home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
- CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_
-
-
- Reported by Osmund de Souza/AT&T
-
- OPSTAT Minutes
-
- The proposed Agenda for the meeting was:
-
-
- o Administration
- o Metrics - old, new, and exotic
- o Measurement polling periods
- o Query language and exchange protocol
- o Report formats
- o Closing
-
-
- The proposed Agenda was approved. Osmund de Souza volunteered to take
- the Minutes.
-
- Metrics: The group reviewed the metrics that have been proposed so far.
- Bernhard had written a ``metrics paper'' before the meeting to help
- focus the discussion. We agreed that the basic set of measurements
- should include the following:
-
-
- o Octets in/out, unicast packets in/out, non-unicast packets in/out
- for each interface.
-
- o IP packets forwarded, IP packet discarded, (similar counts for
- other network layer protocols), for each router.
-
-
- We then talked about whether we should expand this set to include new
- and exotic metrics and if so, what they should be. There were ideas
- about measuring availability, stability, delay performance, congestion,
- and line errors. We decided that rather than try to come to a
- conclusion at the meeting we would take it to the mailing list. We did
- agree that the metrics paper should not explicitly include or exclude
- these new measures, but rather should leave the door open for expanding
- the base set later. We also agreed that initially it would be wise to
- work with variables within the current MIB structure, though this should
- not limit us as the opstat architecture matures.
-
- Measurement: As usual, we had a lively discussion about measurement
- polling intervals. Vikas Aggarwal presented the results of a study he
- did on JvNCNet. In the study he periodically polled each interface in
- the network to download traffic data to a central manager. Since it
- took three minutes to poll all the interfaces, the polling period was
- three minutes. He computed the utilization of each link in the network
- for each three minute interval, and also for integer multiples of three
- minutes by aggregating the measurements. The results showed that as the
- ``integration'' interval increased, the average of the average
-
- 1
-
-
-
-
-
- utilization in each interval remained unchanged (to within some small
- error) but the variation in average utilization for each interval
- decreased. Hence, for instance, the three minute utilizations had
- several peaks above 70
-
- The discussion led to the understanding that measurement collection
- should ideally be done on a small enough time scale to capture
- short-term variations and peaks in traffic loads. Burstier traffic
- requires a smaller polling interval. However, small interval polling on
- a large network may be difficult for most network management systems,
- and there is the problem of storing the measurements for later
- processing. While no definite conclusion was reached on this one, the
- group is close to settling the issue by gravitating towards a polling
- interval of 5-15 minutes.
-
- Query Language: We reviewed the paper that Bernhard had put together
- (and circulated on the mailing list) to define a query language syntax
- for the statistics client/server model. The language is geared around
- the following simple commands: login, exit, help, format, and select.
- There was some discussion about the meaning of the ``format'' command
- and what help the ``help'' command was supposed to give. We decided
- that ``format'' should let the user know the storage/presentation format
- of the data in the query, and that ``help'' should explain the meaning
- and syntax of commands as well as the nature of the data named in the
- query. Bernhard agreed to incorporate our comments in the document
- before resending it to the list.
-
- David O'Leary said that he may be able to get a (more?) graduate
- student to work on a statistics client/server protocol. He did not have
- a clear idea of the direction in which the work would proceed, but would
- keep the group updated through the mailing list.
-
- Report Formats: We did not have enough time to spend discussing the
- format of the reports. We reviewed the ideas that had come up at
- previous meetings and that Bernhard had summarized in a ``reports
- paper''. We did agree that we may have spent too much effort in the
- past defining the ``reports for upper management'', aka The McDonald's
- Report. We felt that we should concentrate on engineering reports for
- network operations and planning. These reports could then be stripped
- of an appropriate amount of useful information to present to upper
- management.
-
- Closing: An item that came up during the discussion was the need for us
- to interface more with other groups, notably SNMP, and Internet
- Accounting. We were also pleased about the progress we had made since
- our previous meeting in St. Louis.
-
- Finally the meeting agreed to use the papers produced by Bernhard as a
- basis for the continued work.
-
- Attendees
-
- Thomas Brisco brisco@rutgers.edu
- Gigi Chu gigic@hpspd.spd.hp.com
-
- 2
-
-
-
-
-
- Henry Clark henryc@oar.net
- Shari Galitzer shari@gateway.mitre.org
- Kenneth Goodwin goodwin@psc.edu
- Phillip Gross pgross@nis.ans.net
- Michael Khalandovsky mlk@ftp.com
- Tim Lee-Thorp ngc!tim@uunet.uu.net
- Chris Myers chris@wugate.wustl.edu
- David O'Leary oleary@sura.net
- Robert Reschly reschly@brl.mil
- Mark Saake saake@llnl.gov
- Timothy Salo tjs@msc.edu
- Erik Sherk sherk@nmc.cit.cornell.edu
- Frank Solensky solensky@clearpoint.com
- Bernhard Stockman boss@sunet.se
- Roxanne Streeter streeter@nsipo.nasa.gov
- David Waitzman djw@bbn.com
- Chris Waters-Pierandozzi waters@jvnc.net
- Gerard White ger@concord.com
- Osmund de Souza desouza@osdpc.ho.att.com
-
-
-
- 3
-