draft-ietf-ccamp-dpm-06.txt   draft-ietf-ccamp-dpm-07.txt 
Network Working Group W. Sun, Ed. Network Working Group W. Sun, Ed.
Internet-Draft SJTU Internet-Draft SJTU
Intended status: Standards Track G. Zhang, Ed. Intended status: Standards Track G. Zhang, Ed.
Expires: December 10, 2012 CATR Expires: February 22, 2013 CATR
June 8, 2012 August 21, 2012
Label Switched Path (LSP) Data Path Delay Metrics in Generalized MPLS/ Label Switched Path (LSP) Data Path Delay Metrics in Generalized MPLS/
MPLS-TE Networks MPLS-TE Networks
draft-ietf-ccamp-dpm-06.txt draft-ietf-ccamp-dpm-07.txt
Abstract Abstract
When setting up a label switched path (LSP) in Generalized MPLS and When setting up a label switched path (LSP) in Generalized MPLS and
MPLS/TE networks, the completion of the signaling process does not MPLS/TE networks, the completion of the signaling process does not
necessarily mean that the cross connection along the LSP have been necessarily mean that the cross connection along the LSP have been
programmed accordingly and in a timely manner. Meanwhile, the programmed accordingly and in a timely manner. Meanwhile, the
completion of signaling process may be used by applications as completion of signaling process may be used by applications as
indication that data path has become usable. The existence of this indication that data path has become usable. The existence of the
delay and the possible failure of cross connection programming, if inconsistency between the signaling messages and cross connection
not properly treated, will result in data loss or even application programing, and the possible failure of cross connection programming,
if not properly treated, will result in data loss or even application
failure. Characterization of this performance can thus help failure. Characterization of this performance can thus help
designers to improve the application model and to build more robust designers to improve the application model and to build more robust
applications. This document defines a series of performance metrics applications. This document defines a series of performance metrics
to evaluate the connectivity of data path in the signaling process. to evaluate the connectivity of data path in the signaling process.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 10, 2012. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 22, 2013.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 26, line 27 skipping to change at page 26, line 27
sample. In computing this, undefined values SHOULD be treated as sample. In computing this, undefined values SHOULD be treated as
infinitely large. Note that this means that the minimum could thus infinitely large. Note that this means that the minimum could thus
be undefined if all the dT values are undefined. In addition, the be undefined if all the dT values are undefined. In addition, the
metric minimum SHOULD be set to undefined if the sample is empty. metric minimum SHOULD be set to undefined if the sample is empty.
11.2. The Median of Metric 11.2. The Median of Metric
Metric median is the median of the dT values in the given sample. In Metric median is the median of the dT values in the given sample. In
computing the median, the undefined values MUST NOT be counted in. computing the median, the undefined values MUST NOT be counted in.
The Median SHOULD be set to undefined if all the dT values are The Median SHOULD be set to undefined if all the dT values are
undefined, or if the sample is empty. undefined, or if the sample is empty.When the number of defined
values in the given sample is small, the metric median may not be
typical and SHOULD be used carefully.
11.3. The percentile of Metric 11.3. The percentile of Metric
The "empirical distribution function" (EDF) of a set of scalar The "empirical distribution function" (EDF) of a set of scalar
measurements is a function F(x) which for any x gives the fractional measurements is a function F(x) which for any x gives the fractional
proportion of the total measurements that were <= x. proportion of the total measurements that were <= x.
Given a percentage X, the X-th percentile of Metric means the Given a percentage X, the X-th percentile of Metric means the
smallest value of x for which F(x) >= X. In computing the percentile, smallest value of x for which F(x) >= X. In computing the percentile,
undefined values MUST NOT be included. undefined values MUST NOT be included.
skipping to change at page 30, line 8 skipping to change at page 30, line 8
The security considerations pertaining to the original RSVP protocol The security considerations pertaining to the original RSVP protocol
[RFC2205] and its TE extensions [RFC3209] also remain relevant. [RFC2205] and its TE extensions [RFC3209] also remain relevant.
13. IANA Considerations 13. IANA Considerations
This document makes no requests for IANA action. This document makes no requests for IANA action.
14. Acknowledgements 14. Acknowledgements
We wish to thank Adrian Farrel, Lou Berger and Al Morton for their We wish to thank Adrian Farrel, Lou Berger and Al Morton for their
comments and help. comments and help. We also wish to thank the reviews done by Klaas
Wierenga and Alexey Melnikov.
This document contains ideas as well as text that have appeared in This document contains ideas as well as text that have appeared in
existing IETF documents. The authors wish to thank G. Almes, S. existing IETF documents. The authors wish to thank G. Almes, S.
Kalidindi and M. Zekauskas. Kalidindi and M. Zekauskas.
We also wish to thank Weisheng Hu, Yaohui Jin and Wei Guo in the We also wish to thank Weisheng Hu, Yaohui Jin and Wei Guo in the
state key laboratory of advanced optical communication systems and state key laboratory of advanced optical communication systems and
networks for the valuable comments. We also wish to thank the networks for the valuable comments. We also wish to thank the
support from NSFC and 863 program of China. support from NSFC and 863 program of China.
 End of changes. 6 change blocks. 
9 lines changed or deleted 13 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/