Benchmarking Working Group M. Konstantynowicz, Ed.
Internet-Draft V. Polak, Ed.
Intended status: Informational Cisco Systems
Expires: September 7, 2020 March 06, 2020

Multiple Loss Ratio Search for Packet Throughput (MLRsearch)
draft-vpolak-mkonstan-bmwg-mlrsearch-03

Abstract

This document proposes changes to [RFC2544], specifically to packet throughput search methodology, by defining a new search algorithm referred to as Multiple Loss Ratio search (MLRsearch for short). Instead of relying on binary search with pre-set starting offered load, it proposes a novel approach discovering the starting point in the initial phase, and then searching for packet throughput based on defined packet loss ratio (PLR) input criteria and defined final trial duration time. One of the key design principles behind MLRsearch is minimizing the total test duration and searching for multiple packet throughput rates (each with a corresponding PLR) concurrently, instead of doing it sequentially.

The main motivation behind MLRsearch is the new set of challenges and requirements posed by NFV (Network Function Virtualization), specifically software based implementations of NFV data planes. Using [RFC2544] in the experience of the authors yields often not repetitive and not replicable end results due to a large number of factors that are out of scope for this draft. MLRsearch aims to address this challenge in a simple way of getting the same result sooner, so more repetitions can be done to describe the replicability.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on September 7, 2020.

Copyright Notice

Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.

This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.


Table of Contents

1. Terminology

2. MLRsearch Background

Multiple Loss Ratio search (MLRsearch) is a packet throughput search algorithm suitable for deterministic systems (as opposed to probabilistic systems). MLRsearch discovers multiple packet throughput rates in a single search, with each rate associated with a distinct Packet Loss Ratio (PLR) criteria.

For cases when multiple rates need to be found, this property makes MLRsearch more efficient in terms of time execution, compared to traditional throughput search algorithms that discover a single packet rate per defined search criteria (e.g. a binary search specified by [RFC2544]). MLRsearch reduces execution time even further by relying on shorter trial durations of intermediate steps, with only the final measurements conducted at the specified final trial duration. This results in the shorter overall search execution time when compared to a traditional binary search, while guaranteeing the same results for deterministic systems.

In practice two rates with distinct PLRs are commonly used for packet throughput measurements of NFV systems: Non Drop Rate (NDR) with PLR=0 and Partial Drop Rate (PDR) with PLR>0. The rest of this document describes MLRsearch for NDR and PDR. If needed, MLRsearch can be adapted to discover more throughput rates with different pre-defined PLRs.

Similarly to other throughput search approaches like binary search, MLRsearch is effective for SUTs/DUTs with PLR curve that is continuously flat or increasing with growing offered load. It may not be as effective for SUTs/DUTs with abnormal PLR curves.

MLRsearch relies on traffic generator to qualify the received packet stream as error-free, and invalidate the results if any disqualifying errors are present e.g. out-of-sequence frames.

MLRsearch can be applied to both uni-directional and bi-directional throughput tests.

For bi-directional tests, MLRsearch rates and ratios are aggregates of both directions, based on the following assumptions:

3. MLRsearch Overview

The main properties of MLRsearch:

The main benefits of MLRsearch vs. binary search include:

Caveats:

4. Sample Implementation

Following is a brief description of a sample MLRsearch implementation, which is a simlified version of the existing implementation.

4.1. Input Parameters

  1. maximum_transmit_rate - Maximum Transmit Rate (MTR) of packets to be used by external traffic generator implementing MLRsearch, limited by the actual Ethernet link(s) rate, NIC model or traffic generator capabilities.
  2. minimum_transmit_rate - minimum packet transmit rate to be used for measurements. MLRsearch fails if lower transmit rate needs to be used to meet search criteria.
  3. final_trial_duration - required trial duration for final rate measurements.
  4. initial_trial_duration - trial duration for initial MLRsearch phase.
  5. final_relative_width - required measurement resolution expressed as (lower_bound, upper_bound) interval width relative to upper_bound.
  6. packet_loss_ratio - maximum acceptable PLR search criterion for PDR measurements.
  7. number_of_intermediate_phases - number of phases between the initial phase and the final phase. Impacts the overall MLRsearch duration. Less phases are required for well behaving cases, more phases may be needed to reduce the overall search duration for worse behaving cases.

4.2. Initial Phase

  1. First trial measures at configured maximum transmit rate (MTR) and discovers maximum receive rate (MRR).
  2. Second trial measures at MRR and discovers MRR2.
  3. Third trial measures at MRR2.

4.3. Non-Initial Phases

  1. Main loop:
    1. IN: trial_duration for the current phase. Set to initial_trial_duration for the first intermediate phase; to final_trial_duration for the final phase; or to the element of interpolating geometric sequence for other intermediate phases. For example with two intermediate phases, trial_duration of the second intermediate phase is the geometric average of initial_trial_duration and final_trial_duration.
    2. IN: relative_width_goal for the current phase. Set to final_relative_width for the final phase; doubled for each preceding phase. For example with two intermediate phases, the first intermediate phase uses quadruple of final_relative_width and the second intermediate phase uses double of final_relative_width.
    3. IN: ndr_interval, pdr_interval from the previous main loop iteration or the previous phase. If the previous phase is the initial phase, both intervals are formed by a (correctly ordered) pair of MRR2 and MRR. Note that the initial phase is likely to create intervals with invalid bounds.
    4. DO: According to the procedure described in point 2., either exit the phase (by jumping to 1.7.), or calculate new transmit rate to measure with.
    5. DO: Perform the trial measurement at the new transmit rate and trial_duration, compute its loss ratio.
    6. DO: Update the bounds of both intervals, based on the new measurement. The actual update rules are numerous, as NDR external search can affect PDR interval and vice versa, but the result agrees with rules of both internal and external search. For example, any new measurement below an invalid lower_bound becomes the new lower_bound, while the old measurement (previously acting as the invalid lower_bound) becomes a new and valid upper_bound. Go to next iteration (1.3.), taking the updated intervals as new input.
    7. OUT: current ndr_interval and pdr_interval. In the final phase this is also considered to be the result of the whole search. For other phases, the next phase loop is started with the current results as an input.
  2. New transmit rate (or exit) calculation (for point 1.4.):
    1. If there is an invalid bound then prepare for external search:
      • IF the most recent measurement at NDR lower_bound transmit rate had the loss higher than zero, then the new transmit rate is NDR lower_bound decreased by two NDR interval widths.
      • Else, IF the most recent measurement at PDR lower_bound transmit rate had the loss higher than PLR, then the new transmit rate is PDR lower_bound decreased by two PDR interval widths.
      • Else, IF the most recent measurement at NDR upper_bound transmit rate had no loss, then the new transmit rate is NDR upper_bound increased by two NDR interval widths.
      • Else, IF the most recent measurement at PDR upper_bound transmit rate had the loss lower or equal to PLR, then the new transmit rate is PDR upper_bound increased by two PDR interval widths.
    2. Else, if interval width is higher than the current phase goal:
      • IF NDR interval does not meet the current phase width goal, prepare for internal search. The new transmit rate is a in the middle of NDR lower_bound and NDR upper_bound.
      • IF PDR interval does not meet the current phase width goal, prepare for internal search. The new transmit rate is a in the middle of PDR lower_bound and PDR upper_bound.
    3. Else, if some bound has still only been measured at a lower duration, prepare to re-measure at the current duration (and the same transmit rate). The order of priorities is:
      • NDR lower_bound,
      • PDR lower_bound,
      • NDR upper_bound,
      • PDR upper_bound.
    4. Else, do not prepare any new rate, to exit the phase. This ensures that at the end of each non-initial phase all intervals are valid, narrow enough, and measured at current phase trial duration.

5. FD.io CSIT Implementation

The only known working implementation of MLRsearch is in the open-source code running in Linux Foundation FD.io CSIT project [FDio-CSIT-MLRsearch] as part of a Continuous Integration / Continuous Development (CI/CD) framework.

MLRsearch is also available as a Python package in [PyPI-MLRsearch].

5.1. Additional details

This document so far has been describing a simplified version of MLRsearch algorithm. The full algorithm as implemented in CSIT contains additional logic, which makes some of the details (but not general ideas) above incorrect. Here is a short description of the additional logic as a list of principles, explaining their main differences from (or additions to) the simplified description, but without detailing their mutual interaction.

  1. Logarithmic transmit rate.
  2. Optimistic maximum rate.
  3. Pessimistic minimum rate.
  4. Conservative interval updates.
  5. Ensure sufficient interval width.
  6. Timeout for bad cases.
  7. Pessimistic external search.

5.1.1. FD.io CSIT Input Parameters

  1. maximum_transmit_rate - Typical values: 2 * 14.88 Mpps for 64B 10GE link rate, 2 * 18.75 Mpps for 64B 40GE NIC (specific model).
  2. minimum_transmit_rate - Value: 2 * 10 kpps (traffic generator limitation).
  3. final_trial_duration - Value: 30 seconds.
  4. initial_trial_duration - Value: 1 second.
  5. final_relative_width - Value: 0.005 (0.5%).
  6. packet_loss_ratio - Value: 0.005 (0.5%).
  7. number_of_intermediate_phases - Value: 2. The value has been chosen based on limited experimentation to date. More experimentation needed to arrive to clearer guidelines.
  8. timeout - Limit for the overall search duration (for one search). If MLRsearch oversteps this limit, it immediatelly declares the test failed, to avoid wasting even more time on a misbehaving SUT. Value: 600 (seconds).
  9. doublings - Number of dublings when computing new interval width in external search. Value: 2 (interval width is quadroupled). Value of 1 is best for well-behaved SUTs, but value of 2 has been found to decrease overall search time for worse-behaved SUT configurations, contributing more to the overall set of different SUT configurations tested.

5.2. Example MLRsearch Run

The following table shows data from a real test run in CSIT (using the default input values as above). The first column is the phase, the second is the trial measurement performed (aggregate bidirectional offered load in megapackets per second, and trial duration in seconds). Each of last four columns show one bound as updated after the measurement (duration truncated to save space). Loss ratio is not shown, but invalid bounds are marked with a plus sign.

Phase Trial NDR lower NDR upper PDR lower PDR upper
init. 37.50 1.00 N/A 37.50 1. N/A 37.50 1.
init. 10.55 1.00 +10.55 1. 37.50 1. +10.55 1. 37.50 1.
init. 9.437 1.00 +9.437 1. 10.55 1. +9.437 1. 10.55 1.
int 1 6.053 1.00 6.053 1. 9.437 1. 6.053 1. 9.437 1.
int 1 7.558 1.00 7.558 1. 9.437 1. 7.558 1. 9.437 1.
int 1 8.446 1.00 8.446 1. 9.437 1. 8.446 1. 9.437 1.
int 1 8.928 1.00 8.928 1. 9.437 1. 8.928 1. 9.437 1.
int 1 9.179 1.00 8.928 1. 9.179 1. 9.179 1. 9.437 1.
int 1 9.052 1.00 9.052 1. 9.179 1. 9.179 1. 9.437 1.
int 1 9.307 1.00 9.052 1. 9.179 1. 9.179 1. 9.307 1.
int 2 9.115 5.48 9.115 5. 9.179 1. 9.179 1. 9.307 1.
int 2 9.243 5.48 9.115 5. 9.179 1. 9.243 5. 9.307 1.
int 2 9.179 5.48 9.115 5. 9.179 5. 9.243 5. 9.307 1.
int 2 9.307 5.48 9.115 5. 9.179 5. 9.243 5. +9.307 5.
int 2 9.687 5.48 9.115 5. 9.179 5. 9.307 5. 9.687 5.
int 2 9.495 5.48 9.115 5. 9.179 5. 9.307 5. 9.495 5.
int 2 9.401 5.48 9.115 5. 9.179 5. 9.307 5. 9.401 5.
final 9.147 30.0 9.115 5. 9.147 30 9.307 5. 9.401 5.
final 9.354 30.0 9.115 5. 9.147 30 9.307 5. 9.354 30
final 9.115 30.0 +9.115 30 9.147 30 9.307 5. 9.354 30
final 8.935 30.0 8.935 30 9.115 30 9.307 5. 9.354 30
final 9.025 30.0 9.025 30 9.115 30 9.307 5. 9.354 30
final 9.070 30.0 9.070 30 9.115 30 9.307 5. 9.354 30
final 9.307 30.0 9.070 30 9.115 30 9.307 30 9.354 30

6. IANA Considerations

No requests of IANA.

7. Security Considerations

Benchmarking activities as described in this memo are limited to technology characterization of a DUT/SUT using controlled stimuli in a laboratory environment, with dedicated address space and the constraints specified in the sections above.

The benchmarking network topology will be an independent test setup and MUST NOT be connected to devices that may forward the test traffic into a production network or misroute traffic to the test management network.

Further, benchmarking is performed on a "black-box" basis, relying solely on measurements observable external to the DUT/SUT.

Special capabilities SHOULD NOT exist in the DUT/SUT specifically for benchmarking purposes. Any implications for network security arising from the DUT/SUT SHOULD be identical in the lab and in production networks.

8. Acknowledgements

Many thanks to Alec Hothan of OPNFV NFVbench project for thorough review and numerous useful comments and suggestions.

9. References

9.1. Normative References

[RFC2544] Bradner, S. and J. McQuaid, "Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect Devices", RFC 2544, DOI 10.17487/RFC2544, March 1999.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017.

9.2. Informative References

[FDio-CSIT-MLRsearch] "FD.io CSIT Test Methodology - MLRsearch", February 2020.
[PyPI-MLRsearch] "MLRsearch 0.3.0, Python Package Index", February 2020.

Authors' Addresses

Maciek Konstantynowicz (editor) Cisco Systems EMail: mkonstan@cisco.com
Vratko Polak (editor) Cisco Systems EMail: vrpolak@cisco.com