Re: [Bloat] [Codel] RFC: Realtime Response Under Load (rrul) test specification

[Wesley Eddy <wes@mti-systems.com>]

On 11/6/2012 8:56 AM, Dave Taht wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
> <hmh@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.
> 


Hi Dave, in my role as IETF TSV AD, I would be happy to help
you get this into the IETF.  Please note that you can't get
a Standards Track RFC published without a working group
adopting it or an AD sponsoring it.

This topic would be of interest for the IPPM and BMWG working
groups, and I know it is of interest to me as a TSV AD, so we
should be able to find a way to bring it in.

In fact, the timing is good, as FCC folks are at the IETF this
week talking about their vision for broadband test and
measurement architecture, and these tests may relate nicely
to that proposed work.

-- 
Wes Eddy
MTI Systems