Bridge Out: Extending RFC 2544 for DCB Devices Timmons C. Player David Newman IETF BMWG interim meeting, 30 October 2009.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
FCoE Overview IEEE CommSoc/SP Chapter Austin, Texas, May Tony Hurson
Advertisements

Chapter 10 Congestion Control in Data Networks1 Congestion Control in Data Networks and Internets COMP5416 Chapter 10.
Switching Bridging and Switching Risanuri Hidayat Bridges and switches are data communications devices that operate principally at Layer 2 of the OSI reference.
EE689 Lecture 14 Review of Last lecture Receiver-driven Layered Multicast.
Introduction. 2 What Is SmartFlow? SmartFlow is the first application to test QoS and analyze the performance and behavior of the new breed of policy-based.
1 QoS Schemes for IEEE Wireless LAN – An Evaluation by Anders Lindgren, Andreas Almquist and Olov Schelen Presented by Tony Sung, 10 th Feburary.
Draft-novak-bmwg-ipflow-meth-05.txt IP Flow Information Accounting and Export Benchmarking Methodology
66th IETF Meeting Montreal IETF BMWG WLAN Switch & Mesh Benchmarking Jerry Perser
Response to doc.: IEEE 11-13/0789r1 Response to IEEE comments on PAR for IEEE P802.1Qcd July 2013 Pat Thaler, IEEE DCB task group chair. Slide.
Draft-constantine-ippm-tcp-throughput-tm-02.txt 1 TCP Throughput Testing Methodology IETF 77 Anaheim Barry Constantine Reinhard.
Module 12 MXL DCB <Place supporting graphic here>
Introduction to IT and Communications Technology Justin Champion C208 – 3292 Ethernet Switching CE
D ATA C ENTER E THERNET M. Keshtgary. O VERVIEW Residential vs. Data Center Ethernet Review of Ethernet Addresses, devices, speeds, algorithms Enhancements.
Unwanted Link Layer Traffic in Large IEEE Wireless Network By Naga V K Akkineni.
Multiple Links Failover Mechanism for RPR Interconnected Rings IEEE WG Orlando, Florida USA March 11~16, 2007.
Data Center Bridging
24/10/2015draft-novak-bmwg-ipflow-meth- 03.txt 1 IP Flow Information Accounting and Export Benchmarking Methodology
Committed information rate
Doc.: IEEE wpp Submission September 2004 B. Mandeville, Iometrix A First Stab at Metrics Bob Mandeville
RMCAT Application Interaction draft-zanaty-rmcat-app-interaction-01 Mo Zanaty, Varun Singh, Suhas Nandakumar, Zahed Sarker IETF 90.
Data Center Benchmarking Drafts Lucien Avramov, Cisco Jacob Rapp, HP July 2013 IETF 90 - Berlin draft-dcbench-def-00 draft-bmwg-dcbench-methodology-01.
Cisco 3 - Switching Perrine. J Page 16/4/2016 Chapter 4 Switches The performance of shared-medium Ethernet is affected by several factors: data frame broadcast.
Congestion Management Study Group1 September 2004 PAR Title Information technology -- Telecommunications and information exchange between systems -- Local.
Geneva, Switzerland, 13 July 2013 IEEE 802.1Qca Path Control and Reservation János Farkas, Ericsson Joint IEEE-SA and ITU Workshop on Ethernet.
1 Traffic Management Benchmarking Framework IETF 85 Atlanta Barry Constantine Tim Copley Ram Krishnan.
CEN 5501C - Computer Networks - Spring UF/CISE - Newman1 Computer Networks Chapter 5 – Hubs, Switches, VLANs, Fast Ethernet.
1 Traffic Management Benchmarking Framework IETF 87 Berlin draft-constantine-bmwg-traffic-management-01 Barry Constantine Tim.
Network convergence – role in I/O virtualization What is a converged network? A single network capable of transmitting both Ethernet and storage traffic.
Improvements in throughput in n The design goal of the n is “HT” for High Throughput. The throughput is high indeed: up to 600 Mbps in raw.
CO5023 LAN Redundancy.
Mitigating starvation in Wireless Ad hoc Networks: Multi-channel MAC and Power Control Adviser : Frank, Yeong-Sung Lin Presented by Shin-Yao Chen.
IGP Data Plane Convergence draft-ietf-bmwg-dataplane-conv-meth-15.txt draft-ietf-bmwg-dataplane-conv-term-15.txt draft-ietf-bmwg-dataplane-conv-app-15.txt.
CCNA3 Module 4 Brierley Module 4. CCNA3 Module 4 Brierley Topics LAN congestion and its effect on network performance Advantages of LAN segmentation in.
1 Traffic Management Benchmarking Framework IETF 89 London draft-constantine-bmwg-traffic-management-03 Barry Constantine Tim.
IEEE Inter Networking Shortest Path Bridging Security Audio/Video Bridging DCB (802.1) Task Group PFC 802.1Qbb ETS 802.1Qaz DCBX 802.1Qaz QCN 802.1Qau.
RMCAT Application Interaction draft-zanaty-rmcat-app-interaction-00 Mo Zanaty, Varun Singh, Suhas Nandakumar IETF 89.
Ethernet Congestion Management Brad Booth, Intel September 2004.
1 Content-Aware Device Benchmarking Methodology (draft-hamilton-bmwg-ca-bench-meth-05) BMWG Meeting IETF-79 Beijing November 2010 Mike Hamilton
Doc.: IEEE t Submission November 2004 Tom AlexanderSlide 1 A Link Layer Metrics Proposal for TGT Tom Alexander VeriWave, Inc. November.
1 Lecture 15 Internet resource allocation and QoS Resource Reservation Protocol Integrated Services Differentiated Services.
Mr. Sathish Kumar. M Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering I’ve learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what.
Chapter-5 STP. Introduction Examine a redundant design In a hierarchical design, redundancy is achieved at the distribution and core layers through additional.
Performance Comparison of Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocols Presented by Venkata Suresh Tamminiedi Computer Science Department Georgia State University.
Cisco Confidential 1 © 2010 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Fiber Channel over Ethernet Marco Voi – Cisco Systems – Workshop CCR INFN.
Data Center Benchmarking Drafts Lucien Avramov, Cisco Jacob Rapp, Cisco July 2013 IETF 87 - Berlin draft-dcbench-def-00 draft-bmwg-dcbench-methodology-01.
Xiao Min Jin LiZhong Wu Bo Yang Jian draft-xiao-mpls-tp-throughput-estimation-00.
MAC Protocols for Sensor Networks
Ethernet Packet Filtering – Part 2 Øyvind Holmeide 10/28/2014 by.
Simplify network configuration for VMs by harmonizing multiple Bridging, QOS, DCB and CNA implementations Shyam Iyer.
Advanced Network Tap application for
MAC Protocols for Sensor Networks
Data Center Benchmarking Drafts
IPv6 Benchmarking Methodology
Future TRILL and TRILL Related Work
Benchmarking Network-layer Traffic Control Mechanisms
Benchmarking Framework
Topics in Distributed Wireless Medium Access Control
Chapter 4 Data Link Layer Switching
Review of July 2013 Proposed Pars
Benchmarking Framework draft-constantine-bmwg-traffic-management-02
Enabling Ultra Low Latency Applications Over Ethernet
Enabling Ultra Low Latency Applications Over Ethernet
RNI Requirements Imposed by PBB-TE
IEEE 802.1Qca Path Control and Reservation
Time Sensitive Networking for 5G
Current State of Affairs For Data Center Convergence (DCB)
Congestion Control in Data Networks and Internets
Improvement to TWT Parameter set selection
Congestion Control, Quality of Service, & Internetworking
Chapter 11. Frame Relay Background Frame Relay Protocol Architecture
Presentation transcript:

Bridge Out: Extending RFC 2544 for DCB Devices Timmons C. Player David Newman IETF BMWG interim meeting, 30 October 2009

Agenda World’s shortest DCB intro Limitations of throughput for DCB Limitations of latency for DCB Other problems New metrics for DCB testing

Introducing DCB DCB (aka DCE, CEE) converges data, storage onto single network IEEE 802.1Qbb (aka PFC) adds flow control per VLAN priority Other DCB mechanisms for: –Capabilities exchange (DCBX) –Congestion notification (802.1Qau) –Shaping (802.1Qaz)

What’s wrong with throughput? RFC 1242 throughput is fine – for Ethernet –Canonical method: Measure oload with 0 loss, followed by oload with packet loss –Highest zero-drop rate is the throughput rate This does not work for DCB

What’s wrong with throughput? Loss should never occur with DCB –Flow control throttles transmitters –Impossible to have success case, then fail case No distinction between iload and oload –Device that forwards 0 packets could have “line-rate throughput” in DCB context No distinction among traffic classes –Different classes may (and probably will) have different maximum forwarding rates

What’s wrong with latency? RFC 2544, section 26.2, requires measurement at throughput rate –Oops: There is no throughput rate RFC 1242 uses different measurements for store-and-forward, bit-forwarding –Oops: DCB devices may alternate modes RFC 2544 does not measure per class

What else can go wrong? 2544/2889 tests use “lock step” pattern 1 -> [2,3,4]; 2 -> [3,4,1]; 3-> [4,1,2]; etc. Very regular packet departure intervals

What else can go wrong? DCB devices quickly go out of lock step Not just per-port but also per-class Much tougher on schedulers Traffic class XOFF/XON interval (µsec) Inter-PFC burst interval (µsec) P P P

DCB testing: What’s new Proposed new work item: New metric: Queueput –Measures MOL per classification –Multiple queueputs, one per classification, are possible Maximum forwarding rate –Same concept as in 2285/2889 –For DCB, more meaningful than throughput –Extended to measure per classification

DCB testing: What’s new Back-off measures DUT PFC overhead –Conceptually similar to 2544 frame loss test –Offer traffic above queueput rate; then reduce iload until the DUT no longer pauses ingress traffic –Measure per classification

DCB testing: What’s new Back-to-back –Conceptually similar to back-off in RFCs 1242/2544 –Extended to measure per classification Other DCB metrics?

Thanks!