Device Reset Characterization draft-ietf-bmwg-reset-02 Rajiv Asati Carlos Pignataro Fernando Calabria Cesar Olvera Presented by Andrew Yourtchenko IETF 78 - Maastricht, Netherlands

Recap - Motivation  During the AD review of the ‘MPLS Forwarding Benchmarking’ document (RFC 5695), the shortcomings in ‘reset’ testing were pointed out.  Complement existing and possible future benchmarking RFCs by defining a complete set of methodologies to be implemented in order to characterize a “device reset”  Thanks to Ron Bonica for being persistent and motivating us to write this draft “All resets are not created equal”

Recap - Core Methodology  Methodologies “crafted” to be implemented on generic devices / platforms  Grouped into mandatory and or optional Test Cases  Reset methodologies are specifically defined for hardware, software and power failure “induced” events.  Detailed procedures added to each Test Case with recommended operational steps  Standardized reporting format, consistent with other forwarding & benchmarking RFCs and working-group documents.

Changelog Between Individual I-D -03 (last IETF) and current WG I-D -01: Thorough review comments and suggestions by Al Morton, David Newman, and John E Dawson (all addressed) Added additional influencing factors Clarified s/mandatory/MUST/, and ensured self-consistent word usage Added requirement to add additional factors to reporting format Text around transmitting packets with link down Change definition of NDR (non-dropping rate) for achievable throughput [RFC2544] Modified Scope section Additional precision for results in the reporting format section and Recovery_time formula Editing in the RP and LC reset Test cases Others small nits (sections 1, 3 and 4)

 Changes to be incorporated so far in -02  From Timmons C. Player  Removal of traffic generation requirements (while sending traffic with no PHY layer)  Additional duration of the outage (‘recovery time’ measurement) reporting methodology definition via start / stop timers From Jan Novak Move the ‘Reporting format’ to an individual section and refer as applicable (avoid “redundant” reading)  Thank you and as always additional feedback / comments are requested …. ToDo

 Finished Working-Group Last-Call (WGLC)  WGLC Completed on July 21, duration 5 weeks  Thanks to Al Morton, Timmons C. Player, John Dawson, Jan Novak, and many others for thorough and complete review !  Will include all outstanding comments in -02  Upcoming, WIP  We believe that rev -02 would be ready to be sent to the IESG  Looking forward to the AD & IESG review Document Status

Thank You !