Examples of LMAP Objects using IPPM Metrics and Protocols

The Large-scale Measurement of Broadband Performance (LMAP) working group has completed a Framework and Use cases, and now proceeds with development of an information model and data model. The IETF IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) working group first created a framework for metric development in . This framework has largely stood the test of time and enabled development of many fundamental metrics. It has been updated once in the area of metric composition , and again in several areas related to active stream measurement of modern networks with reactive propoerties . The Working Group has developed an extensive set of Standards Track Metrics and Measurment Protocols. Among the work especially relevant to LMAP is the development of a Performance Metrics Registry , and a proposal for the initial regsitry contents . This memo is orgainzed into sections that present an example of LMAP Control and Reporting by populating the various information model objects for measurement Tasks and Reporting Tasks (and eventually Schedule, Event, Action, etc). The first example is a UDP Round Trip Latency Metric.

The purpose of this memo is to examine the features and capabilities of the LMAP information model by populating the models with example data intended to enable measurement of IPPM metrics. The scope is to create the examples for Active Metrics and their Methods of Measurement, as defined in the IPPM literature of Standards Track Metrics. Specifically, Metrics in the proposed initial contents for the Performance Metrics Registry contined in are the primary focus, along with existing standards track measurement protocols developed in IPPM .

This draft presents information in a conceptual form. Safeguarding correct syntax is a collosal non-goal in the early drafts.

; name:UDP_RT_Metrics_001; ma-channel-obj ma-report-channels<0..*>; ma-schedule-obj ma-instruction-schedules<0..*>; ma-suppression-obj ma-suppression; } ma-instruction-obj; ]]>

; Prefix: Act_IP_UDP_Round-trip_Delay_95th-percentile_Poisson; Prefix: Act_IP_UDP_Round-trip_Delay_Mean_Poisson; [ma-option-obj ma-task-options<0..*>]; option-role: Src; option-meas_point: mp100; option-measurement_protocol: TWAMP; option-meas_protocol_roles: Control-Client; Session-Sender; option-Src_IP: xxx.xxx.xxx; option-Dst_IP: xxx.xxx.xxx; option-T0: 0; option-lambda: 1 second; option-Tf: 15 min; option-truncate: 30 seconds; [boolean ma-task-suppress-by-default;] suppress: true; [string ma-task-cycle-id;] cycle-id: Access_2016-03-21-0930; } ma-task-obj; Prefix = urn:ietf:params:performance:metric ]]>

]; name:UDP_RT_Metrics_REPORT_001; } ma-report-obj; ]]>

;] Prefix: Act_IP_UDP_Round-trip_Delay_95th-percentile_Poisson; Prefix: Act_IP_UDP_Round-trip_Delay_Mean_Poisson; [ma-option-obj ma-report-task-options<0..*>]; option-role: Src; option-meas_point: mp100; option-measurement_protocol: TWAMP; option-meas_protocol_roles: Control-Client; Session-Sender; option-Src_IP: xxx.xxx.xxx; option-Dst_IP: xxx.xxx.xxx; option-T0: 0; option-Tf: 15 minutes; [ma-option-obj ma-report-task-action-options<0..*>]; [string ma-report-task-cycle-id;] cycle-id: Access_2016-03-21-0930; [string ma-report-task-column-labels<0..*>;] label: Mean; label: 95%-tile; [ma-report-row-obj ma-report-task-rows<0..*>;] row(0): 0.25; 0.34; } ma-report-task-obj; ]]>

TBD

The security considerations that apply to any active measurement of live paths are relevant here as well. See and . When considering privacy of those involved in measurement or those whose traffic is measured, the sensitive information available to potential observers is greatly reduced when using active techniques which are within this scope of work. Passive observations of user traffic for measurement purposes raise many privacy issues. We refer the reader to the privacy considerations described in the Large Scale Measurement of Broadband Performance (LMAP) Framework , which covers active and passive techniques.

This memo makes no requests of IANA.

The author thanks LMAP Participants for their comments.