idnits 2.17.00 (12 Aug 2021) /tmp/idnits59146/draft-morton-lmap-examples-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == There are 4 instances of lines with non-RFC2606-compliant FQDNs in the document. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == Line 154 has weird spacing: '...ion-obj ma-su...' == Line 189 has weird spacing: '...ask-obj ma-re...' == Line 214 has weird spacing: '...row-obj ma-r...' == The document doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet seems to have RFC 2119 boilerplate text. -- The document date (March 21, 2016) is 2245 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Unused Reference: 'RFC2679' is defined on line 258, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3432' is defined on line 262, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC6049' is defined on line 281, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC6576' is defined on line 285, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC6703' is defined on line 290, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'EEAW' is defined on line 302, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'IBD' is defined on line 328, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'IRR' is defined on line 334, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'Mat98' is defined on line 340, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3148' is defined on line 346, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC6808' is defined on line 351, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC6985' is defined on line 356, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RRC' is defined on line 367, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'TSRC' is defined on line 372, but no explicit reference was found in the text ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2679 (Obsoleted by RFC 7679) == Outdated reference: draft-ietf-ippm-metric-registry has been published as RFC 8911 == Outdated reference: draft-ietf-lmap-information-model has been published as RFC 8193 Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 22 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group A. Morton 3 Internet-Draft AT&T Labs 4 Intended status: Informational March 21, 2016 5 Expires: September 22, 2016 7 Examples of LMAP Objects using IPPM Metrics and Protocols 8 draft-morton-lmap-examples-01 10 Abstract 12 In order to examine the completeness and coverage of the LMAP info 13 and data models, we present examples expressing information from IP 14 Performance Metric working group metrics and protocols, and the 15 Performance Metrics Registry. The main update in the version 16 provides a more realistic and useful example of the Cycle_ID in 17 measurement instruction and reporting. 19 Requirements Language 21 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 22 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 23 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 25 Status of This Memo 27 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 28 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 30 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 31 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 32 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 33 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 35 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 36 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 37 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 38 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 40 This Internet-Draft will expire on September 22, 2016. 42 Copyright Notice 44 Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 45 document authors. All rights reserved. 47 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 48 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 49 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 50 publication of this document. Please review these documents 51 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 52 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 53 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 54 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 55 described in the Simplified BSD License. 57 Table of Contents 59 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 60 2. Scope and Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 3. UDP Round Trip Latency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 62 3.1. Measurement Task Capabilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 63 3.2. Instruction Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 64 3.3. Measurement Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 65 3.4. Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 66 3.5. Report Task . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 67 3.6. Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 68 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 69 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 70 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 71 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 72 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 73 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 74 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 76 1. Introduction 78 The Large-scale Measurement of Broadband Performance (LMAP) working 79 group has completed a Framework [RFC7594] and Use cases, and now 80 proceeds with development of an information model 81 [I-D.ietf-lmap-information-model] and data model. 83 The IETF IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) working group first created a 84 framework for metric development in [RFC2330]. This framework has 85 largely stood the test of time and enabled development of many 86 fundamental metrics. It has been updated once in the area of metric 87 composition [RFC5835], and again in several areas related to active 88 stream measurement of modern networks with reactive propoerties 89 [RFC7312]. The Working Group has developed an extensive set of 90 Standards Track Metrics and Measurment Protocols. Among the work 91 especially relevant to LMAP is the development of a Performance 92 Metrics Registry [I-D.ietf-ippm-metric-registry], and a proposal for 93 the initial regsitry contents [I-D.morton-ippm-initial-registry]. 95 This memo is orgainzed into sections that present an example of LMAP 96 Control and Reporting by populating the various information model 97 objects for measurement Tasks and Reporting Tasks (and eventually 98 Schedule, Event, Action, etc). 100 The first example is a UDP Round Trip Latency Metric. 102 2. Scope and Purpose 104 The purpose of this memo is to examine the features and capabilities 105 of the LMAP information model [I-D.ietf-lmap-information-model] by 106 populating the models with example data intended to enable 107 measurement of IPPM metrics. 109 The scope is to create the examples for Active Metrics and their 110 Methods of Measurement, as defined in the IPPM literature of 111 Standards Track Metrics. Specifically, Metrics in the proposed 112 initial contents for the Performance Metrics Registry 113 [I-D.ietf-ippm-metric-registry] contined in 114 [I-D.ietf-ippm-metric-registry] are the primary focus, along with 115 existing standards track measurement protocols developed in IPPM 116 [RFC4656] [RFC5357]. 118 3. UDP Round Trip Latency 120 This draft presents information in a conceptual form. Safeguarding 121 correct syntax is a collosal non-goal in the early drafts. 123 3.1. Measurement Task Capabilities 124 Example: 125 Measurement Capability [ 126 Measurement Protocol [ 127 Protocol Roles [ ] 128 ] 129 Registry URI [ 130 Method Roles [ ] 131 ] 132 ] 133 so, an example would be 135 Measurement Capability [ 136 TWAMP [ 137 Control-Client; Session-Sender; Server; Session-Reflector; 138 ] 139 Prefix:Act_IP_UDP_Round-trip_Delay_95th-percentile_Poisson [ 140 Src; Dst; 141 ... more URIs and Roles ... 142 ] 143 ] 144 for a fully-capable MA. 146 3.2. Instruction Object 148 3.3.1. Definition of ma-instruction-obj 149 object { 150 ma-task-obj ma-instruction-tasks<0..*>; 151 name:UDP_RT_Metrics_001; 152 ma-channel-obj ma-report-channels<0..*>; 153 ma-schedule-obj ma-instruction-schedules<0..*>; 154 ma-suppression-obj ma-suppression; 155 } ma-instruction-obj; 157 3.3. Measurement Task 158 3.9.1. Definition of ma-task-obj 159 object { 160 string ma-task-name; 161 task-name: UDP_RT_Metrics_001; 162 uri ma-task-registry-entries<1..*>; 163 Prefix: Act_IP_UDP_Round-trip_Delay_95th-percentile_Poisson; 164 Prefix: Act_IP_UDP_Round-trip_Delay_Mean_Poisson; 165 [ma-option-obj ma-task-options<0..*>]; 166 option-role: Src; option-meas_point: mp100; 167 option-measurement_protocol: TWAMP; 168 option-meas_protocol_roles: Control-Client; Session-Sender; 169 option-Src_IP: xxx.xxx.xxx; 170 option-Dst_IP: xxx.xxx.xxx; 171 option-T0: 0; option-lambda: 1 second; 172 option-Tf: 15 min; option-truncate: 30 seconds; 173 [boolean ma-task-suppress-by-default;] 174 suppress: true; 175 [string ma-task-cycle-id;] 176 cycle-id: Access_2016-03-21-0930; 177 } ma-task-obj; 179 Prefix = urn:ietf:params:performance:metric 181 3.4. Report 183 3.6.1. Definition of ma-report-obj 185 object { 186 datetime ma-report-date; 187 [uuid ma-report-agent-id;] 188 [string ma-report-group-id;] 189 [ma-report-task-obj ma-report-tasks<0..*>]; 190 name:UDP_RT_Metrics_REPORT_001; 191 } ma-report-obj; 193 3.5. Report Task 194 3.6.2. Definition of ma-report-task-obj 195 object { 196 string ma-report-task-name; 197 task-name: UDP_RT_Metrics_REPORT_001; 198 [uri ma-report-task-registry-entries<1..*>;] 199 Prefix: Act_IP_UDP_Round-trip_Delay_95th-percentile_Poisson; 200 Prefix: Act_IP_UDP_Round-trip_Delay_Mean_Poisson; 201 [ma-option-obj ma-report-task-options<0..*>]; 202 option-role: Src; option-meas_point: mp100; 203 option-measurement_protocol: TWAMP; 204 option-meas_protocol_roles: Control-Client; Session-Sender; 205 option-Src_IP: xxx.xxx.xxx; 206 option-Dst_IP: xxx.xxx.xxx; 207 option-T0: 0; 208 option-Tf: 15 minutes; 209 [ma-option-obj ma-report-task-action-options<0..*>]; 210 [string ma-report-task-cycle-id;] 211 cycle-id: Access_2016-03-21-0930; 212 [string ma-report-task-column-labels<0..*>;] 213 label: Mean; label: 95%-tile; 214 [ma-report-row-obj ma-report-task-rows<0..*>;] 215 row(0): 0.25; 0.34; 216 } ma-report-task-obj; 218 3.6. Schedule 220 TBD 222 4. Security Considerations 224 The security considerations that apply to any active measurement of 225 live paths are relevant here as well. See [RFC4656] and [RFC5357]. 227 When considering privacy of those involved in measurement or those 228 whose traffic is measured, the sensitive information available to 229 potential observers is greatly reduced when using active techniques 230 which are within this scope of work. Passive observations of user 231 traffic for measurement purposes raise many privacy issues. We refer 232 the reader to the privacy considerations described in the Large Scale 233 Measurement of Broadband Performance (LMAP) Framework [RFC7594], 234 which covers active and passive techniques. 236 5. IANA Considerations 238 This memo makes no requests of IANA. 240 6. Acknowledgements 242 The author thanks LMAP Participants for their comments. 244 7. References 246 7.1. Normative References 248 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 249 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 250 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 251 . 253 [RFC2330] Paxson, V., Almes, G., Mahdavi, J., and M. Mathis, 254 "Framework for IP Performance Metrics", RFC 2330, 255 DOI 10.17487/RFC2330, May 1998, 256 . 258 [RFC2679] Almes, G., Kalidindi, S., and M. Zekauskas, "A One-way 259 Delay Metric for IPPM", RFC 2679, DOI 10.17487/RFC2679, 260 September 1999, . 262 [RFC3432] Raisanen, V., Grotefeld, G., and A. Morton, "Network 263 performance measurement with periodic streams", RFC 3432, 264 DOI 10.17487/RFC3432, November 2002, 265 . 267 [RFC4656] Shalunov, S., Teitelbaum, B., Karp, A., Boote, J., and M. 268 Zekauskas, "A One-way Active Measurement Protocol 269 (OWAMP)", RFC 4656, DOI 10.17487/RFC4656, September 2006, 270 . 272 [RFC5357] Hedayat, K., Krzanowski, R., Morton, A., Yum, K., and J. 273 Babiarz, "A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)", 274 RFC 5357, DOI 10.17487/RFC5357, October 2008, 275 . 277 [RFC5835] Morton, A., Ed. and S. Van den Berghe, Ed., "Framework for 278 Metric Composition", RFC 5835, DOI 10.17487/RFC5835, April 279 2010, . 281 [RFC6049] Morton, A. and E. Stephan, "Spatial Composition of 282 Metrics", RFC 6049, DOI 10.17487/RFC6049, January 2011, 283 . 285 [RFC6576] Geib, R., Ed., Morton, A., Fardid, R., and A. Steinmitz, 286 "IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) Standard Advancement 287 Testing", BCP 176, RFC 6576, DOI 10.17487/RFC6576, March 288 2012, . 290 [RFC6703] Morton, A., Ramachandran, G., and G. Maguluri, "Reporting 291 IP Network Performance Metrics: Different Points of View", 292 RFC 6703, DOI 10.17487/RFC6703, August 2012, 293 . 295 [RFC7312] Fabini, J. and A. Morton, "Advanced Stream and Sampling 296 Framework for IP Performance Metrics (IPPM)", RFC 7312, 297 DOI 10.17487/RFC7312, August 2014, 298 . 300 7.2. Informative References 302 [EEAW] Pentikousis, K., Piri, E., Pinola, J., Fitzek, F., 303 Nissilae, T., and I. Harjula, "Empirical Evaluation of 304 VoIP Aggregation over a Fixed WiMAX Testbed", Proceedings 305 of the 4th International Conference on Testbeds and 306 research infrastructures for the development of networks 307 and communities (TridentCom 308 '08) http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1390599, March 309 2008. 311 [I-D.ietf-ippm-metric-registry] 312 Bagnulo, M., Claise, B., Eardley, P., Morton, A., and A. 313 Akhter, "Registry for Performance Metrics", draft-ietf- 314 ippm-metric-registry-05 (work in progress), October 2015. 316 [I-D.ietf-lmap-information-model] 317 Burbridge, T., Eardley, P., Bagnulo, M., and J. 318 Schoenwaelder, "Information Model for Large-Scale 319 Measurement Platforms (LMAP)", draft-ietf-lmap- 320 information-model-09 (work in progress), March 2016. 322 [I-D.morton-ippm-initial-registry] 323 Morton, A., Bagnulo, M., Eardley, P., and K. D'Souza, 324 "Initial Performance Metric Registry Entries", draft- 325 morton-ippm-initial-registry-04 (work in progress), 326 February 2016. 328 [IBD] Fabini, J., Karner, W., Wallentin, L., and T. Baumgartner, 329 "The Illusion of Being Deterministic - Application-Level 330 Considerations on Delay in 3G HSPA Networks", Lecture 331 Notes in Computer Science, Springer, Volume 5550, 2009, 332 pp 301-312 , May 2009. 334 [IRR] Fabini, J., Wallentin, L., and P. Reichl, "The Importance 335 of Being Really Random: Methodological Aspects of IP-Layer 336 2G and 3G Network Delay Assessment", ICC'09 Proceedings of 337 the 2009 IEEE International Conference on 338 Communications, doi: 10.1109/ICC.2009.5199514, June 2009. 340 [Mat98] Mathis, M., "Empirical Bulk Transfer Capacity", IP 341 Performance Metrics Working Group report in Proceeding of 342 the Forty Third Internet Engineering Task Force, Orlando, 343 FL. http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98dec/slides/ 344 ippm-mathis-98dec.pdf, December 1998. 346 [RFC3148] Mathis, M. and M. Allman, "A Framework for Defining 347 Empirical Bulk Transfer Capacity Metrics", RFC 3148, 348 DOI 10.17487/RFC3148, July 2001, 349 . 351 [RFC6808] Ciavattone, L., Geib, R., Morton, A., and M. Wieser, "Test 352 Plan and Results Supporting Advancement of RFC 2679 on the 353 Standards Track", RFC 6808, DOI 10.17487/RFC6808, December 354 2012, . 356 [RFC6985] Morton, A., "IMIX Genome: Specification of Variable Packet 357 Sizes for Additional Testing", RFC 6985, 358 DOI 10.17487/RFC6985, July 2013, 359 . 361 [RFC7594] Eardley, P., Morton, A., Bagnulo, M., Burbridge, T., 362 Aitken, P., and A. Akhter, "A Framework for Large-Scale 363 Measurement of Broadband Performance (LMAP)", RFC 7594, 364 DOI 10.17487/RFC7594, September 2015, 365 . 367 [RRC] Peraelae, P., Barbuzzi, A., Boggia, G., and K. 368 Pentikousis, "Theory and Practice of RRC State Transitions 369 in UMTS Networks", IEEE Globecom 2009 Workshops doi: 370 10.1109/GLOCOMW.2009.5360763, November 2009. 372 [TSRC] Fabini, J. and M. Abmayer, "Delay Measurement Methodology 373 Revisited: Time-slotted Randomness Cancellation", IEEE 374 Transactions on Instrumentation and 375 Measurement doi:10.1109/TIM.2013.2263914, October 2013. 377 Author's Address 378 Al Morton 379 AT&T Labs 380 200 Laurel Avenue South 381 Middletown, NJ 07748 382 USA 384 Phone: +1 732 420 1571 385 Fax: +1 732 368 1192 386 Email: acmorton@att.com 387 URI: http://home.comcast.net/~acmacm/