Subject: [secdir] [New-work] WG Review: Recharter of IP Performance Metrics (ippm)

From: IETF Secretariat <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 12:32:49 -0800 (PST)

A modified charter has been submitted for the IP Performance Metrics
(ippm) working group in the Transport Area of the IETF.  The IESG has not
made any determination as yet.  The modified charter is provided below for
informational purposes only.  Please send your comments to the IESG
mailing list ([email-masked]) by Wednesday, January 21, 2009.

IP Performance Metrics (ippm) 
-------------------------------------------- 
Last Modified: 2008-12-19 
 
Current Status: Active Working Group 
 
Additional information is available at tools.ietf.org/wg/ippm 
 
Chair(s): 
	Matthew Zekauskas [[email-masked]] 
         Henk Uijterwaal [[email-masked]] 
 
Transport Area Director(s): 
	Magnus Westerlund [email-masked]]  
         Lars Eggert [[email-masked]] 
 
Transport Area Advisor: 
	Lars Eggert [[email-masked]] 
 
Mailing Lists: 
	General Discussion: [email-masked]  
         To Subscribe: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm  
         In Body: subscribe 
	Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ippm/index.html 

Description of Working Group: 
 
The IPPM WG has developed a set of standard metrics that can be 
applied to the quality, performance, and reliability of Internet 
data delivery services. These metrics are designed such that they 
can be performed by network operators, end users, or independent 
testing groups. It is important that the metrics not represent a 
value judgment (i.e. define "good" and "bad"), but rather provide 
unbiased quantitative measures of performance. 
 
Functions peripheral to Internet data delivery services, such as 
NOC/NIC services, are beyond the scope of this working group. 
 
The IPPM WG has produced documents that define specific metrics and 
procedures for accurately measuring and documenting these metrics. 
This is the current list of fundamental metrics and the existing 
set of derived metrics. 
 
  - connectivity 
 
  - one-way delay and loss 
 
  - round-trip delay. 
 
  - delay variation 
 
  - loss patterns 
 
  - packet reordering 
 
  - bulk transport capacity 
 
  - link bandwidth capacity 
 
  - packet duplication 
 
The working group will advance these metrics along the standards 
track within the IETF.  It will be guided by applicable IESG documents 
in this area. Additionally, the WG will produce Proposed Standard 
AS documents, comparable to applicability statements in RFC 2026, 
that will focus on procedures for measuring the individual metrics 
and how these metrics characterize features that are important to 
different service classes, such as bulk transport, periodic streams, 
packet bursts or multimedia streams.  Each AS document will discuss 
the performance characteristics that are pertinent to a specified 
service class; clearly identify the set of metrics that aid in the 
description of those characteristics; specify the methodologies 
required to collect said metrics; and lastly, present the requirements 
for the common, unambiguous reporting of testing results.  The AS 
documents can also discuss the use of the metrics to verify performance 
expectations, such as SLA's, report results to specific user groups 
or investigate network problems.  The focus is, again, to define 
how this should be done, not to define a value judgment. The WG may 
define additional statistics for its metrics if needed. Specific 
topics of these AS documents must be approved by the Area Directors 
as charter additions. 
 
The WG will work on documents describing how to compose and decompose 
the results of its metrics over time or space. 
 
The WG has produced protocols to enable communication among test 
equipment that implements the one- and two-way metrics (OWAMP and 
TWAMP respectively).  OWAMP and TWAMP will be advanced along the 
standards track.   Further development of these protocols will also 
be done inside the WG. 
 
The metrics developed by the WG were developed inside an active 
measurement context, that is, the devices used to measure the metrics 
produce their own traffic.  However, most metrics can be used inside 
a passive context as well.  No work is planned is this area though, 
this may be changed with AD approval. 
 
The intent of the WG is to cooperate with other appropriate standards 
bodies and forums (such as ATIS IIF, ITU-T SG 12, 13 and 15, MEF) 
to promote consistent approaches and metrics. Within the IETF 
process, IPPM metrics definitions will be subject to as rigorous a 
scrutiny for usefulness, clarity, and accuracy as other protocol 
standards. The IPPM WG will interact with other areas of IETF 
activity whose scope intersect with the requirement of these specific 
metrics.  The WG will, on request, provide input to other IETF WG 
on the use of these metrics.

_______________________________________________
New-work mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/new-work
_______________________________________________
secdir mailing list
[email-masked]
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/secdir
_______________________________________________
secdir mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir