Performance Metrics for Other Layers (pmol)
-------------------------------------------

 Charter
 Last Modified: 2007-11-14

 Current Status: Active Working Group

 Chair(s):
     Al Morton  <acmorton@att.com>
     Alan Clark  <alan@telchemy.com>

 Operations and Management Area Director(s):
     Dan Romascanu  <dromasca@avaya.com>
     Ronald Bonica  <rbonica@juniper.net>

 Operations and Management Area Advisor:
     Dan Romascanu  <dromasca@avaya.com>

 Mailing Lists: 
     General Discussion:pmol@ietf.org
     To Subscribe:      https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pmol
     Archive:           http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pmol/index.html

Description of Working Group:

The successful implementation and operation of IP based applications 

often depends on some underlying performance measurement 

infrastructure that helps service operators or network managers to 

recognize when performance is unsatisfactory and identify problems 

affecting service quality. Standardized performance metrics add the 

desirable features of consistent implementation, interpretation, no 

comparison. 



The IETF has two Working Groups dedicated to the development of 

performance metrics however each has strict limitations in their 

charters: 



- The Benchmarking Methodology WG has addressed a range of networking 

technologies and protocols in their long history (such as IEEE 802.3, 

ATM, Frame Relay, and Routing Protocols), but the charter strictly 

limits their Performance characterizations to the laboratory 

environment. 



- The IP Performance Metrics WG has the mandate to develop metrics 

applicable to the performance of Internet data delivery, but it is 

specifically prohibited from developing metrics that characterize 

traffic (such as a VoIP stream). 



The IETF also has current and completed activities related to the 

reporting of application performance metrics (e.g. RAQMON and RTCP XR) 

and is also actively involved in the development of reliable transport 

protocols which would affect the relationship between IP performance 

and application performance. 



Thus there is a gap in the currently chartered coverage of IETF WGs: 

development of performance metrics for IP-based protocols and 

applications that operate over UDP, TCP, SCTP, DCCP, Forward Error 

Correction (FEC) and other robust transport protocols, and that can be 

used to characterize traffic on live networks. 



The working group will focus on the completion of two RFCs: 



1. A PMOL framework and guidelines memo that will describe the 

necessary elements of performance metrics of protocols and 

applications transported over IETF-specified protocols (such as the 

formal definition, purpose, and units of measure) and the various 

types of metrics that characterize traffic on live networks (such as 

metrics derived from other metrics, possibly on lower layers). The 

framework will also address the need to specify the intended audience 

and the motivation for the performance metrics. There will also be 

guidelines for a performance metric development process that includes 

entry criteria for new proposals (how a proposal might be evaluated 

for possible endorsement by a protocol development working group), and 

how an successful proposal will be developed. Also, it is recognized 

that there are applications and protocols that do not need to use this 

framework and can make use of simpler specific methods for determining 

performance. 



2. A proof-of-concept RFC defining performance metrics for SIP, based 

on draft-malas-performance-metrics. This memo would serve as an 

example of the framework and the PMOL development process in the IETF. 



Discussion of new work proposals is strongly discouraged under the 

initial charter of the PMOL WG, except to advise a protocol 

development WG when they are evaluating a new work proposal for 

related performance metrics. 



The Working Group will work closely with the RAI and APPS areas, 

performing early review of the documents with the two areas and 

inviting their particpation in the WGLC. 



The PMOL WG will also be guided by a document describing how memos 

defining performance metrics are intended to advance along the IETF 

Standards track (draft-bradner-metricstest). 



PMOL WG will take advantage of expertise and seek to avoid overlap 

with other standards development organizations, such as ETSI STQ, ITU-

T SG 12, ATIS IIF, ATIS PRQC, and others.

 Goals and Milestones:

   Jun 2008       Performance Metrics Draft to IESG Review for consideration as 
                Proposed Standard 

   Sep 2008       PMOL Framework and Guidelines Draft to IESG Review for 
                consideration as BCP 

   Nov 2008       Discuss rechartering of the WG for new PMOL metrics work or 
                shut down 


 Internet-Drafts:

  No Current Internet-Drafts.

 Request For Comments:

  None to date.