75 th IETF, Stockholm, Sweden July 26-31, 2009 BMWG SIP Benchmarking BMWG, Monday July 27, 2009 Scott Poretsky Carol Davids Vijay K. Gurbani.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Re-INVITE Handling draft-camarillo-sipping-reinvite-00.txt
Advertisements

1 © 2001, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. © 2004, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Location Conveyance in SIP draft-ietf-sipping-location-requirements-02.
The leader in session border control for trusted, first class interactive communications.
SIP Interconnect Guidelines draft-hancock-sip-interconnect-guidelines-02 David Hancock, Daryl Malas.
69th IETF Chicago IETF BMWG WLAN Switch Benchmarking Tarunesh Ahuja, Tom Alexander, Scott Bradner, Sanjay Hooda, Jerry Perser, Muninder Sambi.
NETW-250 Troubleshooting Last Update Copyright Kenneth M. Chipps Ph.D. 1.
Voice over IP Fundamentals
SIP Testing Methodology Elie Cohen ProLab PM 17/01/2003.
SIP Performance Benchmarking draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-term-04 draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-04 August 2, 2012 Prof. Carol Davids, Illinois Inst. of Tech.
SIP Performance Benchmarking draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-term-03 draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-03 March 28, 2011 Prof. Carol Davids, Illinois Inst. of Tech.
Testing SIP Services Over IP. Agenda  SIP testing – advanced scenarios  SIP testing - Real Life Examples.
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) By: Zhixin Chen.
A simulation-based comparative evaluation of transport protocols for SIP Authors: M.Lulling*, J.Vaughan Department of Computer science, University college.
A General approach to MPLS Path Protection using Segments Ashish Gupta Ashish Gupta.
Internet Telephony Helen J. Wang Network Reading Group, Jan 27, 99 Acknowledgement: Jimmy, Bhaskar.
A General approach to MPLS Path Protection using Segments Ashish Gupta Ashish Gupta.
Agenda Introduction to 3GPP Introduction to SIP IP Multimedia Subsystem Service Routing in IMS Implementation Conclusions.
SIP Performance Metrics 66 th IETF – Montreal Daryl Malas.
Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) Common Log Format (CLF) Vijay K. Gurbani Bell Laboratories/Alcatel-Lucent 75 th IETF, Stockholm, Sweden July 26-31, 2009.
SIP Session Initiation Protocol Short Introduction Artur Hecker, ENST.
Draft-constantine-ippm-tcp-throughput-tm-00.txt 1 TCP Throughput Testing Methodology IETF 76 Hiroshima Barry Constantine
SIP End-to-End Performance Metrics draft-malas-performance-metrics-06.txt.
Session Initiation Protocol Team Members: Manjiri Ayyar Pallavi Murudkar Sriusha Kottalanka Vamsi Ambati Girish Satya LeeAnn Tam.
WG RAQMON Internet-Drafts RMON MIB WG Meeting Washington, Nov. 11, 2004.
Module 10: Monitoring ISA Server Overview Monitoring Overview Configuring Alerts Configuring Session Monitoring Configuring Logging Configuring.
1 Proposal for BENCHMARKING SIP NETWORKING DEVICES draft-poretsky-sip-bench-term-01.txt draft-poretsky-sip-bench-meth-00.txt Co-authors are Scott Poretsky.
Assuring Performance of Carrier-Class Networks and Enterprise Contact Centers SP-11: Ensuring Service Quality While Increasing Revenue February 4, 2009.
Managing Handoff. For operations and management to detect and isolating Handoff being particularly challenging, therefore it is important to understand.
Proposal for new Working Group Item: Core Router Software Accelerated Life Testing (draft-poretsky-routersalt-term-00.txt) Authors: Scott Poretsky, Avici.
Presented By Team Netgeeks SIP Session Initiation Protocol.
Application Performance Metrics APM BOF July 25, 2007 Alan Clark Al Morton IETF 69 – Chicago – July 2007.
IGP Data Plane Convergence draft-ietf-bmwg-dataplane-conv-meth-14.txt draft-ietf-bmwg-dataplane-conv-term-14.txt draft-ietf-bmwg-dataplane-conv-app-14.txt.
SIP Performance Benchmarking draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-term-02 draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-02 July 24, 2010 Prof. Carol Davids, Illinois Inst. of Tech.
Doc.: wng Submission - Study Project Proposal WPP – Tools & Parameters November 2003 Bob Mandeville, Iometrics Bob Mandeville
DNS SRV and NAPTR Use for SPEERMINT - Tom Creighton, Gaurav Khandpur Comcast SPEERMINT Intermin Meeting Philadelphia Sept
SIPREC draft-ietf-siprec-req-02 Requirements for Media Recording using SIP Draft authors: K. Rehor, A. Hutton, L. Portman, R. Jain, H. Lum IETF 78.5 Interim.
Omar A. Abouabdalla Network Research Group (USM) SIP – Functionality and Structure of the Protocol SIP – Functionality and Structure of the Protocol By.
VoIP Signaling Protocols A signaling protocol is a common language spoken by telephones and call-management servers, the PSTN, and legacy PBX systems as.
SIPREC draft-ietf-siprec-req-00 Requirements for Media Recording using SIP Draft authors: K. Rehor, A. Hutton, L. Portman, R. Jain, H. Lum IETF 78 Ken.
SIP Interconnect Guidelines draft-hancock-sip-interconnect-guidelines-01 David Hancock, Daryl Malas.
3GPP2 Circuit-Switched Video Conferencing & Packet-Switched Video Telephony Services Overview Scott Droste Chair, TSG-C WG1 Applications & Services Motorola.
SIP and SIPPING WGsMay, IETF Interim Meeting Orit levin Conferencing Requirements for SIP Based Applications.
1 SIP Performance Benchmarking draft-poretsky-sip-bench-term-04.txt draft-poretsky-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-02.txt BMWG, IETF-70 Vancouver Dec 2007 Davids IIT.
SIP Performance Benchmarking draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-term-01 draft-ietf-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-01 March 22, 2010 Prof. Carol Davids, Illinois Inst. of Tech.
Doc.: IEEE /0651r0 Submission May 2006 Royce Fernald - Intel CorporationSlide 1 Video Delivery vs. Attenuation in a Conducted Environment Notice:
1 SIP Performance Benchmarking draft-poretsky-sip-bench-term-03.txt draft-poretsky-bmwg-sip-bench-meth-01.txt BMWG, IETF-69 Chicago July 2007 Poretsky,
UCT-COE Seminar Page 1 January 23, 2016 Vitalis G.O Neco Ventura Charging QoS-Enabled Services in Inter-domain IMS Frameworks Department of Electrical.
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.
March 20, 2007BLISS BOF IETF-681 Requirements and Implementation Options for the Multiple Line Appearance Feature using the Session Initiation Protocol.
1 IGP Data Plane Convergence Benchmarking draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-app-01.txt draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-term-01.txt draft -ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth-01.txt.
Congestion Notification Process for Real-Time Traffic draft-babiarz-tsvwg-rtecn-01.txt Jozef Babiarz Kwok Ho Chan Victor Firoiu 60 th IETF, Aug. 5 th,
1 Authors: Scott Poretsky, Reef Point Systems Shankar Rao, Qwest Communications 64th IETF Meeting – Vancouver Accelerated Stress Benchmarking draft-ietf-bmwg-acc-bench-term-07.txt.
1 Benchmarking Methodology WG (bmwg) 71st IETF – Philadelphia, PA USA Monday, March 10, 2008, 13:00-15:00 (Salon J) Chairs: –Al Morton
The Session Initiation Protocol - SIP
Doc.: IEEE t Submission November 2004 Tom AlexanderSlide 1 A Link Layer Metrics Proposal for TGT Tom Alexander VeriWave, Inc. November.
S Postgraduate Course in Radio Communications. Application Layer Mobility in WLAN Antti Keurulainen,
1 IGP Data Plane Convergence Benchmarking draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-app-00.txt draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-term-00.txt draft -ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth-00.txt.
1 SIP End-to-End Performance Metrics 70 th IETF Conference PMOL Daryl Malas.
Authors: Scott Poretsky, Quarry Technologies Brent Imhoff, LightCore
Session-Independent Policies draft-ietf-sipping-session-indep-policy-02 Volker Hilt Jonathan Rosenberg Gonzalo.
SIP Performance Benchmarking
draft-ietf-simple-message-sessions-00 Ben Campbell
Authors: Scott Poretsky, Quarry Technologies Brent Imhoff, LightCore
IETF 78 Ken Rehor on behalf of the team
Accelerated Stress Benchmarking
IETF BMWG FRR Related Benchmarking Drafts Status and Update
IETF BMWG FRR Related Benchmarking Drafts Status and Update
Network Announcements with SIP
SIP Performance Metrics
SIP Basics Workshop Dennis Baron July 20, 2005.
Presentation transcript:

75 th IETF, Stockholm, Sweden July 26-31, 2009 BMWG SIP Benchmarking BMWG, Monday July 27, 2009 Scott Poretsky Carol Davids Vijay K. Gurbani

Required Document Updates 1.Add REGISTRATION and IM specific terms as needed 2.Remove Packet Loss from IM and Registration Rate test case 3.Add option for AUTH Challenge in Meth and update Session Attempt Failure definition in Term to allow 401 and 407 when AUTH is used. 4.Session Attempt Failure definition should use the Establishment Threshold Time term 5.Add number of endpoints for forking option and establish an upper bound to the response time 6.Add codec as a media parameter since this could impact setup rate 2 IETF 75 BMWG

Required Document Reviews 1.Review “Reporting Format” to ensure it is complete 2.Assess alignment with PMOL end-to-end SIP benchmarking work 3.Ensure SIP Overload is sufficiently covered in the methodology while providing overload mechanism-agnostic method(s) to observe and measure the overload condition (as requested by SIPPING) IETF 75 BMWG3

Reporting Format (Current)‏ Test Setup SIP Transport Protocol = ____________________ Session Attempt Rate = _____________________ IS Media Attempt Rate = ____________________ Total Sessions Attempted = __________________ Media Streams Per Session = ________________ Associated Media Protocol = _________________ Media Packet Size = ________________________ Media Offered Load = _______________________ Media Session Hold Time = __________________ Establishment Threshold Time = _______________ Loop Detecting Option = _____________________ Forking Option = ___________________________ 4 Benchmarks for IS Session Capacity = __________________________ Session Overload Capacity = __________________ Session Establishment Rate = _________________ Session Establishment Performance = __________ Session Attempt Delay = _____________________ Session Disconnect Delay = __________________ Benchmarks for NS IM Rate = _______________________________ Registration Rate = _________________________ IETF 74 BMWG

Alignment with PMOL IETF 75 BMWG5 We set out to determine if the measurements in the BMWG metrics draft can be used to predict measurements made using the metrics defined in the PMOL end-to-end performance draft. We conclude that the answer is “No.” BMWG takes individual core elements and stresses them to the point of failure. Its metrics describe the session attempt rates that cause failure of core elements. PMOL metrics describe the delays between signaling messages, the duration of sessions and the percent of session attempt failures to session attempts. The next two pages contain examples of the divergence of the two sets of metrics.

Examples IETF 75 BMWG6 1. Ineffective Session Attempts The appearance of an “Ineffective Session Attempt” (ISA) as defined in PMOL, triggers the end of a test cycle in BMWG. PMOL counts ISAs, since PMOL is interested in the end-to-end experience. BMWG stops the test since it has tested to failure. 2. Session Attempts PMOL does not define a session attempt rate. It does define session attempt delays. This is because PMOL is interested in the end-to-end performance of a session. The BMWG draft defines a session attempt rate as a parameter of test. This is because a metric of interest is the rate at which the first “Ineffective Session Attempt” occurs.

Alignment with PMOL IETF 75 BMWG7 Session Establishment Ratio vs. Session Attempt Rate The PMOL metric SER is the percent of session attempts that are not redirected and that are answered. The BMWG Session Attempt Rate is a parameter of the test. It is the number of sessions that the Emulated Agent attempts to establish with the DUT/SUT over a specified time interval. The next pages show the comparison of PMOL metrics with BMWG parameters of test as well as the comparison of PMOL metrics with BMWG metrics.

PMOL Metrics vs BMWG Parameters of Test PMOL metrics Registration request delay Session request delay Session disconnect delay Session duration time Hops per request Session establishment ratio Session defects ratio Ineffective session attempts Session disconnect failures Session completion ratio IETF 75 BMWG8 BMWG parameters Session attempt rate IS media attempt rate Establishment threshold time Media Packet size Media Offered Load Media Session Hold Time Loop detection and forking options

PMOL Metrics vs BMWG Parameters of Test PMOL Session establishment ratio (SER) – a metric –(# of INVITE Requests w/ associated 200 OK) / ((Total # of INVITE Requests)-(# of INVITE Requests w/ 3XX Response)) x 100 (The percent of session attempts that are not redirected and that are answered.) Ineffective session attempts (ISA) – a metric –Ineffective session attempts occur when a proxy or agent internally releases a setup request with a failed or overloaded condition. BMWG Session Attempt Rate – a parameter of test –The number of sessions that the Emulated Agent attempts to establish with the DUT/SUT over a specified time interval. IS Media Attempt Rate – a parameter of test –Configuration on the Emulated Agent for number of INVITE- Initiated sessions with Associated Media to be established at the DUT per continuous one- second time intervals. IETF 75 BMWG9

PMOL metrics vs. BMWG metrics PMOL metrics Registration request delay Session request delay Session disconnect delay Session duration time Hops per request Session establishment ratio Session defects ratio Ineffective session attempts Session disconnect failures Session completion ration IETF 75 BMWG10 BMWG metrics Registration rate Session establishment rate Session capacity Session overload capacity Session establishment performance Session attempt delay IM rate

PMOL Session establishment ratio (SER) – a metric –(# of INVITE Requests w/ associated 200 OK) / ((Total # of INVITE Requests)-(# of INVITE Requests w/ 3XX Response)) x 100 BMWG Session Establishment Rate – a metric –The maximum average rate at which the DUT/SUT can successfully establish sessions. Session Establishment Performance – a metric –The percent of Session Attempts that become Established Sessions over the duration of a benchmarking test. IETF 75 BMWG11 PMOL metrics vs. BMWG metrics

PMOL Session request delay (SRD) – a metric –Time of Status Indicative Response minus Time of INVITE BMWG Session Attempt Delay – a metric –The average time measured at the Emulated Agent for a Session Attempt to result in an Established Session. IETF 75 BMWG12 PMOL metrics vs. BMWG metrics