1

BENCHMARKING IGP DATA PLANE

ROUTE CONVERGENCE

draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-app-08.txt

draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-term-08.txt

draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth-08.txt

Co-authors are Scott Poretsky of Reef Point and Brent Imhoff of Juniper Networks

64th IETF Meeting – Vancouver

2

Current Status

• 3 documents completed 2nd WGLC

1. draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-app-08.txt, Considerations for Benchmarking IGP Data Plane Route Convergence

2. draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-term-08.txt, Terminology for Benchmarking IGP Data Plane Route Convergence

3. draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth-08.txt, Benchmarking Methodology for IGP Data Plane Route Convergence

• -09 will be issued soon to correct NITs

3

Nits for –09 (1 of 2)

• Clean-up Normative/Informative References• Clarify time measurement granularity is to milliseconds• Specify the packet size includes Payload, IP header, and Link-

Layer header• Clarify last sentence of Convergence Packet loss discussion

• Fix figures with formatting error of the ‘Tester’• Change "this draft describes" to "this document describes"

• Make Consistent use of term Throughput (not Forwarding Rate)

4

Nits for –09 (2 of 2)

• Found rfc3978 Section 5.4 paragraph 1 boilerplate (on line 696), which is fine, but *also* found rfc2026 Section 10.4C paragraph 1 boilerplate on line 42. It should be removed.

• Some lines – between 73 to 77 characters long (26 instances)– with control characters (52 instances)– With an extra space between words (5 instances)

• Considerations (Applicability) missing form feeds

5

Next Steps

• -09 will be issued soon with changes

1. List from Al Morton

2. 2 Nits from Thomas E

3. Nit from Timmons P

4. Few IETF I-D Nits

5. Anything else?

• Do we need additional non-BMWG reviewer?

• Goal is –09 to go to IESG