2</a>. Table of Proportions</span>
When the sequence is designed to vary within some proportional
constraints, a table simply giving the proportions of each size MAY
be used instead.
+-----------+---------------------+---------------------------+
| IP Length | Percentage of Total | Length(s) at Other Layers |
+-----------+---------------------+---------------------------+
| 64 | 23 | 82 |
| 128 | 67 | 146 |
| 1000 | 10 | 1018 |
+-----------+---------------------+---------------------------+
Note that the table of proportions also allows non-standard packet
sizes but trades the short genome specification and ability to
specify the exact sequence for other flexibilities.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-6.3" href="#section-6.3">6.3</a>. Deterministic Algorithm</span>
If a deterministic packet-size generation method is used (such as a
monotonic increase by 1 octet from start value to MTU), then the
generation algorithm SHOULD be reported.
<span class="grey">Morton Informational [Page 7]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-8" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6985">RFC 6985</a> IMIX Genome July 2013</span>
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-6.4" href="#section-6.4">6.4</a>. Pseudorandom Length Algorithm</span>
If a pseudorandom length generation capability is used, then the
generation algorithm SHOULD be reported with the results along with
the seed value used. We also recognize the opportunity to randomize
inter-packet spacing from a test sender as well as the size, and both
spacing and length pseudorandom generation algorithms and seeds
SHOULD be reported when used.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-6.5" href="#section-6.5">6.5</a>. Pseudorandom Sequence Algorithm</span>
Finally, we note another possibility: a pseudorandom sequence
generates an index to the table of packet lengths, and the generation
algorithm SHOULD be reported with the results, along with the seed
value if used.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-7" href="#section-7">7</a>. Security Considerations</span>
Benchmarking activities as described in this memo are limited to
technology characterization using controlled stimuli in a laboratory
environment, with dedicated address space and other constraints
[<a href="./rfc2544" title=""Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect Devices"">RFC2544</a>].
The benchmarking network topology will be an independent test setup
and MUST NOT be connected to devices that may forward the test
traffic into a production network or misroute traffic to the test
management network.
Further, benchmarking is performed on a "black-box" basis, relying
solely on measurements observable external to the Device Under Test
(DUT) or System Under Test (SUT).
Special capabilities SHOULD NOT exist in the DUT/SUT specifically for
benchmarking purposes. Any implications for network security arising
from the DUT/SUT SHOULD be identical in the lab and in production
networks.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-8" href="#section-8">8</a>. Acknowledgements</span>
Thanks to Sarah Banks, Aamer Akhter, Steve Maxwell, and Scott Bradner
for their reviews and comments. Ilya Varlashkin suggested the
run-length encoding approach in <a href="#section-6.1">Section 6.1</a>.
<span class="grey">Morton Informational [Page 8]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-9" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6985">RFC 6985</a> IMIX Genome July 2013</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-9" href="#section-9">9</a>. References</span>
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-9.1" href="#section-9.1">9.1</a>. Normative References</span>
[<a id="ref-RFC2119">RFC2119</a>] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp14">BCP 14</a>, <a href="./rfc2119">RFC 2119</a>, March 1997.
[<a id="ref-RFC2544">RFC2544</a>] Bradner, S. and J. McQuaid, "Benchmarking Methodology for
Network Interconnect Devices", <a href="./rfc2544">RFC 2544</a>, March 1999.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-9.2" href="#section-9.2">9.2</a>. Informative References</span>
[<a id="ref-Agilent">Agilent</a>] Agilent, "The Journal of Internet Test Methodologies",
September 2007, <<a href="http://www.ixiacom.com/pdfs/test_plans/agilent_journal_of_internet_test_methodologies.pdf">http://www.ixiacom.com/pdfs/test_plans/</a>
<a href="http://www.ixiacom.com/pdfs/test_plans/agilent_journal_of_internet_test_methodologies.pdf">agilent_journal_of_internet_test_methodologies.pdf</a>>.
[<a id="ref-IMIXonList">IMIXonList</a>]
IETF Benchmarking Methodology Working Group, "Discussion
on IMIX", October 2003, <<a href="http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/bmwg/current/msg00691.html">http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/</a>
<a href="http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/bmwg/current/msg00691.html">web/bmwg/current/msg00691.html</a>>.
[<a id="ref-IXIA">IXIA</a>] IXIA, "Testing PPPoX and L2TP Broadband Access Devices",
2004, <<a href="http://www.ixiacom.com/library/test_plans/display?skey=testing_pppox">http://www.ixiacom.com/library/test_plans/</a>
<a href="http://www.ixiacom.com/library/test_plans/display?skey=testing_pppox">display?skey=testing_pppox</a>>.
[<a id="ref-Jumbo1">Jumbo1</a>] Dykstra, P., "Gigabit Ethernet Jumbo Frames, and why you
should care", WareOnEarth Communications, Inc., December
1999, <<a href="http://sd.wareonearth.com/~phil/jumbo.html">http://sd.wareonearth.com/~phil/jumbo.html</a>>.
[<a id="ref-Jumbo2">Jumbo2</a>] Mathis, M., "The Ethernet CRC limits packets to about
12 kBytes. (NOT)", Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center,
April 2003,
<<a href="http://staff.psc.edu/mathis/MTU/arguments.html#crc">http://staff.psc.edu/mathis/MTU/arguments.html#crc</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC5470">RFC5470</a>] Sadasivan, G., Brownlee, N., Claise, B., and J. Quittek,
"Architecture for IP Flow Information Export", <a href="./rfc5470">RFC 5470</a>,
March 2009.
[<a id="ref-Spirent">Spirent</a>] Spirent, "Test Methodology Journal: IMIX (Internet Mix)
Journal", January 2006, <<a href="http://gospirent.com/whitepaper/IMIX%20Test%20Methodolgy%20Journal.pdf">http://gospirent.com/whitepaper/</a>
<a href="http://gospirent.com/whitepaper/IMIX%20Test%20Methodolgy%20Journal.pdf">IMIX%20Test%20Methodolgy%20Journal.pdf</a>>.
<span class="grey">Morton Informational [Page 9]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-10" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc6985">RFC 6985</a> IMIX Genome July 2013</span>
Author's Address
Al Morton
AT&T Labs
200 Laurel Avenue South
Middletown, NJ 07748
USA
Phone: +1 732 420 1571
Fax: +1 732 368 1192
EMail: acmorton@att.com
URI: <a href="http://home.comcast.net/~acmacm/">http://home.comcast.net/~acmacm/</a>
Morton Informational [Page 10]
</pre>
|
