[Bloat] RFC: Realtime Response Under Load (rrul) test specification
I have been working on developing a specification for testing networks more effectively for various side effects of bufferbloat, notably gaming and voip performance, and especially web performance as well as a few other things that concerned me, such as IPv6 behavior, and the effects of packet classification. A key goal is to be able to measure the quality of the user experience while a network is otherwise busy, with complex stuff going on in the background, but with a simple presentation of the results in the end, in under 60 seconds. While it's not done yet, it escaped into the wild today, and I might as well solicit wider opinions on it, sooo... get the spec at: https://github.com/dtaht/deBloat/blob/master/spec/rrule.doc?raw=true Portions of the test are being prototyped in the netperf-wrappers repo on github. The initial results of the rrul test on several hotel networks I've tried it on are interesting. Example: http://www.teklibre.com/~d/rrul2_conference.pdf A major sticking point at the moment is to come up with an equivalent of the chrome-benchmarks for measuring relative web page performance with and without a network load, or to merely incorporate some automated form of that benchmark into the overall test load. The end goal is to have a complex, comprehensive benchmark of some core networking issues, that produces simple results, whether they be via a java tool like icsi's, or via flash on the web, or the command line, via something like netperf. Related resources: netperf 2.6 or later running on a fairly nearby server https://github.com/tohojo/netperf-wrapper python-matplotlib I look forward to your comments. -- Dave Täht Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html ___ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
Re: [Bloat] RFC: Realtime Response Under Load (rrul) test specification
On Tue, 06 Nov 2012, Dave Taht wrote: I have been working on developing a specification for testing networks more effectively for various side effects of bufferbloat, notably gaming and voip performance, and especially web performance as well as a few other things that concerned me, such as IPv6 behavior, and the effects of packet classification. When it is reasonably complete, it would be nice to have it as an informational or better yet, standards-track IETF RFC. IETF RFC non-experimental status allows us to require RRUL testing prior to service acceptance, and even add it as one of the SLA metrics on public tenders, which goes a long way into pushing anything into more widespread usage. -- One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie. -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh ___ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
Re: [Bloat] RFC: Realtime Response Under Load (rrul) test specification
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh h...@hmh.eng.br wrote: On Tue, 06 Nov 2012, Dave Taht wrote: I have been working on developing a specification for testing networks more effectively for various side effects of bufferbloat, notably gaming and voip performance, and especially web performance as well as a few other things that concerned me, such as IPv6 behavior, and the effects of packet classification. When it is reasonably complete, it would be nice to have it as an informational or better yet, standards-track IETF RFC. IETF RFC non-experimental status allows us to require RRUL testing prior to service acceptance, and even add it as one of the SLA metrics on public tenders, which goes a long way into pushing anything into more widespread usage. It was my intent to write this as a real, standards track rfc, and also submit it as a prospective test to the ITU and other testing bodies such as nist, undewriter labratories, consumer reports, and so on. However I: A) got intimidated by the prospect of dealing with the rfc editor B) Have some sticky problems with two aspects of the test methodology (and that's just what I know about) which I am prototyping around. Running the prototype tests on various real networks has had very interesting results... (I do hope others try the prototype tests, too, on their networks) C) thought it would be clearer to write the shortest document possible on this go-round. D) Am not particularly fond of the rrule name. (suggestions?) I now plan (after feedback) to produce and submit this as a standards track RFC in the march timeframe. It would give me great joy to have this test series included in various SLA metrics, in the long run. -- Dave Täht Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html ___ Bloat mailing list Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
