Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
RPR'ers,
Based on the 'underwhelming' responses that I got
back on this, we'll consider the performance metrics discussion closed for now,
and move on.
As I mentioned before, I want for us to work on
identifying the scenarios, and metrics that we want to use as a starting point.
I know that some of you already put extensive efforts into producing simulation
results, but we want to all get to run a consistent subset for various
proposals. I've already posted some preliminary thoughts and suggestions (and
got the same underwhelming response!).
Please share with us any thoughts that you have on
this subset, and if you have suggestions on more details. In the meantime, I'll
work on putting together more details too. I'd like to see us go to the Interim
meeting with some of these discussions already started, so that we just work on
ironing out any points of disagreements that we may have. Hopefully, we can
reach to some consensus on a starting subset that we all agree to, and start
running some coherent simulations after the Interim and share the results in the
November plenary. As you know, we're going to have a lot of simulation work
to do, so getting a head start on it can help us avoid the situation where
this becomes a gating factor in the future causing delays in establishing the
standard.
Thanks.
Khaled Amer
President, AmerNet Architecture Analysis and Performance Modeling Specialists Phone: (949)552-1114 13711 Solitaire Way, Irvine, CA 92620 Fax: (949)552-1116 e-mail: khaledamer@xxxxxxx ----- Original Message -----
From: Khaled Amer
To: Reflector RPRSG
Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2000 8:48 PM
Subject: RPR Perf. Metrics Discussions All,
Attached is the last version of the presentation
that I gave in the La Jolla plenary meeting in July. This includes the
suggestions that were raised in the discussions that we had during the
meeting. Please have a look at them and make sure
that they cover everything that we discussed. If not, please point out any
points that I may have missed.
I'd like for us to reach an agreement on this
before the interim meeting that we're having in a few weeks in Santa
Clara.
Please provide any input or concerns that you may
have by Friday 8/11. I'll plan on posting the 'final' version the following
Monday for your review. After that, we'll consider this closed (at least for
now).
Another couple of points:
- I would like to request that we begin
thinking about some simulation scenarios that we can use as a starting
point. We'll have to start with some subset and then add on as we decide is
appropriate. Along with this, we should also identify in these scenarios a
subset of the output results or metrics for these simulation runs. We can
start by addressing one or more of the of the metrics that we have in the
attached presentation.
For example, I'll go ahead and make a strawman
attempt at this. We can use this strawman to open up the discussion for bashing
it! How about starting with the following
subset of the goals that we identified for this work such as:
I know that this is a rough strawman, and most of
the items need to be defined in more details. But we can use this as a
starting point to trigger some thoughts and discussions on the reflector.
If you have any thoughts on this, or just any thoughts on your mind (well ...
related to this!), please speak up. Let's start discussing this on the
reflector in the coming couple of weeks so that we can make good progress in the
meeting, instead of starting the discussion then.
- Several of you indicated availability of traffic
patterns that were taken off the Internet or other networking environments that
would be useful for us to use in the simulations. In my mind, we need things
like packet size distributions, interarrival times, burstiness, application
and protocol distributions, and any other relevant characteristics of network
traffics that we may want to consider in the simulations. If you have
information that would help with this, please let us know on the reflector and
we would appreciate you making it available and discussing it during the next
meeting.
Any other suggestions are most
welcome.
Khaled Amer
President, AmerNet Architecture Analysis and Performance Modeling Specialists Phone: (949)552-1114 13711 Solitaire Way, Irvine, CA 92620 Fax: (949)552-1116 e-mail: khaledamer@xxxxxxx |
Performance Metrics vers 2.0.ppt