Hi Al,
Thanks for the explanation, I am OK if this is the group consensus.
Roni

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Al Morton [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 10:04 PM
> To: Roni Even; draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-
> [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: RE: Gen-ART LC review of draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-
> meth-23
> 
> At 06:12 AM 8/19/2011, Roni Even wrote:
> >I had another question whether there is some experience from actually
> >conducting the tests based on the long time this draft was under
> >development.
> 
> Roni,
> 
> There were several labs conducting these tests before
> the drafts were prepared, in fact, the state of the art
> for convergence testing advanced while these drafts were in
> development - which is one reason we had difficulty in the
> first IESG review. So there is plenty of test experience.
> 
> You actually asked if we could provide guidance on how many
> times to repeat tests, but the WG has declined to do this.
> I'm sure you understand that with a wide range of equipment
> and testing circumstances only general guidance can be given,
> such as:
> 
> section 5.6
> ... It is RECOMMENDED to repeat a test multiple times with
>     different random ranges of the header fields such that convergence
>     time benchmarks are measured for different distributions of traffic
>     over the available paths.
> 
> and
> 5.8. Measurement Statistics
> 
>     The benchmark measurements may vary for each trial, due to the
>     statistical nature of timer expirations, cpu scheduling, etc.
>     Evaluation of the test data must be done with an understanding of
>     generally accepted testing practices regarding repeatability,
>     variance and statistical significance of a small number of trials.
> 
> hope this helps,
> Al
> 


_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

Reply via email to