home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
Text File | 1999-10-14 | 66.8 KB | 1,740 lines |
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Network Working Group S. Bradner
- Request for Comments: 2544 Harvard University
- Obsoletes: 1944 J. McQuaid
- Category: Informational NetScout Systems
- March 1999
-
-
- Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect Devices
-
- Status of this Memo
-
- This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does
- not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this
- memo is unlimited.
-
- Copyright Notice
-
- Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
-
- IESG Note
-
- This document is a republication of RFC 1944 correcting the values
- for the IP addresses which were assigned to be used as the default
- addresses for networking test equipment. (See section C.2.2 ). This
- RFC replaces and obsoletes RFC 1944.
-
- Abstract
-
- This document discusses and defines a number of tests that may be
- used to describe the performance characteristics of a network
- interconnecting device. In addition to defining the tests this
- document also describes specific formats for reporting the results of
- the tests. Appendix A lists the tests and conditions that we believe
- should be included for specific cases and gives additional
- information about testing practices. Appendix B is a reference
- listing of maximum frame rates to be used with specific frame sizes
- on various media and Appendix C gives some examples of frame formats
- to be used in testing.
-
- 1. Introduction
-
- Vendors often engage in "specsmanship" in an attempt to give their
- products a better position in the marketplace. This often involves
- "smoke & mirrors" to confuse the potential users of the products.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 1]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- This document defines a specific set of tests that vendors can use to
- measure and report the performance characteristics of network
- devices. The results of these tests will provide the user comparable
- data from different vendors with which to evaluate these devices.
-
- A previous document, "Benchmarking Terminology for Network
- Interconnect Devices" (RFC 1242), defined many of the terms that are
- used in this document. The terminology document should be consulted
- before attempting to make use of this document.
-
- 2. Real world
-
- In producing this document the authors attempted to keep in mind the
- requirement that apparatus to perform the described tests must
- actually be built. We do not know of "off the shelf" equipment
- available to implement all of the tests but it is our opinion that
- such equipment can be constructed.
-
- 3. Tests to be run
-
- There are a number of tests described in this document. Not all of
- the tests apply to all types of devices under test (DUTs). Vendors
- should perform all of the tests that can be supported by a specific
- type of product. The authors understand that it will take a
- considerable period of time to perform all of the recommended tests
- nder all of the recommended conditions. We believe that the results
- are worth the effort. Appendix A lists some of the tests and
- conditions that we believe should be included for specific cases.
-
- 4. Evaluating the results
-
- Performing all of the recommended tests will result in a great deal
- of data. Much of this data will not apply to the evaluation of the
- devices under each circumstance. For example, the rate at which a
- router forwards IPX frames will be of little use in selecting a
- router for an environment that does not (and will not) support that
- protocol. Evaluating even that data which is relevant to a
- particular network installation will require experience which may not
- be readily available. Furthermore, selection of the tests to be run
- and evaluation of the test data must be done with an understanding of
- generally accepted testing practices regarding repeatability,
- variance and statistical significance of small numbers of trials.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 2]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- 5. Requirements
-
- In this document, the words that are used to define the significance
- of each particular requirement are capitalized. These words are:
-
- * "MUST" This word, or the words "REQUIRED" and "SHALL" mean that
- the item is an absolute requirement of the specification.
-
- * "SHOULD" This word or the adjective "RECOMMENDED" means that
- there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to
- ignore this item, but the full implications should be
- understood and the case carefully weighed before choosing a
- different course.
-
- * "MAY" This word or the adjective "OPTIONAL" means that this
- item is truly optional. One vendor may choose to include the
- item because a particular marketplace requires it or because it
- enhances the product, for example; another vendor may omit the
- same item.
-
- An implementation is not compliant if it fails to satisfy one or more
- of the MUST requirements for the protocols it implements. An
- implementation that satisfies all the MUST and all the SHOULD
- requirements for its protocols is said to be "unconditionally
- compliant"; one that satisfies all the MUST requirements but not all
- the SHOULD requirements for its protocols is said to be
- "conditionally compliant".
-
- 6. Test set up
-
- The ideal way to implement this series of tests is to use a tester
- with both transmitting and receiving ports. Connections are made
- from the sending ports of the tester to the receiving ports of the
- DUT and from the sending ports of the DUT back to the tester. (see
- Figure 1) Since the tester both sends the test traffic and receives
- it back, after the traffic has been forwarded but the DUT, the tester
- can easily determine if all of the transmitted packets were received
- and verify that the correct packets were received. The same
- functionality can be obtained with separate transmitting and
- receiving devices (see Figure 2) but unless they are remotely
- controlled by some computer in a way that simulates the single
- tester, the labor required to accurately perform some of the tests
- (particularly the throughput test) can be prohibitive.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 3]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- +------------+
- | |
- +------------| tester |<-------------+
- | | | |
- | +------------+ |
- | |
- | +------------+ |
- | | | |
- +----------->| DUT |--------------+
- | |
- +------------+
- Figure 1
-
- +--------+ +------------+ +----------+
- | | | | | |
- | sender |-------->| DUT |--------->| receiver |
- | | | | | |
- +--------+ +------------+ +----------+
- Figure 2
-
- 6.1 Test set up for multiple media types
-
- Two different setups could be used to test a DUT which is used in
- real-world networks to connect networks of differing media type,
- local Ethernet to a backbone FDDI ring for example. The tester could
- support both media types in which case the set up shown in Figure 1
- would be used.
-
- Two identical DUTs are used in the other test set up. (see Figure 3)
- In many cases this set up may more accurately simulate the real
- world. For example, connecting two LANs together with a WAN link or
- high speed backbone. This set up would not be as good at simulating
- a system where clients on a Ethernet LAN were interacting with a
- server on an FDDI backbone.
-
- +-----------+
- | |
- +---------------------| tester |<---------------------+
- | | | |
- | +-----------+ |
- | |
- | +----------+ +----------+ |
- | | | | | |
- +------->| DUT 1 |-------------->| DUT 2 |---------+
- | | | |
- +----------+ +----------+
-
- Figure 3
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 4]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
-
- 7. DUT set up
-
- Before starting to perform the tests, the DUT to be tested MUST be
- configured following the instructions provided to the user.
- Specifically, it is expected that all of the supported protocols will
- be configured and enabled during this set up (See Appendix A). It is
- expected that all of the tests will be run without changing the
- configuration or setup of the DUT in any way other than that required
- to do the specific test. For example, it is not acceptable to change
- the size of frame handling buffers between tests of frame handling
- rates or to disable all but one transport protocol when testing the
- throughput of that protocol. It is necessary to modify the
- configuration when starting a test to determine the effect of filters
- on throughput, but the only change MUST be to enable the specific
- filter. The DUT set up SHOULD include the normally recommended
- routing update intervals and keep alive frequency. The specific
- version of the software and the exact DUT configuration, including
- what functions are disabled, used during the tests MUST be included
- as part of the report of the results.
-
- 8. Frame formats
-
- The formats of the test frames to use for TCP/IP over Ethernet are
- shown in Appendix C: Test Frame Formats. These exact frame formats
- SHOULD be used in the tests described in this document for this
- protocol/media combination and that these frames will be used as a
- template for testing other protocol/media combinations. The specific
- formats that are used to define the test frames for a particular test
- series MUST be included in the report of the results.
-
- 9. Frame sizes
-
- All of the described tests SHOULD be performed at a number of frame
- sizes. Specifically, the sizes SHOULD include the maximum and minimum
- legitimate sizes for the protocol under test on the media under test
- and enough sizes in between to be able to get a full characterization
- of the DUT performance. Except where noted, at least five frame
- sizes SHOULD be tested for each test condition.
-
- Theoretically the minimum size UDP Echo request frame would consist
- of an IP header (minimum length 20 octets), a UDP header (8 octets)
- and whatever MAC level header is required by the media in use. The
- theoretical maximum frame size is determined by the size of the
- length field in the IP header. In almost all cases the actual
- maximum and minimum sizes are determined by the limitations of the
- media.
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 5]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- In theory it would be ideal to distribute the frame sizes in a way
- that would evenly distribute the theoretical frame rates. These
- recommendations incorporate this theory but specify frame sizes which
- are easy to understand and remember. In addition, many of the same
- frame sizes are specified on each of the media types to allow for
- easy performance comparisons.
-
- Note: The inclusion of an unrealistically small frame size on some of
- the media types (i.e. with little or no space for data) is to help
- characterize the per-frame processing overhead of the DUT.
-
- 9.1 Frame sizes to be used on Ethernet
-
- 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 1280, 1518
-
- These sizes include the maximum and minimum frame sizes permitted by
- the Ethernet standard and a selection of sizes between these extremes
- with a finer granularity for the smaller frame sizes and higher frame
- rates.
-
- 9.2 Frame sizes to be used on 4Mb and 16Mb token ring
-
- 54, 64, 128, 256, 1024, 1518, 2048, 4472
-
- The frame size recommendations for token ring assume that there is no
- RIF field in the frames of routed protocols. A RIF field would be
- present in any direct source route bridge performance test. The
- minimum size frame for UDP on token ring is 54 octets. The maximum
- size of 4472 octets is recommended for 16Mb token ring instead of the
- theoretical size of 17.9Kb because of the size limitations imposed by
- many token ring interfaces. The reminder of the sizes are selected
- to permit direct comparisons with other types of media. An IP (i.e.
- not UDP) frame may be used in addition if a higher data rate is
- desired, in which case the minimum frame size is 46 octets.
-
- 9.3 Frame sizes to be used on FDDI
-
- 54, 64, 128, 256, 1024, 1518, 2048, 4472
-
- The minimum size frame for UDP on FDDI is 53 octets, the minimum size
- of 54 is recommended to allow direct comparison to token ring
- performance. The maximum size of 4472 is recommended instead of the
- theoretical maximum size of 4500 octets to permit the same type of
- comparison. An IP (i.e. not UDP) frame may be used in addition if a
- higher data rate is desired, in which case the minimum frame size is
- 45 octets.
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 6]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- 9.4 Frame sizes in the presence of disparate MTUs
-
- When the interconnect DUT supports connecting links with disparate
- MTUs, the frame sizes for the link with the *larger* MTU SHOULD be
- used, up to the limit of the protocol being tested. If the
- interconnect DUT does not support the fragmenting of frames in the
- presence of MTU mismatch, the forwarding rate for that frame size
- shall be reported as zero.
-
- For example, the test of IP forwarding with a bridge or router that
- joins FDDI and Ethernet should use the frame sizes of FDDI when going
- from the FDDI to the Ethernet link. If the bridge does not support IP
- fragmentation, the forwarding rate for those frames too large for
- Ethernet should be reported as zero.
-
- 10. Verifying received frames
-
- The test equipment SHOULD discard any frames received during a test
- run that are not actual forwarded test frames. For example, keep-
- alive and routing update frames SHOULD NOT be included in the count
- of received frames. In any case, the test equipment SHOULD verify
- the length of the received frames and check that they match the
- expected length.
-
- Preferably, the test equipment SHOULD include sequence numbers in the
- transmitted frames and check for these numbers on the received
- frames. If this is done, the reported results SHOULD include in
- addition to the number of frames dropped, the number of frames that
- were received out of order, the number of duplicate frames received
- and the number of gaps in the received frame numbering sequence.
- This functionality is required for some of the described tests.
-
- 11. Modifiers
-
- It might be useful to know the DUT performance under a number of
- conditions; some of these conditions are noted below. The reported
- results SHOULD include as many of these conditions as the test
- equipment is able to generate. The suite of tests SHOULD be first
- run without any modifying conditions and then repeated under each of
- the conditions separately. To preserve the ability to compare the
- results of these tests any frames that are required to generate the
- modifying conditions (management queries for example) will be
- included in the same data stream as the normal test frames in place
- of one of the test frames and not be supplied to the DUT on a
- separate network port.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 7]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- 11.1 Broadcast frames
-
- In most router designs special processing is required when frames
- addressed to the hardware broadcast address are received. In bridges
- (or in bridge mode on routers) these broadcast frames must be flooded
- to a number of ports. The stream of test frames SHOULD be augmented
- with 1% frames addressed to the hardware broadcast address. The
- frames sent to the broadcast address should be of a type that the
- router will not need to process. The aim of this test is to
- determine if there is any effect on the forwarding rate of the other
- data in the stream. The specific frames that should be used are
- included in the test frame format document. The broadcast frames
- SHOULD be evenly distributed throughout the data stream, for example,
- every 100th frame.
-
- The same test SHOULD be performed on bridge-like DUTs but in this
- case the broadcast packets will be processed and flooded to all
- outputs.
-
- It is understood that a level of broadcast frames of 1% is much
- higher than many networks experience but, as in drug toxicity
- evaluations, the higher level is required to be able to gage the
- effect which would otherwise often fall within the normal variability
- of the system performance. Due to design factors some test equipment
- will not be able to generate a level of alternate frames this low.
- In these cases the percentage SHOULD be as small as the equipment can
- provide and that the actual level be described in the report of the
- test results.
-
- 11.2 Management frames
-
- Most data networks now make use of management protocols such as SNMP.
- In many environments there can be a number of management stations
- sending queries to the same DUT at the same time.
-
- The stream of test frames SHOULD be augmented with one management
- query as the first frame sent each second during the duration of the
- trial. The result of the query must fit into one response frame. The
- response frame SHOULD be verified by the test equipment. One example
- of the specific query frame that should be used is shown in Appendix
- C.
-
- 11.3 Routing update frames
-
- The processing of dynamic routing protocol updates could have a
- significant impact on the ability of a router to forward data frames.
- The stream of test frames SHOULD be augmented with one routing update
- frame transmitted as the first frame transmitted during the trial.
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 8]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- Routing update frames SHOULD be sent at the rate specified in
- Appendix C for the specific routing protocol being used in the test.
- Two routing update frames are defined in Appendix C for the TCP/IP
- over Ethernet example. The routing frames are designed to change the
- routing to a number of networks that are not involved in the
- forwarding of the test data. The first frame sets the routing table
- state to "A", the second one changes the state to "B". The frames
- MUST be alternated during the trial.
-
- The test SHOULD verify that the routing update was processed by the
- DUT.
-
- 11.4 Filters
-
- Filters are added to routers and bridges to selectively inhibit the
- forwarding of frames that would normally be forwarded. This is
- usually done to implement security controls on the data that is
- accepted between one area and another. Different products have
- different capabilities to implement filters.
-
- The DUT SHOULD be first configured to add one filter condition and
- the tests performed. This filter SHOULD permit the forwarding of the
- test data stream. In routers this filter SHOULD be of the form:
-
- forward input_protocol_address to output_protocol_address
-
- In bridges the filter SHOULD be of the form:
-
- forward destination_hardware_address
-
- The DUT SHOULD be then reconfigured to implement a total of 25
- filters. The first 24 of these filters SHOULD be of the form:
-
- block input_protocol_address to output_protocol_address
-
- The 24 input and output protocol addresses SHOULD not be any that are
- represented in the test data stream. The last filter SHOULD permit
- the forwarding of the test data stream. By "first" and "last" we
- mean to ensure that in the second case, 25 conditions must be checked
- before the data frames will match the conditions that permit the
- forwarding of the frame. Of course, if the DUT reorders the filters
- or does not use a linear scan of the filter rules the effect of the
- sequence in which the filters are input is properly lost.
-
- The exact filters configuration command lines used SHOULD be included
- with the report of the results.
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 9]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- 11.4.1 Filter Addresses
-
- Two sets of filter addresses are required, one for the single filter
- case and one for the 25 filter case.
-
- The single filter case should permit traffic from IP address
- 198.18.1.2 to IP address 198.19.65.2 and deny all other traffic.
-
- The 25 filter case should follow the following sequence.
-
- deny aa.ba.1.1 to aa.ba.100.1
- deny aa.ba.2.2 to aa.ba.101.2
- deny aa.ba.3.3 to aa.ba.103.3
- ...
- deny aa.ba.12.12 to aa.ba.112.12
- allow aa.bc.1.2 to aa.bc.65.1
- deny aa.ba.13.13 to aa.ba.113.13
- deny aa.ba.14.14 to aa.ba.114.14
- ...
- deny aa.ba.24.24 to aa.ba.124.24
- deny all else
-
-
- All previous filter conditions should be cleared from the router
- before this sequence is entered. The sequence is selected to test to
- see if the router sorts the filter conditions or accepts them in the
- order that they were entered. Both of these procedures will result
- in a greater impact on performance than will some form of hash
- coding.
-
- 12. Protocol addresses
-
- It is easier to implement these tests using a single logical stream
- of data, with one source protocol address and one destination
- protocol address, and for some conditions like the filters described
- above, a practical requirement. Networks in the real world are not
- limited to single streams of data. The test suite SHOULD be first run
- with a single protocol (or hardware for bridge tests) source and
- destination address pair. The tests SHOULD then be repeated with
- using a random destination address. While testing routers the
- addresses SHOULD be random and uniformly distributed over a range of
- 256 networks and random and uniformly distributed over the full MAC
- range for bridges. The specific address ranges to use for IP are
- shown in Appendix C.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 10]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- 13. Route Set Up
-
- It is not reasonable that all of the routing information necessary to
- forward the test stream, especially in the multiple address case,
- will be manually set up. At the start of each trial a routing update
- MUST be sent to the DUT. This routing update MUST include all of the
- network addresses that will be required for the trial. All of the
- addresses SHOULD resolve to the same "next-hop". Normally this will
- be the address of the receiving side of the test equipment. This
- routing update will have to be repeated at the interval required by
- the routing protocol being used. An example of the format and
- repetition interval of the update frames is given in Appendix C.
-
- 14. Bidirectional traffic
-
- Normal network activity is not all in a single direction. To test
- the bidirectional performance of a DUT, the test series SHOULD be run
- with the same data rate being offered from each direction. The sum of
- the data rates should not exceed the theoretical limit for the media.
-
- 15. Single stream path
-
- The full suite of tests SHOULD be run along with whatever modifier
- conditions that are relevant using a single input and output network
- port on the DUT. If the internal design of the DUT has multiple
- distinct pathways, for example, multiple interface cards each with
- multiple network ports, then all possible types of pathways SHOULD be
- tested separately.
-
- 16. Multi-port
-
- Many current router and bridge products provide many network ports in
- the same module. In performing these tests first half of the ports
- are designated as "input ports" and half are designated as "output
- ports". These ports SHOULD be evenly distributed across the DUT
- architecture. For example if a DUT has two interface cards each of
- which has four ports, two ports on each interface card are designated
- as input and two are designated as output. The specified tests are
- run using the same data rate being offered to each of the input
- ports. The addresses in the input data streams SHOULD be set so that
- a frame will be directed to each of the output ports in sequence so
- that all "output" ports will get an even distribution of packets from
- this input. The same configuration MAY be used to perform a
- bidirectional multi-stream test. In this case all of the ports are
- considered both input and output ports and each data stream MUST
- consist of frames addressed to all of the other ports.
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 11]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- Consider the following 6 port DUT:
-
- --------------
- ---------| in A out X|--------
- ---------| in B out Y|--------
- ---------| in C out Z|--------
- --------------
-
- The addressing of the data streams for each of the inputs SHOULD be:
-
- stream sent to input A:
- packet to out X, packet to out Y, packet to out Z
- stream sent to input B:
- packet to out X, packet to out Y, packet to out Z
- stream sent to input C
- packet to out X, packet to out Y, packet to out Z
-
- Note that these streams each follow the same sequence so that 3
- packets will arrive at output X at the same time, then 3 packets at
- Y, then 3 packets at Z. This procedure ensures that, as in the real
- world, the DUT will have to deal with multiple packets addressed to
- the same output at the same time.
-
- 17. Multiple protocols
-
- This document does not address the issue of testing the effects of a
- mixed protocol environment other than to suggest that if such tests
- are wanted then frames SHOULD be distributed between all of the test
- protocols. The distribution MAY approximate the conditions on the
- network in which the DUT would be used.
-
- 18. Multiple frame sizes
-
- This document does not address the issue of testing the effects of a
- mixed frame size environment other than to suggest that if such tests
- are wanted then frames SHOULD be distributed between all of the
- listed sizes for the protocol under test. The distribution MAY
- approximate the conditions on the network in which the DUT would be
- used. The authors do not have any idea how the results of such a test
- would be interpreted other than to directly compare multiple DUTs in
- some very specific simulated network.
-
- 19. Testing performance beyond a single DUT.
-
- In the performance testing of a single DUT, the paradigm can be
- described as applying some input to a DUT and monitoring the output.
- The results of which can be used to form a basis of characterization
- of that device under those test conditions.
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 12]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- This model is useful when the test input and output are homogenous
- (e.g., 64-byte IP, 802.3 frames into the DUT; 64 byte IP, 802.3
- frames out), or the method of test can distinguish between dissimilar
- input/output. (E.g., 1518 byte IP, 802.3 frames in; 576 byte,
- fragmented IP, X.25 frames out.)
-
- By extending the single DUT test model, reasonable benchmarks
- regarding multiple DUTs or heterogeneous environments may be
- collected. In this extension, the single DUT is replaced by a system
- of interconnected network DUTs. This test methodology would support
- the benchmarking of a variety of device/media/service/protocol
- combinations. For example, a configuration for a LAN-to-WAN-to-LAN
- test might be:
-
- (1) 802.3-> DUT 1 -> X.25 @ 64kbps -> DUT 2 -> 802.3
-
- Or a mixed LAN configuration might be:
-
- (2) 802.3 -> DUT 1 -> FDDI -> DUT 2 -> FDDI -> DUT 3 -> 802.3
-
- In both examples 1 and 2, end-to-end benchmarks of each system could
- be empirically ascertained. Other behavior may be characterized
- through the use of intermediate devices. In example 2, the
- configuration may be used to give an indication of the FDDI to FDDI
- capability exhibited by DUT 2.
-
- Because multiple DUTs are treated as a single system, there are
- limitations to this methodology. For instance, this methodology may
- yield an aggregate benchmark for a tested system. That benchmark
- alone, however, may not necessarily reflect asymmetries in behavior
- between the DUTs, latencies introduce by other apparatus (e.g.,
- CSUs/DSUs, switches), etc.
-
- Further, care must be used when comparing benchmarks of different
- systems by ensuring that the DUTs' features/configuration of the
- tested systems have the appropriate common denominators to allow
- comparison.
-
- 20. Maximum frame rate
-
- The maximum frame rates that should be used when testing LAN
- connections SHOULD be the listed theoretical maximum rate for the
- frame size on the media.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 13]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- The maximum frame rate that should be used when testing WAN
- connections SHOULD be greater than the listed theoretical maximum
- rate for the frame size on that speed connection. The higher rate
- for WAN tests is to compensate for the fact that some vendors employ
- various forms of header compression.
-
- A list of maximum frame rates for LAN connections is included in
- Appendix B.
-
- 21. Bursty traffic
-
- It is convenient to measure the DUT performance under steady state
- load but this is an unrealistic way to gauge the functioning of a DUT
- since actual network traffic normally consists of bursts of frames.
- Some of the tests described below SHOULD be performed with both
- steady state traffic and with traffic consisting of repeated bursts
- of frames. The frames within a burst are transmitted with the
- minimum legitimate inter-frame gap.
-
- The objective of the test is to determine the minimum interval
- between bursts which the DUT can process with no frame loss. During
- each test the number of frames in each burst is held constant and the
- inter-burst interval varied. Tests SHOULD be run with burst sizes of
- 16, 64, 256 and 1024 frames.
-
- 22. Frames per token
-
- Although it is possible to configure some token ring and FDDI
- interfaces to transmit more than one frame each time that the token
- is received, most of the network devices currently available transmit
- only one frame per token. These tests SHOULD first be performed
- while transmitting only one frame per token.
-
- Some current high-performance workstation servers do transmit more
- than one frame per token on FDDI to maximize throughput. Since this
- may be a common feature in future workstations and servers,
- interconnect devices with FDDI interfaces SHOULD be tested with 1, 4,
- 8, and 16 frames per token. The reported frame rate SHOULD be the
- average rate of frame transmission over the total trial period.
-
- 23. Trial description
-
- A particular test consists of multiple trials. Each trial returns
- one piece of information, for example the loss rate at a particular
- input frame rate. Each trial consists of a number of phases:
-
- a) If the DUT is a router, send the routing update to the "input"
- port and pause two seconds to be sure that the routing has settled.
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 14]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- b) Send the "learning frames" to the "output" port and wait 2
- seconds to be sure that the learning has settled. Bridge learning
- frames are frames with source addresses that are the same as the
- destination addresses used by the test frames. Learning frames for
- other protocols are used to prime the address resolution tables in
- the DUT. The formats of the learning frame that should be used are
- shown in the Test Frame Formats document.
-
- c) Run the test trial.
-
- d) Wait for two seconds for any residual frames to be received.
-
- e) Wait for at least five seconds for the DUT to restabilize.
-
- 24. Trial duration
-
- The aim of these tests is to determine the rate continuously
- supportable by the DUT. The actual duration of the test trials must
- be a compromise between this aim and the duration of the benchmarking
- test suite. The duration of the test portion of each trial SHOULD be
- at least 60 seconds. The tests that involve some form of "binary
- search", for example the throughput test, to determine the exact
- result MAY use a shorter trial duration to minimize the length of the
- search procedure, but the final determination SHOULD be made with
- full length trials.
-
- 25. Address resolution
-
- The DUT SHOULD be able to respond to address resolution requests sent
- by the DUT wherever the protocol requires such a process.
-
- 26. Benchmarking tests:
-
- Note: The notation "type of data stream" refers to the above
- modifications to a frame stream with a constant inter-frame gap, for
- example, the addition of traffic filters to the configuration of the
- DUT.
-
- 26.1 Throughput
-
- Objective: To determine the DUT throughput as defined in RFC 1242.
-
- Procedure: Send a specific number of frames at a specific rate
- through the DUT and then count the frames that are transmitted by the
- DUT. If the count of offered frames is equal to the count of received
- frames, the fewer frames are received than were transmitted, the rate
- of the offered stream is reduced and the test is rerun.
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 15]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- The throughput is the fastest rate at which the count of test frames
- transmitted by the DUT is equal to the number of test frames sent to
- it by the test equipment.
-
- Reporting format: The results of the throughput test SHOULD be
- reported in the form of a graph. If it is, the x coordinate SHOULD be
- the frame size, the y coordinate SHOULD be the frame rate. There
- SHOULD be at least two lines on the graph. There SHOULD be one line
- showing the theoretical frame rate for the media at the various frame
- sizes. The second line SHOULD be the plot of the test results.
- Additional lines MAY be used on the graph to report the results for
- each type of data stream tested. Text accompanying the graph SHOULD
- indicate the protocol, data stream format, and type of media used in
- the tests.
-
- We assume that if a single value is desired for advertising purposes
- the vendor will select the rate for the minimum frame size for the
- media. If this is done then the figure MUST be expressed in frames
- per second. The rate MAY also be expressed in bits (or bytes) per
- second if the vendor so desires. The statement of performance MUST
- include a/ the measured maximum frame rate, b/ the size of the frame
- used, c/ the theoretical limit of the media for that frame size, and
- d/ the type of protocol used in the test. Even if a single value is
- used as part of the advertising copy, the full table of results
- SHOULD be included in the product data sheet.
-
- 26.2 Latency
-
- Objective: To determine the latency as defined in RFC 1242.
-
- Procedure: First determine the throughput for DUT at each of the
- listed frame sizes. Send a stream of frames at a particular frame
- size through the DUT at the determined throughput rate to a specific
- destination. The stream SHOULD be at least 120 seconds in duration.
- An identifying tag SHOULD be included in one frame after 60 seconds
- with the type of tag being implementation dependent. The time at
- which this frame is fully transmitted is recorded (timestamp A). The
- receiver logic in the test equipment MUST recognize the tag
- information in the frame stream and record the time at which the
- tagged frame was received (timestamp B).
-
- The latency is timestamp B minus timestamp A as per the relevant
- definition frm RFC 1242, namely latency as defined for store and
- forward devices or latency as defined for bit forwarding devices.
-
- The test MUST be repeated at least 20 times with the reported value
- being the average of the recorded values.
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 16]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- This test SHOULD be performed with the test frame addressed to the
- same destination as the rest of the data stream and also with each of
- the test frames addressed to a new destination network.
-
- Reporting format: The report MUST state which definition of latency
- (from RFC 1242) was used for this test. The latency results SHOULD
- be reported in the format of a table with a row for each of the
- tested frame sizes. There SHOULD be columns for the frame size, the
- rate at which the latency test was run for that frame size, for the
- media types tested, and for the resultant latency values for each
- type of data stream tested.
-
- 26.3 Frame loss rate
-
- Objective: To determine the frame loss rate, as defined in RFC 1242,
- of a DUT throughout the entire range of input data rates and frame
- sizes.
-
- Procedure: Send a specific number of frames at a specific rate
- through the DUT to be tested and count the frames that are
- transmitted by the DUT. The frame loss rate at each point is
- calculated using the following equation:
-
- ( ( input_count - output_count ) * 100 ) / input_count
-
-
- The first trial SHOULD be run for the frame rate that corresponds to
- 100% of the maximum rate for the frame size on the input media.
- Repeat the procedure for the rate that corresponds to 90% of the
- maximum rate used and then for 80% of this rate. This sequence
- SHOULD be continued (at reducing 10% intervals) until there are two
- successive trials in which no frames are lost. The maximum
- granularity of the trials MUST be 10% of the maximum rate, a finer
- granularity is encouraged.
-
- Reporting format: The results of the frame loss rate test SHOULD be
- plotted as a graph. If this is done then the X axis MUST be the
- input frame rate as a percent of the theoretical rate for the media
- at the specific frame size. The Y axis MUST be the percent loss at
- the particular input rate. The left end of the X axis and the bottom
- of the Y axis MUST be 0 percent; the right end of the X axis and the
- top of the Y axis MUST be 100 percent. Multiple lines on the graph
- MAY used to report the frame loss rate for different frame sizes,
- protocols, and types of data streams.
-
- Note: See section 18 for the maximum frame rates that SHOULD be used.
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 17]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- 26.4 Back-to-back frames
-
- Objective: To characterize the ability of a DUT to process back-to-
- back frames as defined in RFC 1242.
-
- Procedure: Send a burst of frames with minimum inter-frame gaps to
- the DUT and count the number of frames forwarded by the DUT. If the
- count of transmitted frames is equal to the number of frames
- forwarded the length of the burst is increased and the test is rerun.
- If the number of forwarded frames is less than the number
- transmitted, the length of the burst is reduced and the test is
- rerun.
-
- The back-to-back value is the number of frames in the longest burst
- that the DUT will handle without the loss of any frames. The trial
- length MUST be at least 2 seconds and SHOULD be repeated at least 50
- times with the average of the recorded values being reported.
-
- Reporting format: The back-to-back results SHOULD be reported in the
- format of a table with a row for each of the tested frame sizes.
- There SHOULD be columns for the frame size and for the resultant
- average frame count for each type of data stream tested. The
- standard deviation for each measurement MAY also be reported.
-
- 26.5 System recovery
-
- Objective: To characterize the speed at which a DUT recovers from an
- overload condition.
-
- Procedure: First determine the throughput for a DUT at each of the
- listed frame sizes.
-
- Send a stream of frames at a rate 110% of the recorded throughput
- rate or the maximum rate for the media, whichever is lower, for at
- least 60 seconds. At Timestamp A reduce the frame rate to 50% of the
- above rate and record the time of the last frame lost (Timestamp B).
- The system recovery time is determined by subtracting Timestamp B
- from Timestamp A. The test SHOULD be repeated a number of times and
- the average of the recorded values being reported.
-
- Reporting format: The system recovery results SHOULD be reported in
- the format of a table with a row for each of the tested frame sizes.
- There SHOULD be columns for the frame size, the frame rate used as
- the throughput rate for each type of data stream tested, and for the
- measured recovery time for each type of data stream tested.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 18]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- 26.6 Reset
-
- Objective: To characterize the speed at which a DUT recovers from a
- device or software reset.
-
- Procedure: First determine the throughput for the DUT for the
- minimum frame size on the media used in the testing.
-
- Send a continuous stream of frames at the determined throughput rate
- for the minimum sized frames. Cause a reset in the DUT. Monitor the
- output until frames begin to be forwarded and record the time that
- the last frame (Timestamp A) of the initial stream and the first
- frame of the new stream (Timestamp B) are received. A power
- interruption reset test is performed as above except that the power
- to the DUT should be interrupted for 10 seconds in place of causing a
- reset.
-
- This test SHOULD only be run using frames addressed to networks
- directly connected to the DUT so that there is no requirement to
- delay until a routing update is received.
-
- The reset value is obtained by subtracting Timestamp A from Timestamp
- B.
-
- Hardware and software resets, as well as a power interruption SHOULD
- be tested.
-
- Reporting format: The reset value SHOULD be reported in a simple set
- of statements, one for each reset type.
-
- 27. Security Considerations
-
- Security issues are not addressed in this document.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 19]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- 28. Editors' Addresses
-
- Scott Bradner
- Harvard University
- 1350 Mass. Ave, room 813
- Cambridge, MA 02138
-
- Phone: +1 617 495-3864
- Fax: +1 617 496-8500
- EMail: sob@harvard.edu
-
-
- Jim McQuaid
- NetScout Systems
- 4 Westford Tech Park Drive
- Westford, MA 01886
-
- Phone: +1 978 614-4116
- Fax: +1 978 614-4004
- EMail: mcquaidj@netscout.com
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 20]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- Appendix A: Testing Considerations
-
- A.1 Scope Of This Appendix
-
- This appendix discusses certain issues in the benchmarking
- methodology where experience or judgment may play a role in the tests
- selected to be run or in the approach to constructing the test with a
- particular DUT. As such, this appendix MUST not be read as an
- amendment to the methodology described in the body of this document
- but as a guide to testing practice.
-
- 1. Typical testing practice has been to enable all protocols to be
- tested and conduct all testing with no further configuration of
- protocols, even though a given set of trials may exercise only one
- protocol at a time. This minimizes the opportunities to "tune" a
- DUT for a single protocol.
-
- 2. The least common denominator of the available filter functions
- should be used to ensure that there is a basis for comparison
- between vendors. Because of product differences, those conducting
- and evaluating tests must make a judgment about this issue.
-
- 3. Architectural considerations may need to be considered. For
- example, first perform the tests with the stream going between
- ports on the same interface card and the repeat the tests with the
- stream going into a port on one interface card and out of a port
- on a second interface card. There will almost always be a best
- case and worst case configuration for a given DUT architecture.
-
- 4. Testing done using traffic streams consisting of mixed protocols
- has not shown much difference between testing with individual
- protocols. That is, if protocol A testing and protocol B testing
- give two different performance results, mixed protocol testing
- appears to give a result which is the average of the two.
-
- 5. Wide Area Network (WAN) performance may be tested by setting up
- two identical devices connected by the appropriate short- haul
- versions of the WAN modems. Performance is then measured between
- a LAN interface on one DUT to a LAN interface on the other DUT.
-
- The maximum frame rate to be used for LAN-WAN-LAN configurations is a
- judgment that can be based on known characteristics of the overall
- system including compression effects, fragmentation, and gross link
- speeds. Practice suggests that the rate should be at least 110% of
- the slowest link speed. Substantive issues of testing compression
- itself are beyond the scope of this document.
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 21]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- Appendix B: Maximum frame rates reference
-
- (Provided by Roger Beeman, Cisco Systems)
-
- Size Ethernet 16Mb Token Ring FDDI
- (bytes) (pps) (pps) (pps)
-
- 64 14880 24691 152439
- 128 8445 13793 85616
- 256 4528 7326 45620
- 512 2349 3780 23585
- 768 1586 2547 15903
- 1024 1197 1921 11996
- 1280 961 1542 9630
- 1518 812 1302 8138
-
- Ethernet size
- Preamble 64 bits
- Frame 8 x N bits
- Gap 96 bits
-
- 16Mb Token Ring size
- SD 8 bits
- AC 8 bits
- FC 8 bits
- DA 48 bits
- SA 48 bits
- RI 48 bits ( 06 30 00 12 00 30 )
- SNAP
- DSAP 8 bits
- SSAP 8 bits
- Control 8 bits
- Vendor 24 bits
- Type 16 bits
- Data 8 x ( N - 18) bits
- FCS 32 bits
- ED 8 bits
- FS 8 bits
-
- Tokens or idles between packets are not included
-
- FDDI size
- Preamble 64 bits
- SD 8 bits
- FC 8 bits
- DA 48 bits
- SA 48 bits
- SNAP
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 22]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- DSAP 8 bits
- SSAP 8 bits
- Control 8 bits
- Vendor 24 bits
- Type 16 bits
- Data 8 x ( N - 18) bits
- FCS 32 bits
- ED 4 bits
- FS 12 bits
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 23]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- Appendix C: Test Frame Formats
-
- This appendix defines the frame formats that may be used with these
- tests. It also includes protocol specific parameters for TCP/IP over
- Ethernet to be used with the tests as an example.
-
- C.1. Introduction
-
- The general logic used in the selection of the parameters and the
- design of the frame formats is explained for each case within the
- TCP/IP section. The same logic has been used in the other sections.
- Comments are used in these sections only if there is a protocol
- specific feature to be explained. Parameters and frame formats for
- additional protocols can be defined by the reader by using the same
- logic.
-
- C.2. TCP/IP Information
-
- The following section deals with the TCP/IP protocol suite.
-
- C.2.1 Frame Type.
-
- An application level datagram echo request is used for the test data
- frame in the protocols that support such a function. A datagram
- protocol is used to minimize the chance that a router might expect a
- specific session initialization sequence, as might be the case for a
- reliable stream protocol. A specific defined protocol is used because
- some routers verify the protocol field and refuse to forward unknown
- protocols.
-
- For TCP/IP a UDP Echo Request is used.
-
- C.2.2 Protocol Addresses
-
- Two sets of addresses must be defined: first the addresses assigned
- to the router ports, and second the address that are to be used in
- the frames themselves and in the routing updates.
-
- The network addresses 192.18.0.0 through 198.19.255.255 are have been
- assigned to the BMWG by the IANA for this purpose. This assignment
- was made to minimize the chance of conflict in case a testing device
- were to be accidentally connected to part of the Internet. The
- specific use of the addresses is detailed below.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 24]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- C.2.2.1 Router port protocol addresses
-
- Half of the ports on a multi-port router are referred to as "input"
- ports and the other half as "output" ports even though some of the
- tests use all ports both as input and output. A contiguous series of
- IP Class C network addresses from 198.18.1.0 to 198.18.64.0 have been
- assigned for use on the "input" ports. A second series from
- 198.19.1.0 to 198.19.64.0 have been assigned for use on the "output"
- ports. In all cases the router port is node 1 on the appropriate
- network. For example, a two port DUT would have an IP address of
- 198.18.1.1 on one port and 198.19.1.1 on the other port.
-
- Some of the tests described in the methodology memo make use of an
- SNMP management connection to the DUT. The management access address
- for the DUT is assumed to be the first of the "input" ports
- (198.18.1.1).
-
- C.2.2.2 Frame addresses
-
- Some of the described tests assume adjacent network routing (the
- reboot time test for example). The IP address used in the test frame
- is that of node 2 on the appropriate Class C network. (198.19.1.2 for
- example)
-
- If the test involves non-adjacent network routing the phantom routers
- are located at node 10 of each of the appropriate Class C networks.
- A series of Class C network addresses from 198.18.65.0 to
- 198.18.254.0 has been assigned for use as the networks accessible
- through the phantom routers on the "input" side of DUT. The series
- of Class C networks from 198.19.65.0 to 198.19.254.0 have been
- assigned to be used as the networks visible through the phantom
- routers on the "output" side of the DUT.
-
- C.2.3 Routing Update Frequency
-
- The update interval for each routing protocol is may have to be
- determined by the specifications of the individual protocol. For IP
- RIP, Cisco IGRP and for OSPF a routing update frame or frames should
- precede each stream of test frames by 5 seconds. This frequency is
- sufficient for trial durations of up to 60 seconds. Routing updates
- must be mixed with the stream of test frames if longer trial periods
- are selected. The frequency of updates should be taken from the
- following table.
-
- IP-RIP 30 sec
- IGRP 90 sec
- OSPF 90 sec
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 25]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- C.2.4 Frame Formats - detailed discussion
-
- C.2.4.1 Learning Frame
-
- In most protocols a procedure is used to determine the mapping
- between the protocol node address and the MAC address. The Address
- Resolution Protocol (ARP) is used to perform this function in TCP/IP.
- No such procedure is required in XNS or IPX because the MAC address
- is used as the protocol node address.
-
- In the ideal case the tester would be able to respond to ARP requests
- from the DUT. In cases where this is not possible an ARP request
- should be sent to the router's "output" port. This request should be
- seen as coming from the immediate destination of the test frame
- stream. (i.e. the phantom router (Figure 2) or the end node if
- adjacent network routing is being used.) It is assumed that the
- router will cache the MAC address of the requesting device. The ARP
- request should be sent 5 seconds before the test frame stream starts
- in each trial. Trial lengths of longer than 50 seconds may require
- that the router be configured for an extended ARP timeout.
-
- +--------+ +------------+
- | | | phantom |------ P LAN
- A
- IN A------| DUT |------------| |------ P LAN
- B
- | | OUT A | router |------ P LAN
- C
- +--------+ +------------+
-
- Figure 2
-
- In the case where full routing is being used
-
- C.2.4.2 Routing Update Frame
-
- If the test does not involve adjacent net routing the tester must
- supply proper routing information using a routing update. A single
- routing update is used before each trial on each "destination" port
- (see section C.24). This update includes the network addresses that
- are reachable through a phantom router on the network attached to the
- port. For a full mesh test, one destination network address is
- present in the routing update for each of the "input" ports. The
- test stream on each "input" port consists of a repeating sequence of
- frames, one to each of the "output" ports.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 26]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- C.2.4.3 Management Query Frame
-
- The management overhead test uses SNMP to query a set of variables
- that should be present in all DUTs that support SNMP. The variables
- for a single interface only are read by an NMS at the appropriate
- intervals. The list of variables to retrieve follow:
-
- sysUpTime
- ifInOctets
- ifOutOctets
- ifInUcastPkts
- ifOutUcastPkts
-
- C.2.4.4 Test Frames
-
- The test frame is an UDP Echo Request with enough data to fill out
- the required frame size. The data should not be all bits off or all
- bits on since these patters can cause a "bit stuffing" process to be
- used to maintain clock synchronization on WAN links. This process
- will result in a longer frame than was intended.
-
- C.2.4.5 Frame Formats - TCP/IP on Ethernet
-
- Each of the frames below are described for the 1st pair of DUT ports,
- i.e. "input" port #1 and "output" port #1. Addresses must be changed
- if the frame is to be used for other ports.
-
- C.2.6.1 Learning Frame
-
- ARP Request on Ethernet
-
- -- DATAGRAM HEADER
- offset data (hex) description
- 00 FF FF FF FF FF FF dest MAC address send to
- broadcast address
- 06 xx xx xx xx xx xx set to source MAC address
- 12 08 06 ARP type
- 14 00 01 hardware type Ethernet = 1
- 16 08 00 protocol type IP = 800
- 18 06 hardware address length 48 bits
- on Ethernet
- 19 04 protocol address length 4 octets
- for IP
- 20 00 01 opcode request = 1
- 22 xx xx xx xx xx xx source MAC address
- 28 xx xx xx xx source IP address
- 32 FF FF FF FF FF FF requesting DUT's MAC address
- 38 xx xx xx xx DUT's IP address
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 27]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- C.2.6.2 Routing Update Frame
-
- -- DATAGRAM HEADER
- offset data (hex) description
- 00 FF FF FF FF FF FF dest MAC address is broadcast
- 06 xx xx xx xx xx xx source hardware address
- 12 08 00 type
-
- -- IP HEADER
- 14 45 IP version - 4, header length (4
- byte units) - 5
- 15 00 service field
- 16 00 EE total length
- 18 00 00 ID
- 20 40 00 flags (3 bits) 4 (do not
- fragment),
- fragment offset-0
- 22 0A TTL
- 23 11 protocol - 17 (UDP)
- 24 C4 8D header checksum
- 26 xx xx xx xx source IP address
- 30 xx xx xx destination IP address
- 33 FF host part = FF for broadcast
-
- -- UDP HEADER
- 34 02 08 source port 208 = RIP
- 36 02 08 destination port 208 = RIP
- 38 00 DA UDP message length
- 40 00 00 UDP checksum
-
- -- RIP packet
- 42 02 command = response
- 43 01 version = 1
- 44 00 00 0
-
- -- net 1
- 46 00 02 family = IP
- 48 00 00 0
- 50 xx xx xx net 1 IP address
- 53 00 net not node
- 54 00 00 00 00 0
- 58 00 00 00 00 0
- 62 00 00 00 07 metric 7
-
- -- net 2
- 66 00 02 family = IP
- 68 00 00 0
- 70 xx xx xx net 2 IP address
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 28]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- 73 00 net not node
- 74 00 00 00 00 0
- 78 00 00 00 00 0
- 82 00 00 00 07 metric 7
-
- -- net 3
- 86 00 02 family = IP
- 88 00 00 0
- 90 xx xx xx net 3 IP address
- 93 00 net not node
- 94 00 00 00 00 0
- 98 00 00 00 00 0
- 102 00 00 00 07 metric 7
-
- -- net 4
- 106 00 02 family = IP
- 108 00 00 0
- 110 xx xx xx net 4 IP address
- 113 00 net not node
- 114 00 00 00 00 0
- 118 00 00 00 00 0
- 122 00 00 00 07 metric 7
-
- -- net 5
- 126 00 02 family = IP
- 128 00 00 0
- 130 00 net 5 IP address
- 133 00 net not node
- 134 00 00 00 00 0
- 138 00 00 00 00 0
- 142 00 00 00 07 metric 7
-
- -- net 6
- 146 00 02 family = IP
- 148 00 00 0
- 150 xx xx xx net 6 IP address
- 153 00 net not node
- 154 00 00 00 00 0
- 158 00 00 00 00 0
- 162 00 00 00 07 metric 7
-
- C.2.4.6 Management Query Frame
-
- To be defined.
-
- C.2.6.4 Test Frames
-
- UDP echo request on Ethernet
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 29]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- -- DATAGRAM HEADER
- offset data (hex) description
- 00 xx xx xx xx xx xx set to dest MAC address
- 06 xx xx xx xx xx xx set to source MAC address
- 12 08 00 type
-
- -- IP HEADER
- 14 45 IP version - 4 header length 5 4
- byte units
- 15 00 TOS
- 16 00 2E total length*
- 18 00 00 ID
- 20 00 00 flags (3 bits) - 0 fragment
- offset-0
- 22 0A TTL
- 23 11 protocol - 17 (UDP)
- 24 C4 8D header checksum*
- 26 xx xx xx xx set to source IP address**
- 30 xx xx xx xx set to destination IP address**
-
- -- UDP HEADER
- 34 C0 20 source port
- 36 00 07 destination port 07 = Echo
- 38 00 1A UDP message length*
- 40 00 00 UDP checksum
-
- -- UDP DATA
- 42 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 some data***
- 50 08 09 0A 0B 0C 0D 0E 0F
-
- * - change for different length frames
-
- ** - change for different logical streams
-
- *** - fill remainder of frame with incrementing octets,
- repeated if required by frame length
-
- Values to be used in Total Length and UDP message length fields:
-
- frame size total length UDP message length
- 64 00 2E 00 1A
- 128 00 6E 00 5A
- 256 00 EE 00 9A
- 512 01 EE 01 9A
- 768 02 EE 02 9A
- 1024 03 EE 03 9A
- 1280 04 EE 04 9A
- 1518 05 DC 05 C8
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 30]
-
- RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology March 1999
-
-
- Full Copyright Statement
-
- Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
-
- This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
- others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
- or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
- and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
- kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
- included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
- document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
- the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
- Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
- developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
- copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
- followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
- English.
-
- The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
- revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
-
- This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
- "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
- TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
- BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
- HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
- MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Bradner & McQuaid Informational [Page 31]
-
-