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 ----- 
    
    
    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:
    
      - Ring performance: 
      
        - Metrics: ring utilization under heavy loads, 
        global throughput and goodput
 
       - Fairness: 
      
        - Metrics: per class and per node throughput, 
        end-to-end packet delay for scenarios that demonstrate fairness 
        (TBD)
 
       - Congestion control: 
      
        - Metrics: per class and per node throughput 
        in response to a congestion condition occurring 
    (TBD)
 
 
    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