Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-ippm-capacity-protocol

draft-ietf-ippm-capacity-protocol







Network Working Group                                      L. Ciavattone
Internet-Draft                                                 AT&T Labs
Intended status: Standards Track                                 R. Geib
Expires: 24 August 2024                                 Deutsche Telekom
                                                        21 February 2024


           Test Protocol for One-way IP Capacity Measurement
                  draft-ietf-ippm-capacity-protocol-07

Abstract

   This memo addresses the problem of protocol support for measuring
   Network Capacity metrics in RFC 9097, where the method deploys a
   feedback channel from the receiver to control the sender's
   transmission rate in near-real-time.  This memo defines a simple
   protocol to perform the RFC 9097 (and other) measurements.

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 24 August 2024.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2024 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 Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   2.  Scope, Goals, and Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Protocol Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Parameters and Security-related Operations  . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.1.  Parameters and Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.2.  Security Mode Operations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       4.2.1.  Mode 0: OPTIONAL Unauthenticated mode . . . . . . . .   7
       4.2.2.  Mode 1: REQUIRED authentication mode  . . . . . . . .   8
       4.2.3.  Mode 2: OPTIONAL authentication for Data phase  . . .   8
       4.2.4.  Mode 3: OPTIONAL Partial Encryption - Control and
               Status Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       4.2.5.  OPTIONAL Fully Encrypted mode - For Information
               Only  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     4.3.  Key Management  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     4.4.  Firewall Configuration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   5.  Test Setup Request and Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     5.1.  Client Generates Test Setup Request . . . . . . . . . . .  13
       5.1.1.  Authenticated Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
       5.1.2.  Unauthenticated Mode  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
       5.1.3.  Partial Encrypted Mode  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     5.2.  Server Processes Test Setup Request and Generates
           Response  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
       5.2.1.  Test Setup Request Processing - Rejection . . . . . .  17
       5.2.2.  Test Setup Request Processing - Acceptance  . . . . .  19
     5.3.  Setup Response Processing at the Client . . . . . . . . .  22
   6.  Test Activation Request and Response  . . . . . . . . . . . .  23
     6.1.  Client Generates Test Activation Request  . . . . . . . .  23
     6.2.  Server Processes Test Activation Request and Generates
           Response  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  27
       6.2.1.  Server Rejects or Modifies Request  . . . . . . . . .  27
       6.2.2.  Server Accepts Request and Generates Response . . . .  28
     6.3.  Client Processes Test Activation Response . . . . . . . .  30
   7.  Test Stream Transmission and Measurement Feedback Messages  .  31
     7.1.  Test Packet PDU and Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  31
     7.2.  Status PDU  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  35
       7.2.1.  Authenticated Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  42
       7.2.2.  Unauthenticated Mode  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  42
       7.2.3.  Partial Encrypted Mode  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  42
   8.  Stopping the Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  42
   9.  Method of Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  43
     9.1.  Notes on Interface Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . .  43
   10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  44
   11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  45
     11.1.  New System Port Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  45
     11.2.  New UDPST Registry Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  46



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


       11.2.1.  PDU Identifier Registry  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  46
       11.2.2.  Protocol Number Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  46
       11.2.3.  Test Setup PDU Modifier Bitmap Registry  . . . . . .  47
       11.2.4.  Test Setup PDU Authentication Mode Registry  . . . .  47
       11.2.5.  Test Setup PDU Command Response Field Registry . . .  48
       11.2.6.  Test Activation PDU Modifier Bitmap Registry . . . .  50
       11.2.7.  Test Activation PDU Command Request Registry . . . .  50
       11.2.8.  Test Activation PDU Rate Adjustment Algo.
               Registry  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  50
       11.2.9.  Test Activation PDU Command Response Field
               Registry  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  51
   12. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  51
   13. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  52
     13.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  52
     13.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  53
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  56

1.  Introduction

   The IETF's efforts to define Network and Bulk Transport Capacity have
   been chartered and finally progressed after over twenty years.

   In that time, the performance community has seen development of
   Informative definitions in [RFC3148] for Framework for Bulk Transport
   Capacity (BTC), RFC 5136 for Network Capacity and Maximum IP-layer
   Capacity, and the Experimental metric definitions and methods in
   [RFC8337], Model-Based Metrics for BTC.

   This memo looks at the problem of measuring Network Capacity metrics
   defined in [RFC9097] where the method deploys a feedback channel from
   the receiver to control the sender's transmission rate in near-real-
   time.

   Although there are several test protocols already available for
   support and management of active measurements, this protocol is a
   major departure from their operation:

   1.  UDP transport, not TCP, is used for Control phase messages (e.g.,
       Test Setup, Test Activation) and Data phase messages (e.g., Load,
       Status Feedback).

   2.  TWAMP [RFC5357] and STAMP [RFC8762] use the philosophy that one
       host is a Session-Reflector, sending test packets every time they
       receive a test packet.  This protocol supports a one-way test
       with periodic Status Feedback messages returned to the sender.
       These messages are also a basis for on-path round-trip delay
       measurements, which are a key input to the load rate adjustment
       algorithm.



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   3.  OWAMP [RFC4656] supports one-way testing with results Fetch at
       the end of the test session.  This protocol supports a one-way
       test and requires periodic Status Feedback messages returned to
       the sender to support the load rate adjustment algorithm.

   4.  The security features of OWAMP [RFC4656] and TWAMP [RFC5357] have
       been described as "unusual", to the point that IESG approved
       their use while also asking that these methods not be used again.
       Further, the common OWAMP [RFC4656] and TWAMP [RFC5357] approach
       to security is over 15 years old at this time.

   Note: the -00 update of this draft will be the last that describes
   version 8 of the protocol in the running code.  Updates -01 and -02
   of the draft correspond to version 9 of the protocol, which strives
   to allow interoperability with version 8.  The -03, -04, and -05
   updates of the draft incorporate new security modes of operation, and
   correspond to version 10 of the protocol.  After additional
   refinements, versions -06 and beyond will utilize a protocol version
   of 20.

   Ruediger Geib joined the team of authors to help completing this
   draft.  He's not replacing Al Morton, as Al can't be replaced.

1.1.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14[RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

2.  Scope, Goals, and Applicability

   The scope of this memo is to define a protocol to measure the Maximum
   IP-Layer Capacity metric and according to the standardized method.
   We note that aspects of this protocol and end-host configuration can
   lead to support of additional forms of measurement, such as
   application emulation enabled by creative use of the load rate
   adjustment algorithm.

   The continued goal is to harmonize the specified IP-Layer Capacity
   metric and method across the industry, and this protocol supports the
   specifications of IETF and other Standards Development Organizations.








Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   All active testing protocols currently defined by the IPPM WG are
   UDP-based, but this protocol specifies both control and test
   protocols using UDP transport.  Also, a feedback message stream
   continues operating during testing to convey results and dynamic
   configurations.

   The primary application of the protocol described here is the same as
   in Section 2 of [RFC7497] where:

   *  The access portion of the network is the focus of this problem
      statement.  The user typically subscribes to a service with
      bidirectional access partly described by rates in bits per second.

3.  Protocol Overview

   This section gives an informative overview of the communication
   protocol between two test end-points (without expressing requirements
   or describing the authentication and encryption aspects; later
   sections provide these details and requirements).

   One end-point takes the role of server, listening for connection
   requests on a well-known destination port from the other end-point,
   the client.

   The client requires configuration of a test direction parameter
   (upstream or downstream test, where the client performs the role of
   sender or receiver, respectively) as well as the hostname or IP
   address of the server in order to begin the setup and configuration
   exchanges with the server.

   Additionally, multi-connection (multi-flow) testing is inherently
   supported by the protocol.  Each connection is essentially
   independent and attempts to maximize its own individual traffic rate.
   For multi-connection tests, a single client process would replicate
   the connection setup and test procedure multiple times (once for each
   flow) to one or more server instances.  The server instance(s) would
   process each connection independently, as if they were coming from
   separate clients.  It SHALL be the responsibility of the client
   process to manage the inter-related connections logistically as well
   as aggregate the individual test results into an overall set of
   performance statistics.  Fields in the control messages (mcIndex,
   mcCount, and mcIdent) exist to both differentiate and associate the
   multiple connections that comprise a single test.

   The protocol uses UDP transport and has four types of exchanges in
   two phases.  Exchanges 1 and 2 constitute the Control phase, while
   exchanges 3 and 4 constitute the Data phase.




Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   1.  Setup Request and Response Exchange: The client requests to begin
       a test by communicating its protocol version, intended security
       mode, and datagram size support.  The server either confirms
       matching a configuration or rejects the connection.  The server
       also communicates the ephemeral port for further communication
       when accepting the client's request.

   2.  Test Activation Request and Response: the client composes a
       request conveying parameters such as the testing direction, the
       duration of the test interval and test sub-intervals, and various
       thresholds.  The server then chooses to accept, ignore or modify
       any of the test parameters, and communicates the set that will be
       used unless the client rejects the modifications.  Note that the
       client assumes that the Test Activation exchange has opened any
       co-located firewalls and network address/port translators for the
       test connection (in response to the Request packet on the
       ephemeral port) and the traffic that follows.  If the Test
       Activation Request is rejected or fails, the client assumes that
       the firewall will close the address/port combination after the
       firewall's configured idle traffic timeout.

   3.  Test Stream Transmission and Measurement Feedback Messages:
       Testing proceeds with one end-point sending Load PDUs and the
       other end-point receiving the Load PDUs and sending frequent
       status messages to communicate status and transmission conditions
       there.  The data in the feedback messages, whether received from
       the client or when being sent to the client, is input to a load
       rate adjustment algorithm at the server which controls future
       sending rates at either end.  The choice to locate the load rate
       adjustment algorithm at the server, regardless of transmission
       direction, means that the algorithm can be updated more easily at
       a host within the network, and at a fewer number of hosts than
       the number of clients.

   4.  Stopping the Test: When the specified test duration has been
       reached, the server initiates the exchange to stop the test by
       setting a STOP indication in its outgoing Load PDUs or Status
       Feedback messages.  After being received, the client acknowledges
       it by also setting a STOP indication in its outgoing Load PDUs or
       Status Feedback messages.  A graceful connection termination at
       each end then follows.  Since the Load PDUs and Status Feedback
       messages are used, this exchange is considered a sub-exchange of
       3.  If the Test traffic stops or the communication path fails,
       the client assumes that the firewall will close the address/port
       combination after the firewall's configured idle traffic timeout.






Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                 [Page 6]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   5.  Both the client and server react to unexpected interruptions in
       the Control and Data phase.  Watchdog timers limit the time a
       server or client will wait before stopping all traffic and
       terminating a test.

4.  Parameters and Security-related Operations

4.1.  Parameters and Definitions

   For Parameters related to the Maximum IP-Layer Capacity Metric and
   Method, please see Section 4 of [RFC9097].

4.2.  Security Mode Operations

   There are four security modes of operation:

   1.  A REQUIRED mode with authentication during the Control phase:
       Test Setup and Test Activation exchanges.

   2.  An OPTIONAL mode with the additional authentication of the Status
       Feedback messages (not the Load PDUs) during the Data phase.

   3.  An OPTIONAL Unauthenticated mode for all messages.  This mode
       SHALL only be permitted when all other modes requiring
       authentication (or Partial Encryption) are not permitted.

   4.  An OPTIONAL mode with encryption of the Control phase exchanges
       and the Status Feedback messages.

   5.  For full encryption, OPTIONAL operation of both Control and Data
       phase exchanges inside an encrypted tunnel chosen and
       instantiated via a bilateral agreement between the users.  This
       is not an explicit mode of the protocol itself.

   The requirements below refer to the PDUs in the sections that follow,
   primarily the authUnixTime field, the authDigest field, and the keyId
   field.  In an attempt to be more efficient, although somewhat
   unconventional, the second half of the 256-bit HMAC-SHA256 hash
   within the authDigest is reused as the Initialization Vector (IV).
   The roles in this section have been generalized so that the
   requirements for the PDU sender and receiver can be re-used and
   referred to elsewhere.

4.2.1.  Mode 0: OPTIONAL Unauthenticated mode

   In the OPTIONAL Unauthenticated mode, all PDU senders SHALL set the
   authUnixTime field, the authDigest field, and the keyId field of all
   packets to all zeroes.



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                 [Page 7]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   When the OPTIONAL Unauthenticated mode of operation is allowed, all
   other modes requiring authentication (or Partial Encryption) SHALL be
   blocked or not supported.  Unauthenticated and authenticated modes
   SHALL be considered mutually exclusive.

   Any errors (configuration miss-match between client and server) found
   in the Test Setup exchange or the Test Activation exchange SHOULD
   result in silent rejection (no further packets sent on the address/
   port pairs).  The exception is when the testing hosts have been
   configured for troubleshooting control phase failures and rejection
   messages will aid in the process.

4.2.2.  Mode 1: REQUIRED authentication mode

   In the REQUIRED authentication mode, the client and the server SHALL
   be configured to use one of a number of shared secret keys.

   During the Control phase, the sender SHALL read the current time and
   populate the authUnixTime field, then calculate the authDigest field
   of the entire PDU (with the authDigest field set to all zeroes)
   according to [RFC6234] and send the packet to the receiver.

   Upon reception, the receiver SHALL validate the message PDU for
   validity of the authDigest, the authUnixTime field for acceptable
   immediacy, correct length, and formatting (PDU-specific fields are
   also checked, such as protocol version).

   If the validation fails, the receiver SHOULD NOT continue with the
   Control phase and implement silent rejection (no further packets sent
   on the address/port pairs).  The exception is when the testing hosts
   have been configured for troubleshooting Control phase failures and
   rejection messages will aid in the process.

   If the validation succeeds, the receiver SHALL continue with the
   Control phase and compose a successful response or a response
   indicating the error conditions identified.

   This process SHALL be executed for each request and response in the
   Test Setup exchange, including the Null Request, (Section 5) and the
   Test Activation exchange (Section 6).

4.2.3.  Mode 2: OPTIONAL authentication for Data phase

   When using the OPTIONAL authentication during the Data Phase, the
   process SHALL also be applied to the Status PDU.  The client sends
   the Status PDU in a downstream test, and the server sends it in an
   upstream test.




Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                 [Page 8]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   The Status PDU sender SHALL read the current time and populate the
   authUnixTime field, then calculate the authDigest field of the entire
   Status PDU (with the authDigest field set to all zeroes) and send the
   packet to the receiver.

   Upon reception, the receiver SHALL validate the message PDU for
   validity of the authDigest, the authUnixTime field for acceptable
   immediacy, correct length, and formatting (PDU-specific fields are
   also checked, such as protocol version).

   If the authentication validation fails, the receiver SHALL ignore the
   message.  If the watchdog timer expires (due to successive failed
   validations), the test session will prematurely terminate (no further
   load traffic SHALL be transmitted).

   If this optional mode has not been selected, then the authUnixTime
   field, the authDigest field, and the keyId field of the Status PDU
   (see Section 7.2) SHALL be populated with all zeroes.

4.2.4.  Mode 3: OPTIONAL Partial Encryption - Control and Status
        Feedback

   This mode incorporates Authenticated mode 2, which includes all
   control and Status Feedback messages.  The encryption algorithm only
   provides encryption and relies on the existing authentication
   mechanism to provide integrity protection.  This mode re-uses several
   protocol fields, which is reasonable since both authentication and
   encryption are provided (the field format is presented in later
   sections).

   When using the OPTIONAL Partial Encryption, the process SHALL be
   applied to the Test Setup Request, the Test Setup Response, the Null
   Request (if applicable), the Test Activation Request, the Test
   Activation Response, and the Status PDU.  The client sends the Status
   PDU in a downstream test, and the server sends it in an upstream
   test.

   In the OPTIONAL Partial encryption mode, the client and the server
   SHALL be configured to use one of a number of shared secret keys (see
   keyId).

   The following encryption specifications SHALL be used:

   1.  Advanced Encryption Standard, AES, according to Federal
       Information Processing Standards Publication 197 [FIPS-197]

   2.  Cipher Block Chaining (CBC) [CBC]




Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                 [Page 9]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   3.  Key size of 128 bits (fixed block size of 128 bits)

   The encrypted portion of each PDU SHALL contain the padding required
   to maintain a multiple of the AES CBC block size of 16 octets.  As
   such, any library functions used for encryption and decryption SHALL
   have padding disabled (to maintain an equal encrypted and unencrypted
   length).  In OpenSSL for example, this can be accomplished via
   "EVP_CIPHER_CTX_set_padding(ctx,0)".

   The sender (intending to use encryption) SHALL read the current time
   and populate the authUnixTime field of the request packet, setting
   any padding or reserved fields to zero, and then calculate (and
   populate) the authDigest, for the entire PDU, in the same manner as
   specified with Authentication mode 1 and 2.  The sender SHALL then
   encrypt the header up to and including the first half (128 bits) of
   the 256-bit HMAC-SHA256 hash within the authDigest field.  The second
   half of the HMAC-SHA256 hash within the authDigest field (128 bits)
   will be used as the Initialization Vector (IV).  The IV and any
   subsequent fields SHALL be communicated in the clear.  Finally, the
   sender SHALL send the packet with partially encrypted PDU to the
   receiver.

   Upon reception, the receiver SHALL decrypt the PDU using the included
   IV and shared key.  Then, check the message PDU for validity via the
   authDigest, the authUnixTime field for acceptable immediacy, and
   general formatting such as protocol version.  Finally, the PDU-
   specific fields that control the test are processed.

   If the PDU validation fails in the Control phase, the receiver SHOULD
   NOT continue with current exchange and implement silent rejection (no
   further packets sent on the address/port pairs).  The exception is
   when the testing hosts have been configured for troubleshooting
   Control phase failures and rejection messages will aid in the
   process.

   If the validation succeeds in the Control phase, the receiver SHALL
   continue with the current exchange and compose a successful response
   or a response indicating the error conditions identified.  The
   response PDU SHALL be encrypted as described above, and the packet
   with encrypted PDU SHALL be sent back to the originator.

   This process SHALL be executed for each request and response in the
   Test Setup exchange, including the Null Request, (Section 5), the
   Test Activation exchange (Section 6), and the Status Feedback PDUs.







Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 10]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   If the PDU validation fails for a Status PDU, the receiver SHALL
   ignore the message.  If the watchdog timer expires (due to successive
   failed validations), the test session will prematurely terminate (no
   further load traffic SHALL be transmitted).

4.2.5.  OPTIONAL Fully Encrypted mode - For Information Only

   Two users may wish to make private measurements as part of a
   bilateral agreement, and they might achieve this goal by encrypting
   the traffic of this protocol.  However, there is no advantage in a
   native-protocol mode to encrypt all traffic when industry solutions
   for encrypted tunnels are widespread and users can deploy the tunnel
   technology of their choice ([RFC6071] for IPsec and [RFC8446] for
   TLS).

   Although it was suggested, DTLS [RFC9147] could not be the basis for
   a mode with encryption of all the PDUs.  The replay protection would
   remove duplicated packets and prevent transparent measurement of this
   impairment.

   The protocol's operation is mostly independent from the tunnel
   operation, but reject messages during the Control phase MAY be sent,
   the same as when configuring the server for troubleshooting.  Also,
   the additional encapsulation header size will likely limit the
   maximum UDP payload possible in the Full Encryption mode, and users
   may need to account for the smaller limit.

   Operation of both Control and Data phases inside an encrypted tunnel
   would provide a measure of privacy for all protocol operations, but
   the cost could be inaccurate measurements (from the additional
   processing overhead on Load PDUs at Gigabit rates) and reduced scale
   (when considering a server's capacity to host test sessions).

   The primary scope of this protocol is Internet access measurement.
   This scope greatly limits the geography of the eavesdropping attack
   surface, and encourages user-selected encryption solutions when
   needed (although this need may be more likely when the protocol is
   used beyond its intended scope).  IPPM protocols that have been
   deployed in this scope have not used the encryption option, and at
   least one of these protocols [TWAMP] has been deployed at great scale
   without using the encrypted mode.

   The key pieces of information exposed by the protocol are found in
   the Status Feedback messages which are transferred every 50ms with
   default timing.  The Status Feedback messages contain either detailed
   measurements of the previous time interval in a downstream test, or
   additionally the next sending rate for the sender in an upstream
   test.  If the Status Feedback messages are encrypted and decrypted,



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 11]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   then the processing time may affect the RTT (Round-Trip Time)
   measurements and affect the protocol operation, especially the load
   rate adjustment algorithm.  Thus, the processing time is a key
   concern for low cost CPE (e.g., residential gateways hosting the
   client function).  The test configuration information exchanged
   elsewhere is considered mundane.

   The tunnel approach has some advantages.  Some users may want to
   characterize the encrypted tunnel in comparison to transport in the
   clear.  It is RECOMMENDED to use the Unauthenticated mode to maximize
   server and client performance for the clear transport case, but some
   may wish to use an Authenticated mode.  Users can also leave the
   encrypted tunnel up when conducting repeating tests, and reduce test
   setup time to the minimum.

4.3.  Key Management

   Section 2 of [RFC7210] specifies a conceptual database for long-lived
   cryptographic keys.  The database is implemented as a plaintext
   table, to allow text editor maintenance of the key table.  The key
   table SHALL be used with the REQUIRED authentication mode and the
   OPTIONAL authentication mode (using the same key).  The same key
   table and key SHALL also be used with the OPTIONAL Partial Encryption
   mode, when used.

   The Key table SHALL have (at least) the following fields, referring
   to Section 2 of [RFC7210]:

   *  AdminKeyName

   *  LocalKeyName

   *  AlgID

   *  Key

   *  SendLifetimeStart

   *  SendLifetimeEnd

   *  AcceptLifetimeStart

   *  AcceptLifetimeEnd

   The LocalKeyName SHALL be determined from the corresponding protocol
   field in the PDUs that follow, keyId.





Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 12]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


4.4.  Firewall Configuration

   Normal firewall configuration allows a host to open a bidirectional
   connection using unique source and destination addresses and port
   numbers by sending a packet using that set of 4-tuple values.  The
   client's interaction with its firewall depends on this configuration.

   The firewall at the server MUST be configured with an open pinhole
   for the server IP address and well-known UDP port of the server.

   Assuming that the firewall administration at the server does not
   allow an open UDP ephemeral port range, then the server MUST send a
   Null Request to the client from the ephemeral port communicated to
   the client in the Test Setup Response.  The Null Request may not
   reach the client: it may be discarded by the client's firewall.

   If the server firewall administration allows an open UDP ephemeral
   port range, then the Null Request is not strictly necessary.
   However, the availability of an open port range policy cannot be
   assumed.

5.  Test Setup Request and Response

   All messages defined in this section SHALL use UDP transport.  The
   hosts SHALL calculate and include the UDP checksum, or check the UDP
   checksum as necessary.

5.1.  Client Generates Test Setup Request

   The client SHALL begin the Control phase exchanges by sending a Test
   Setup Request message to the server's (well-known) control port.

   The client SHALL simultaneously start a test initiation timer so that
   if the Control phase fails to complete Test Setup and Test Activation
   exchanges in the allocated time, the client software SHALL exit
   (close the UDP socket and indicate an error message to the user).
   Lost messages SHALL NOT be retransmitted.  The test initiation timer
   MAY reuse the test termination timeout value.

   As of version 9, the watchdog timeout is configured as a 1 second
   interval to trigger a warning message that the received traffic has
   stopped.  The test termination timeout is based on the watchdog
   interval, and implements a wait time of 2 additional seconds before
   triggering a non-graceful termination.

   The Setup Request/Response message PDU SHALL be organized as follows:





Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 13]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   //
   // Control header for UDP payload of Setup Request/Response PDUs
   //
   struct controlHdrSR {
   #define CHSR_ID 0xACE1
           uint16_t controlId;   // Control ID
           uint16_t protocolVer; // Protocol version
           uint8_t mcIndex;  // Multi-connection index
           uint8_t mcCount;  // Multi-connection count
           uint16_t mcIdent; // Multi-connection identifier
   #define CHSR_CREQ_NONE     0
   #define CHSR_CREQ_SETUPREQ 1  // Setup request
   #define CHSR_CREQ_SETUPRSP 2  // Setup response
           uint8_t cmdRequest;   // Command request
   #define CHSR_CRSP_NONE     0  // (used with request)
   #define CHSR_CRSP_ACKOK    1  // Acknowledgment
   #define CHSR_CRSP_BADVER   2  // Bad version
   #define CHSR_CRSP_BADJS    3  // Jumbo setting mismatch
   #define CHSR_CRSP_AUTHNC   4  // Auth. not configured
   #define CHSR_CRSP_AUTHREQ  5  // Auth. required
   #define CHSR_CRSP_AUTHINV  6  // Auth. (mode) invalid
   #define CHSR_CRSP_AUTHFAIL 7  // Auth. failure
   #define CHSR_CRSP_AUTHTIME 8  // Auth. time invalid
   #define CHSR_CRSP_NOMAXBW  9  // Max bandwidth required
   #define CHSR_CRSP_CAPEXC   10 // Capacity exceeded
   #define CHSR_CRSP_BADTMTU  11 // Trad. MTU mismatch
   #define CHSR_CRSP_MCINVPAR 12 // Multi-conn. invalid params
   #define CHSR_CRSP_CONNFAIL 13 // Conn. allocation failure
           uint8_t cmdResponse;  // Command response
   #define CHSR_USDIR_BIT 0x8000  // Upstream direction bit
           uint16_t maxBandwidth; // Required bandwidth
           uint16_t testPort; // Test port on server
   #define CHSR_JUMBO_STATUS    0x01
   #define CHSR_TRADITIONAL_MTU 0x02
           uint8_t modifierBitmap; // Modifier bitmap
           uint8_t reserved1;   // reserved octet
           uint8_t padding[12]; // Padding for encryption
           //
           uint32_t authUnixTime; // Authentication time stamp
   #define AUTH_DIGEST_LENGTH 32  // SHA-256 digest length
           uint8_t authDigest[AUTH_DIGEST_LENGTH] // HMAC
   #define AUTH_IV_LENGTH 16 // Initialization Vector (IV)
   #define AUTH_DIGEST_IV (AUTH_DIGEST_LENGTH - AUTH_IV_LENGTH)
           // IV = &authDigest[AUTH_DIGEST_IV] (not encrypted)
   #define AUTHMODE_0 0 // Mode 0: Unauthenticated
   #define AUTHMODE_1 1 // Mode 1: Authenticated Control
   #define AUTHMODE_2 2 // Mode 2: Authenticated Control+Status
   #define AUTHMODE_3 3 // Mode 3: Encrypted Control+Status



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 14]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


           uint8_t authMode;   // Authentication mode (not encrypted)
           uint8_t keyId;      // Key ID in shared table (not encrypted)
           uint16_t reserved;  // reserved octets (not encrypted)
   };

   Figure 1: Test Setup PDU

   The UDP PDU format layout SHALL be as follows (big-endian AB):

   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |          controlId            |          protocolVer          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |    mcIndex    |    mcCount    |            mcIdent            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  cmdRequest   | cmdResponse   |         maxBandwidth          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |           testPort            |modifierBitmap |   reserved1   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   |                        padding (96 bits)                      |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                         authUnixTime                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   |                      authDigest (256 bits)                    |
   |                                                               |
   | _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _ |
   |                                                               |
   |              Initialization Vector (128 bits)                 |
   |       [Reuses second half of HMAC within authDigest]          |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   authMode    |     keyId     |          reserved             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Figure 2: Test Setup PDU Layout

   Additional details regarding the Setup Request and Response fields
   are as follows:

   mcIndex: The index (0,1,2,...) of a connection relative to all
   connections that make up a single test.  It is used to differentiate
   separate connections within a multi-connection test.

   mcCount: The total count of attempted connections.



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 15]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   mcIdent: A pseudorandom non-zero identifier (via RNG, source port
   number,...) that is common to all connections of a single test.  It
   is used to associate separate connections within a multi-connection
   test.

   maxBandwith: When this field is non-zero, it is a specification of
   the maximum bit rate the client expects to send or receive during the
   requested test.  The server compares this value to its currently
   available configured limit for test admission control.  This field
   MAY optionally be used for rate-limiting the maximum rate the server
   should attempt.  The CHSR_USDIR_BIT bit is set to 0 by default to
   indicate "downstream" and has to be set to 1 to indicate "upstream".

   testPort: The UDP ephemeral port number on the server that the client
   SHALL use for the Test Activation Request and subsequent Load or
   Status PDUs.

   modifierBitmap: There are two bits currently assigned in this bitmap:

   CHSR_JUMBO_STATUS  Above a sending rate of 1Gbps, allow datagram
      sizes that result in Jumbo Frames (with a max IP packet size of
      9000 bytes).  Up to a sending rate of 1Gbps, or for all sending
      rates if CHSR_JUMBO_STATUS is not set, datagram sizes SHALL NOT
      produce an IP packet size greater than 1250 bytes (unless
      CHSR_TRADITIONAL_MTU is also set).

   CHSR_TRADITIONAL_MTU  Allow datagram sizes, at any sending rate, that
      can result in a Traditional IP packet size of 1500 bytes.
      Effectively increasing the default non-Jumbo maximum from 1250
      bytes to 1500 bytes.

   Other bit positions are currently undefined.  A new registry will be
   needed for modifierBitmap assignments; see the IANA Considerations
   section.

   authDigest (and Initialization Vector, IV) field: This field contains
   the 256-bit HMAC-SHA256 hash.  In Partial Encrypted mode, the second
   half of the hash within this field (128 bits) is reused as the
   Initialization Vector (IV).

   authMode: The authMode field currently has four values assigned:

   AUTHMODE_0:  OPTIONAL Unauthenticated mode

   AUTHMODE_1:  REQUIRED authentication for Control phase

   AUTHMODE_2:  OPTIONAL authentication for Control and Data phase
      (Status Feedback PDU only)



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 16]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   AUTHMODE_3:  OPTIONAL partial encrypted mode

   plus, a range of values for experimentation: 60 through 63.  A new
   registry will be needed for mode values; see the IANA Considerations
   section.

   keyId: This is a localKeyName, the numeric key identifier for a key
   in the shared key table.

5.1.1.  Authenticated Modes

   When operating in either of the Authenticated modes (authMode 1 and
   authMode 2), the client SHALL follow the requirements of
   Section 4.2.2 (and 4.2.3 if applicable), and SHALL generate the
   authDigest field.  The HMAC-SHA256 calculation SHALL cover all fields
   in the header.  The current Unix time SHALL be read and inserted
   immediately prior to the calculation (as immediately as possible).
   Computation of the authDigest HMAC-SHA256 hash is specified in
   [RFC6234].

5.1.2.  Unauthenticated Mode

   When operating in Unauthenticated mode, the requirements of
   Section 4.2.1 SHALL be followed.

5.1.3.  Partial Encrypted Mode

   When operating in the Partial Encryption mode, the client SHALL
   follow the requirements of Section 4.2.4 and SHALL encrypt the PDU up
   to, but not including, the Initialization Vector (IV) or beyond.

5.2.  Server Processes Test Setup Request and Generates Response

   This section describes the processes at the server to evaluate the
   Test Setup Request and determine the next steps.

5.2.1.  Test Setup Request Processing - Rejection

   When the server receives the Setup Request, it SHALL:

   *  verify the size of the Setup Request message and if correct
      interrogate the authMode field

   *  if operating in the Partial Encryption mode, use the available
      keyId and IV to decrypt the Setup Request message up to the IV
      using the method prescribed in Section 4.2.4





Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 17]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   *  if operating in one of the Authenticated modes, validate the Setup
      Request message by checking the authDigest as prescribed in
      Section 4.2.2

   and then proceed to evaluate the other fields in the protocol header,
   such as the protocol version, the Control ID (to validate the type of
   message), the maximum Bandwidth requested for the test, and the
   modifierBitmap for use of options such as Jumbo datagram status and
   Traditional MTU (1500 bytes).  The value in the authUnixTime field is
   a 32-bit time stamp and a 5 minute tolerance window (+/- 2.5 minutes)
   SHALL be used (if in one of the Authenticated modes) to distinguish a
   subsequent replay of a Test Setup PDU.

   The authUnixTime field is expected to be zeroed in Unauthenticated
   mode.

   If the client has selected options for:

   *  Jumbo datagram support (modifierBitmap),

   *  Traditional MTU (modifierBitmap),

   *  Authentication mode (authMode)

   that do not match the server configuration, the server MUST reject
   the Setup Request.

   If the Setup Request must be rejected, the conditions below determine
   whether the server sends a response:

   *  In Authenticated modes, if the authDigest is valid, a Test Setup
      Response SHALL be sent back to the client with a corresponding
      command response value indicating the reason for the rejection.
      The server SHALL follow the requirements of Section 4.2.2 and
      insert an updated authUnixTime and authDigest in the response.

   *  In Authenticated modes, if the authDigest is invalid, then the
      Test Setup Request SHOULD fail silently.  The exception is for
      operations support: server administrators using authentication are
      permitted to send a Setup Response to support operations and
      troubleshooting.

   *  If Unauthenticated mode is selected, the Test Setup Request SHALL
      fail silently.

   The additional, non-authentication circumstances when a server SHALL
   NOT communicate the appropriate Command Response code for an error
   condition (fail silently) are when:



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 18]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   1.  the Setup Request PDU size is not correct,

   2.  the Control ID is invalid, or

   3.  a directed attack has been detected,

   in which case the server will allow setup attempts to terminate
   silently.  Attack detection is beyond the scope of this
   specification.

   When the server replies to the Test Setup Request message, the Test
   Setup Response PDU is structured identically to the Request PDU and
   SHALL retain the original values received in it, with the following
   exceptions:

   *  The cmdRequest field is set to CHSR_CREQ_SETUPRSP, indicating a
      response.

   *  The cmdResponse field is set to an error code (starting at
      CHSR_CRSP_BADVER), indicating the reason for rejection.  If
      cmdResponse indicates a bad protocol version (CHSR_CRSP_BADVER),
      the protocolVer field is also updated to indicate the current
      expected version.

   *  The authUnixTime field is updated to the current time and the
      authDigest is recalculated, if doing authentication.

   *  The PDU is encrypted, up to the IV, if doing encryption.

5.2.2.  Test Setup Request Processing - Acceptance

   If the server finds that the Setup Request matches its configuration
   and is otherwise acceptable, the server SHALL initiate a new
   connection to receive the Test Activation Request from the client,
   using a new UDP socket allocated from the UDP ephemeral port range.
   This new socket will also be used for the subsequent Load and Status
   PDUs that are part of testing (with the port number communicated back
   to the client in the Test Setup Response).  Then, the server SHALL
   start a watchdog timer (to terminate the new connection if the client
   goes silent) and SHALL send the Test Setup Response back to the
   client.

   When the server replies to the Test Setup Request message, the Test
   Setup Response PDU is structured identically to the Request PDU and
   SHALL retain the original values received in it, with the following
   exceptions:





Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 19]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   *  The cmdRequest field is set to CHSR_CREQ_SETUPRSP, indicating a
      response.

   *  The cmdResponse field is set to CHSR_CRSP_ACKOK, indicating an
      acknowledgment.

   *  The testPort field is set to the ephemeral port number to be used
      for the client's Test Activation Request and all subsequent
      communication.

   *  The authUnixTime field is updated to the current time and the
      authDigest is recalculated, if doing authentication.

   *  The PDU is encrypted, up to the IV, if doing encryption.

   Finally, the new UDP connection associated with the new socket and
   port number is opened, and the server awaits further communication
   there.

   To ensure that a server's local firewall will successfully allow
   packets received for the new ephemeral port, the server SHALL
   immediately send a Null Request with the corresponding values
   including the source and destination IP addresses and port numbers.
   The source port SHALL be the new ephemeral port.  This operation
   allows communication to the server even when the server's local
   firewall prohibits open ranges of ephemeral ports.  The packet is not
   expected to arrive successfully at the client if the client-side
   firewall blocks unexpected traffic.  If the Null Request arrives at
   the client, it is a confirmation that further exchanges are possible
   on the new port-pair (but this is not strictly necessary).  Note that
   there is no response to a Null Request.

   The Null Request message PDU SHALL be organized as follows:


















Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 20]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   //
   // Control header for UDP payload of Null Request PDU
   //
   struct controlHdrNR {
   #define CHNR_ID 0xDEAD
           uint16_t controlId;   // Control ID
           uint16_t protocolVer; // Protocol version
           uint8_t mcIndex;  // Multi-connection index
           uint8_t mcCount;  // Multi-connection count
           uint16_t mcIdent; // Multi-connection identifier
   #define CHNR_CREQ_NONE    0
   #define CHNR_CREQ_NULLREQ 1  // Null request
           uint8_t cmdRequest;  // Command request
   #define CHNR_CRSP_NONE 0     // (used with request)
           uint8_t cmdResponse; // Command response
           uint16_t reserved1;  // reserved octets
           //
           uint32_t authUnixTime; // Authentication time stamp
           uint8_t authDigest[AUTH_DIGEST_LENGTH] // HMAC
           // IV = &authDigest[AUTH_DIGEST_IV] (not encrypted)
           uint8_t authMode;   // Authentication mode (not encrypted)
           uint8_t keyId;      // Key ID in shared table (not encrypted)
           uint16_t reserved;  // reserved octets (not encrypted)
   };

   Figure 3: Null Request PDU

   The UDP PDU format layout SHALL be as follows (big-endian AB):























Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 21]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |          controlId            |          protocolVer          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |    mcIndex    |    mcCount    |            mcIdent            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  cmdRequest   |  cmdResponse  |           reserved1           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                         authUnixTime                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   |                      authDigest (256 bits)                    |
   |                                                               |
   | _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _ |
   |                                                               |
   |              Initialization Vector (128 bits)                 |
   |       [Reuses second half of HMAC within authDigest]          |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   authMode    |     keyId     |          reserved             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Figure 4: Null Request PDU Layout

   If a Test Activation Request is not subsequently received from the
   client on the new ephemeral port number before the watchdog timer
   expires, the server SHALL close the socket and deallocate the
   associated resources.

5.3.  Setup Response Processing at the Client

   When the client receives the Test Setup Response message, it SHALL:

   *  verify the size of the Setup Response message and if correct
      interrogate the authMode field

   *  if operating in the Partial Encryption mode, use the available
      keyId and IV to decrypt the Setup Response message up to the IV
      using the method prescribed in Section 4.2.4

   *  if operating in one of the Authenticated modes, validate the Setup
      Response message by checking the authDigest as prescribed in
      Section 4.2.2

   and then proceed to evaluate the other fields in the protocol,
   beginning with the protocol version, Control ID (to validate the type
   of message), and cmdRequest for the role of the message (SHOULD be



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 22]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   Test Setup Response).  The value in the authUnixTime field is a
   32-bit timestamp with a 5 minute tolerance window (+/- 2.5 minutes)
   and SHALL be used (if in one of the Authenticated modes) to
   distinguish a subsequent replay of the message.

   The authUnixTime field is expected to be zeroed in Unauthenticated
   mode.

   If the cmdResponse value indicates an error (values greater than
   CHSR_CRSP_ACKOK) the client SHALL display/report a relevant message
   to the user or management process and exit.  If the client receives a
   Command Response code that is not equal to one of the codes defined
   above, the client MUST terminate the connection and terminate
   operation of the current Setup Request.  If the Command Server
   Response code value indicates success (CHSR_CRSP_ACKOK), the client
   SHALL compose a Test Activation Request with all the test parameters
   it desires, such as the test direction, the test duration, etc., as
   described below.

6.  Test Activation Request and Response

   This section is divided according to the sending and processing of
   the client, server, and again at the client.

   All messages defined in this section SHALL use UDP transport.  The
   hosts SHALL calculate and include the UDP checksum, or check the UDP
   checksum as necessary.

6.1.  Client Generates Test Activation Request

   Upon a successful setup exchange, the client SHALL compose and send
   the Test Activation Request to the UDP port number the server
   communicated in the Test Setup Response (the new ephemeral port, and
   not the well-known port).

   The Test Activation Request/Response message PDU (as well as the
   included Sending Rate structure) SHALL be organized as follows:

//
// Sending rate structure for a single row of transmission parameters
//
struct sendingRate {
        uint32_t txInterval1; // Transmit interval (us)
        uint32_t udpPayload1; // UDP payload (bytes)
        uint32_t burstSize1;  // UDP burst size per interval
        uint32_t txInterval2; // Transmit interval (us)
        uint32_t udpPayload2; // UDP payload (bytes)
        uint32_t burstSize2;  // UDP burst size per interval



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 23]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


        uint32_t udpAddon2;   // UDP add-on (bytes)
};
//
// Control header for UDP payload of Test Act. Request/Response PDUs
//
struct controlHdrTA {
#define CHTA_ID 0xACE2
        uint16_t controlId;   // Control ID
        uint16_t protocolVer; // Protocol version
        uint8_t mcIndex;  // Multi-connection index
        uint8_t mcCount;  // Multi-connection count
        uint16_t mcIdent; // Multi-connection identifier
#define CHTA_CREQ_NONE      0
#define CHTA_CREQ_TESTACTUS 1 // Test activation upstream
#define CHTA_CREQ_TESTACTDS 2 // Test activation downstream
        uint8_t cmdRequest;   // Command request
#define CHTA_CRSP_NONE     0  // (used with request)
#define CHTA_CRSP_ACKOK    1  // Acknowledgment
#define CHTA_CRSP_BADPARAM 2  // Bad/invalid test params
        uint8_t cmdResponse;  // Command response
        uint16_t lowThresh;   // Low delay variation threshold (ms)
        uint16_t upperThresh; // Upper delay variation threshold (ms)
        uint16_t trialInt;    // Status Feedback/trial interval (ms)
        uint16_t testIntTime; // Test interval time (sec)
        uint8_t subIntPeriod; // Sub-interval period (sec)
        uint8_t ipTosByte;    // IP ToS byte for testing
#define CHTA_SRIDX_DEF UINT16_MAX // Request default server rate search
        uint16_t srIndexConf;   // Configured Sending Rate Table index
        uint8_t useOwDelVar;    // Use one-way delay, not RTT (BOOL)
        uint8_t highSpeedDelta; // High-speed row adjustment delta
        uint16_t slowAdjThresh; // Slow rate adjustment threshold
        uint16_t seqErrThresh;  // Sequence error threshold
        uint8_t ignoreOooDup;   // Ignore Out-of-Order/Duplicates (BOOL)
#define CHTA_SRIDX_ISSTART 0x01 // Use srIndexConf as starting index
#define CHTA_RAND_PAYLOAD  0x02 // Randomize payload
        uint8_t modifierBitmap; // Modifier bitmap
#define CHTA_RA_ALGO_B   0   // Algorithm B
#define CHTA_RA_ALGO_C   1   // Algorithm C
        uint8_t rateAdjAlgo; // Rate adjust. algorithm
        uint8_t reserved1;   // reserved octet
        struct sendingRate srStruct; // Sending rate structure
        //
        uint32_t authUnixTime; // Authentication time stamp
        uint8_t authDigest[AUTH_DIGEST_LENGTH] // HMAC
        // IV = &authDigest[AUTH_DIGEST_IV] (not encrypted)
        uint8_t authMode;   // Authentication mode (not encrypted)
        uint8_t keyId;      // Key ID in shared table (not encrypted)
        uint16_t reserved;  // reserved octets (not encrypted)



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 24]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


};

   Figure 5: Test Activation PDU

   The UDP PDU format layout SHALL be as follows (big-endian AB):

   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          txInterval1                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          udpPayload1                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          burstSize1                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          txInterval2                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          udpPayload2                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          burstSize2                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          udpAddon2                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |          controlId            |          protocolVer          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |    mcIndex    |    mcCount    |            mcIdent            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  cmdRequest   | cmdResponse   |           lowThresh           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |         upperThresh           |           trialInt            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |         testIntTime           | subIntPeriod  |  ipTosByte    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |         srIndexConf           |  useOwDelVar  |highSpeedDelta |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |         slowAdjThresh         |         seqErrThresh          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | ignoreOooDup  |modifierBitmap |  rateAdjAlgo  |   reserved1   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-|-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   .                      srStruct (28 octets)                     .
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                         authUnixTime                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 25]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   |                      authDigest (256 bits)                    |
   |                                                               |
   | _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _ |
   |                                                               |
   |              Initialization Vector (128 bits)                 |
   |       [Reuses second half of HMAC within authDigest]          |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   authMode    |     keyId     |          reserved             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Figure 6: Test Activation PDU Layout

   Fields are populated based on default values or command-line options.
   Authentication and encryption modes follow the same methodology as
   with the Setup Request and Response.

   The content of many of the unique fields in Figures 5 and 6 are
   defined in Section 4 of [RFC9097] and Appendix A of [RFC9097].
   Additional details are given below.

   srStruct: Sending Rate structure, used by the server in a Test
   Activation Response for an upstream test, to communicate the
   (initial) Load PDU transmisstion parameters the client SHALL use.
   For a Test Activation Request or a downstream test, this structure
   SHALL be zeroed.  Two sets of periodic transmission parameters are
   available, allowing for dual independent transmitters (to support a
   high degree of rate granularity).  The udpAddon2 field specifies the
   size of a single Load PDU to be sent at the end of the txInterval2
   send sequence, even when udpPayload2 or burstSize2 are zero and
   result in no transmission of their own.

   srIndexConf: The requested Configured Sending Rate Table index, used
   in a Test Activation Request, of the desired fixed or starting
   sending rate (depending on whether CHTA_SRIDX_ISSTART is cleared or
   set respectively).  Because a value of zero is a valid fixed or
   starting sending rate index, the field SHALL be set to its maximum
   (CHTA_SRIDX_DEF) when requesting the default behavior of the server
   (starting the selected load rate adjustment algorithm at its minimum/
   zero index).  This SHALL be equivalent to setting srIndexConf to zero
   and setting the CHTA_SRIDX_ISSTART bit.

   modifierBitmap: There are two bits currently assigned in this bitmap:

   CHTA_SRIDX_ISSTART  Treat srIndexConf as the starting sending rate to
      be used by the load rate adjustment algorithm

   CHTA_RAND_PAYLOAD  Randomize the Payload Content beyond the Load PDU



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 26]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


      header

   Other bit positions are currently undefined.  A new registry will be
   needed for modifierBitmap assignments; see the IANA Considerations
   section.

6.2.  Server Processes Test Activation Request and Generates Response

   After the server receives the Test Activation Request on the new
   connection, it MUST choose to accept, ignore or modify any of the
   test parameters.  When the server replies to the Test Activation
   Request message, the Test Activation Response PDU is structured
   identically to the Request PDU and SHALL retain the original values
   received in it unless they are explicitly coerced to a server
   acceptable value.

6.2.1.  Server Rejects or Modifies Request

   When evaluating the Test Activation Request, the server MAY allow the
   client to specify its own fixed or starting send rate via
   srIndexConf.

   Alternatively, the server MAY enforce a maximum limit of the fixed or
   starting send rate which the client can successfully request.  If the
   client's Test Activation Request exceeds the server's configured
   maximum, the server MUST either reject the request or coerce the
   value to the configured maximum bit rate, and communicate that
   maximum to the client in the Test Activation Response.  The client
   can of course choose to end the test, as appropriate.

   Other parameters where the server has the OPTION to coerce the client
   to use values other than those in the Test Activation Request are
   (grouped by role):

   *  Load rate adjustment algorithm: lowThresh, upperThresh,
      useOwDelayVar, highSpeedDelta, slowAdjThresh, seqErrThresh,
      highSpeedDelta, ignoreOooDup, rateAdjAlgo.

   *  Test duration/intervals: trialInt, testIntTime, subIntPeriod

   *  Packet marking: ipTosByte

   Coercion is a step toward performing a test with the server-
   configured values; even though the client might prefer certain values
   the server gives the client an opportunity to run a test with
   different values than the preferred set.  In these cases, the Command
   Response value SHALL be CHTA_CRSP_ACKOK.




Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 27]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   Note that the server also has the option of completely rejecting the
   request and sending back an appropriate Command Response value (only
   CHTA_CRSP_BADPARAM currently).

   Whether this error response is sent or not depends on the Security
   mode of operation and the outcome of authDigest validation.

   If the Test Activation Request must be rejected (due to the Command
   Response value being CHTA_CRSP_BADPARAM), and

   *  In Authenticated modes, if the authDigest is valid, a Test
      Activation Response SHALL be sent back to the client with a
      corresponding command response value indicating the reason for the
      rejection.  The server SHALL follow the requirements of
      Section 4.2.2 and insert the authDigest in the response.

   *  In Authenticated modes, if the authDigest is invalid, then the
      Test Activation Request SHOULD fail silently.  The exception is
      for operations support: server administrators using Authentication
      are permitted to send a Setup Response to support operations and
      troubleshooting.

   *  If Unauthenticated mode is selected, the Test Activation Request
      SHALL fail silently.

   The additional, non-authentication circumstances when a server SHALL
   NOT communicate the appropriate Command Response code for an error
   condition (fail silently) are when:

   1.  the Test Activation Request PDU size is not correct,

   2.  the Control ID is invalid, or

   3.  a directed attack has been detected,

   in which case the server will allow Test Activation Requests to
   terminate silently.  Attack detection is beyond the scope of this
   specification.

6.2.2.  Server Accepts Request and Generates Response

   When the server sends the Test Activation Response, it SHALL set the
   Command Response field to CHTA_CRSP_ACKOK

   If the client has requested an upstream test, the server SHALL:






Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 28]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   *  include the transmission parameters from the first row of the
      Sending Rate Table in the Sending Rate structure (if requested by
      srIndexConf having been set to CHTA_SRIDX_DEF), OR

   *  include the transmission parameters from the designated Configured
      Sending Rate Table index (srIndexConf) of the Sending Rate
      Table where, if CHTA_SRIDX_ISSTART is set in modifierBitmap, this
      will be used as the starting rate for the load rate adjustment
      algorithm, else it will be considered a fixed rate test.

   When generating the Test Activation Response (acceptance) for a
   downstream test, the server SHALL set all octets of the Sending Rate
   structure to zero.

   If activation continues, the server prepares the new connection for
   an upstream OR downstream test.

   In the case of a upstream test, the server SHALL prepare to use a
   single timer to send Status PDUs at the specified interval.  For a
   downstream test, the server SHALL prepare to utilize dual timers to
   send Load PDUs based on

   *  the transmission parameters directly from the first row of the
      Sending Rate Table (if requested by srIndexConf having been set to
      CHTA_SRIDX_DEF), OR

   *  the transmission parameters from the designated Configured Sending
      Rate Table index (srIndexConf) of the Sending Rate Table where, if
      CHTA_SRIDX_ISSTART is set in modifierBitmap, this will be used as
      the starting rate for the load rate adjustment algorithm, else it
      will be considered a fixed rate test.

   The server SHALL then send the Test Activation Response back to the
   client, update the watchdog timer with a new timeout value, and set a
   test duration timer to eventually stop the test.  Once the
   requirements of the chosen security mode have been met, the Test
   Activation Response is ready to be sent to the client:

6.2.2.1.  Authenticated Modes

   When operating in either of the Authenticated modes the server SHALL
   follow the requirements of Section 4.2.2 and SHALL generate the
   authDigest field.  The HMAC-SHA256 calculation SHALL cover all the
   fields in the header.  The current Unix time SHALL be read and
   inserted immediately prior to the calculation (as immediately as
   possible).  Computation of the authDigest HMAC-SHA256 hash is
   specified in [RFC6234].




Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 29]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


6.2.2.2.  Unauthenticated Mode

   When operating in Unauthenticated mode, the requirements of
   Section 4.2.1 SHALL be followed.

6.2.2.3.  Partial Encrypted Mode

   When operating in the Partial Encryption mode, the client SHALL
   follow the requirements of Section 4.2.4 and SHALL then encrypt the
   header up to and including the first half (128 bits) of the
   authDigest, after the 256-bit HMAC-SHA256 hash has been inserted.
   The second half (128 bits) of the HMAC-SHA256 hash within the
   authDigest SHALL then be reused as the Initialization Vector (IV).
   The IV and any subsequent fields SHALL be communicated in the clear.

6.3.  Client Processes Test Activation Response

   When the client receives the Test Activation Response, it SHALL:

   *  When operating in Partial Encryption mode, decrypt the PDU using
      the included IV and shared key.  Then, check the message PDU for
      validity via the authDigest and the authUnixTime field for
      acceptable immediacy, if operating in an Authenticated mode.
      Finally, check the PDU for general formatting, such as protocol
      version, and any PDU-specific fields that control the test.

   When the client receives the (vetted) Test Activation Response, it
   first checks the command response value.

   If the client receives a Test Activation Command Response value that
   indicates an error, the client SHALL display/report a relevant
   message to the user or management process and exit.

   If the client receives a Test Activation Command Response value that
   is not equal to one of the codes defined above, the client MUST
   terminate the connection and terminate operation of the current setup
   procedure.

   If the client receives a Test Activation Command Response value that
   indicates success (CHTA_CRSP_ACKOK) the client SHALL update its
   configuration to use any test parameters modified by the server.

   Next, the client SHALL prepare its connection for either an upstream
   test with dual timers set to send Load PDUs (based on the starting
   transmission parameters sent by the server), OR a downstream test
   with a single timer to send Status PDUs at the specified interval.





Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 30]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   Then, the client SHALL stop the test initiation timer and start a
   watchdog timer to detect if the server goes quiet.

   The connection is now ready for testing.

7.  Test Stream Transmission and Measurement Feedback Messages

   This section describes the data phase of the protocol.  The roles of
   sender and receiver vary depending whether the direction of testing
   is from server to client, or the reverse.

   All messages defined in this section SHALL use UDP transport.  The
   hosts SHALL calculate and include the UDP checksum, or check the
   received UDP checksum before further processing, as necessary.

7.1.  Test Packet PDU and Roles

   Testing proceeds with one end-point sending Load PDUs, based on
   transmission parameters from the Sending Rate Table, and the other
   end-point sending Status Feedback messages to communicate the traffic
   conditions at the receiver.  When the server is sending Status
   Feedback messages, they will also contain the latest transmission
   parameters from the Sending Rate Table that the client SHALL use.

   The watchdog timer at the receiver SHALL be reset each time a PDU is
   received.  See non-graceful test stop in Section 8 for handling the
   watchdog timeout expiration at each end-point.

   When the server is sending Load PDUs in the role of sender, it SHALL
   use the transmission parameters directly from the Sending Rate
   Table via the index that is currently selected (which was indirectly
   based on the feedback in its received Status Feedback messages).

   However, when the client is sending Load PDUs in the role of sender,
   it SHALL use the discreet transmission parameters that were
   communicated by the server in its periodic Status Feedback messages
   (and not referencing a Sending Rate Table directly).  This approach
   allows the server to control the individual sending rates as well as
   the algorithm used to decide when and how to adjust the rate.

   The server uses a load rate adjustment algorithm which evaluates
   measurements taken locally at the Load PDU receiver.  When the client
   is the receiver, the information is communicated to the server via
   the periodic Status Feedback messages.  When the server is the
   receiver, the information is used directly (although it is also
   communicated to the client via its periodic Status Feedback
   messages).  This approach is unique to this protocol; it provides the
   ability to search for the Maximum IP Capacity and specify specific



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 31]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   sender behaviors that is absent from other testing tools.  Although
   the algorithm depends on the protocol, it is not part of the protocol
   per se.

   The default algorithm (B) has three paths to its decision on the next
   sending rate:

   1.  When there are no impairments present (no sequence errors and low
       delay variation), resulting in a sending rate increase.

   2.  When there are low impairments present (no sequence errors but
       higher levels of delay variation), the same sending rate is
       maintained.

   3.  When the impairment levels are above the thresholds set for this
       purpose and "congestion" is inferred, resulting in a sending rate
       decrease.

   Algorithm B also has two modes for increasing/decreasing the sending
   rate:

   *  A high-speed mode (fast) to achieve high sending rates quickly,
      but also back-off quickly when "congestion" is inferred from the
      measurements.  Consecutive feedback intervals that have a supra-
      threshold count of sequence number anomalies and/or contain an
      upper delay variation threshold exception in all of the
      consecutive intervals are sufficient to declare "congestion"
      within a test.  The threshold of consecutive feedback intervals
      SHALL be configurable with a default of 3 intervals.

   *  A single-step (slow) mode where all rate adjustments use the
      minimum increase or decrease of one step in the sending rate
      table.  The single step mode continues after the first inference
      of "congestion" from measured impairments.

   An OPTIONAL load rate adjustment algorithm (designated C) has been
   defined in [TR-471].  Algorithm C operation and modes are similar to
   B, but C uses multiplicative increases in the fast mode to reach the
   Gigabit range quickly and adds the possibility to re-try the fast
   mode during a test (which improves the measurement accuracy in
   dynamic or error-prone access, such as radio access).

   On the other hand, the test configuration MAY use a fixed sending
   rate requested by the client, using the field srIndexConf.







Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 32]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   The client MAY communicate the desired fixed rate in its test
   activation request.  The reasons to conduct a fixed-rate test include
   stable measurement at the maximum determined by the load rate
   adjustment algorithm, or the desire to test at a known subscribed
   rate without searching.

   The Load PDU SHALL be organized as follows (followed by any payload
   content):


//
// Load header for UDP payload of Load PDUs
//
struct loadHdr {
#define LOAD_ID 0xBEEF
        uint16_t loadId; // Load ID
#define TEST_ACT_TEST  0 // Test active
#define TEST_ACT_STOP1 1 // Stop indication used locally by server
#define TEST_ACT_STOP2 2 // Stop indication exchanged with client
        uint8_t testAction;  // Test action
        uint8_t rxStopped;   // Receive traffic stopped indicator (BOOL)
        uint32_t lpduSeqNo;  // Load PDU sequence number
        uint16_t udpPayload; // UDP payload (bytes)
        uint16_t spduSeqErr; // Status PDU sequence error count
        uint32_t spduTime_sec;  // Send time in last received status PDU
        uint32_t spduTime_nsec; // Send time in last received status PDU
        uint32_t lpduTime_sec;  // Send time of this load PDU
        uint32_t lpduTime_nsec; // Send time of this load PDU
        uint16_t rttRespDelay;  // Response delay for RTT (ms)
        uint16_t reserved1;     // reserved octets
};

   Figure 7: Load PDU

   The UDP PDU format layout SHALL be as follows (big-endian AB):
















Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 33]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |           loadId              |   testAction  |   rxStopped   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           lpduSeqNo                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |           udpPayload          |           spduSeqErr          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          spduTime_sec                         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                         spduTime_nsec                         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-|-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          lpduTime_sec                         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                         lpduTime_nsec                         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |         rttRespDelay          |           reserved1           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   .                       Payload Content...                      .
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Figure 8: Load PDU Layout

   Specific details regarding Load PDU fields are as follows:

   testAction: Designates the current test action as either
   TEST_ACT_TEST (testing in progress), TEST_ACT_STOP1 (first phase of
   graceful termination, used locally by server), or TEST_ACT_STOP2
   (second phase of graceful termination, sent by server and
   reciprocated by client).  See Section 8 for additional information on
   test termination.

   rxStopped: A boolean (0 or 1) used to indicate to the remote end-
   point that local receive traffic (either Load or Status PDUs) has
   stopped.  All outgoing Load or Status PDUs SHALL continue to assert
   this indication until traffic is received again, or the test is
   terminated.  The time threshold to trigger this condition is expected
   to be a reasonable fraction of the watchdog timeout (a default of one
   second is recommended).

   lpduSeqNo: Load PDU sequence number (starting at 1).  Used to
   determine loss, out-of-order, and duplicates.








Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 34]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   udpPayload: The total payload size of the UDP datagram including the
   Load PDU message header and Payload Content (i.e., what the UDP
   socket read function would return).  This field allows the Load PDU
   receiver to maintain accurate receive statistics if utilizing receive
   truncation (only requesting the Load PDU message header octets from
   the protocol stack).

   spduSeqErr: Status PDU loss count, as seen by the Load PDU sender.
   This is determined by the Status PDU sequence number (spduSeqNo) in
   the most recently received Status PDU.  Used to communicate to the
   Load PDU receiver that return traffic (in the unloaded direction) is
   being lost.

   spduTime_sec/spduTime_nsec: A copy of the most recent spduTime_sec/
   spduTime_nsec from the last Status PDU received.  Used for RTT
   measurements made by the Load PDU receiver.

   lpduTime_sec/lpduTime_nsec: The local send time of the Load PDU.
   Used for one-way delay variation measurements made by the Load PDU
   receiver.

   rttRespDelay: RTT response delay, used to "adjust" raw RTT.  On the
   Load PDU sender, it is the number of milliseconds from reception of
   the most recent Status PDU (when the latest spduTime_sec/
   spduTime_nsec was obtained) to the transmission of the Load PDU
   (where the previously obtained spduTime_sec/spduTime_nsec is
   returned).  When the Load PDU receiver is calculating RTT, by
   subtracting the copied Status PDU send time (in the Load PDU) from
   the local Load PDU receive time, this value is subtracted from the
   raw RTT to correct for any response delay due to Load PDU scheduling.

   Payload Content: All zeroes, all ones, or a pseudorandom binary
   sequence.

7.2.  Status PDU

   The Load PDU receiver SHALL send a Status PDU to the sender during a
   test at the configured feedback interval, after at least one Load PDU
   has been received (when there is something to provide status on).  In
   test scenarios with long delays between client and server, it is
   possible for the Status PDU send timer to fire before the first Load
   PDU arrives.  In these cases, the Status PDU SHALL NOT be sent.

   The watchdog timer at the Load PDU sender SHALL be reset each time a
   Status PDU is received.  See non-graceful test stop in Section 8 for
   handling the watchdog timeout expiration at each end-point.





Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 35]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   The Status PDUs are a key part of the server-client control loop.  To
   protect against bit errors (checksum) or on-path attacks (something
   stronger), there is a requirement to calculate and include/check the
   UDP checksum.  Also, Authenticated mode 2 that covers the Status PDU
   and will detect bit errors or attempts to replace values in the
   original packets.

   The Status Feedback message PDU (as well as the included Sub-Interval
   Statistics structure) SHALL be organized as follows:


 //
 // Sub-interval statistics structure for received traffic information
 //
 struct subIntStats {
         uint32_t rxDatagrams; // Received datagrams
         uint64_t rxBytes;     // Received bytes (64 bits)
         uint32_t deltaTime;   // Time delta (us)
         uint32_t seqErrLoss;  // Loss sum
         uint32_t seqErrOoo;   // Out-of-Order sum
         uint32_t seqErrDup;   // Duplicate sum
         uint32_t delayVarMin; // Delay variation minimum (ms)
         uint32_t delayVarMax; // Delay variation maximum (ms)
         uint32_t delayVarSum; // Delay variation sum (ms)
         uint32_t delayVarCnt; // Delay variation count
         uint32_t rttMinimum;  // Minimum round-trip time (ms)
         uint32_t rttMaximum;  // Maximum round-trip time (ms)
         uint32_t accumTime;   // Accumulated time (ms)
 };
 //
 // Status feedback header for UDP payload of status PDUs
 //
 struct statusHdr {
 #define STATUS_ID 0xFEED
         uint16_t statusId;  // Status ID
         uint8_t testAction; // Test action
         uint8_t rxStopped;  // Receive traffic stopped indicator (BOOL)
         uint32_t spduSeqNo; // Status PDU sequence number
         struct sendingRate srStruct; // Sending rate structure
         uint32_t subIntSeqNo;        // Sub-interval sequence number
         struct subIntStats sisSav;   // Sub-interval saved stats
         uint32_t seqErrLoss;    // Loss sum
         uint32_t seqErrOoo;     // Out-of-Order sum
         uint32_t seqErrDup;     // Duplicate sum
         uint32_t clockDeltaMin; // Clock delta minimum (ms)
         uint32_t delayVarMin;   // Delay variation minimum (ms)
         uint32_t delayVarMax;   // Delay variation maximum (ms)
         uint32_t delayVarSum;   // Delay variation sum (ms)



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 36]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


         uint32_t delayVarCnt;   // Delay variation count
 #define STATUS_NORTT UINT32_MAX // No RTT data/value
         uint32_t rttMinimum;    // Minimum round-trip time sampled (ms)
         uint32_t rttSample;     // Last round-trip time sample (ms)
         uint8_t delayMinUpd;    // Delay minimum(s) updated (BOOL)
         uint8_t reserved1;      // reserved octet
         uint16_t reserved2;     // reserved octets
         uint32_t tiDeltaTime;   // Trial interval delta time (us)
         uint32_t tiRxDatagrams; // Trial interval receive datagrams
         uint32_t tiRxBytes;     // Trial interval receive bytes
         uint32_t spduTime_sec;  // Send time of this status PDU
         uint32_t spduTime_nsec; // Send time of this status PDU
         uint8_t padding[12];    // Padding for encryption
         //
         uint32_t authUnixTime; // Authentication time stamp
         uint8_t authDigest[AUTH_DIGEST_LENGTH] // HMAC
         // IV = &authDigest[AUTH_DIGEST_IV] (not encrypted)
         uint8_t authMode;   // Authentication mode (not encrypted)
         uint8_t keyId;      // Key ID in shared table (not encrypted)
         uint16_t reserved;  // reserved octets (not encrypted)
 };

   Figure 9: Status PDU

   The UDP PDU format layout SHALL be as follows (big-endian AB):


   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          rxDatagrams                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                            rxBytes                            |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           deltaTime                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           seqErrLoss                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           seqErrOoo                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           seqErrDup                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          delayVarMin                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          delayVarMax                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          delayVarSum                          |



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 37]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          delayVarCnt                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          rttMinimum                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          rttMaximum                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           accumTime                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |          statusId             |   testAction  |   rxStopped   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           spduSeqNo                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   .                      srStruct (28 octets)                     .
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          subIntSeqNo                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   .                      sisSav (56 octets)                       .
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           seqErrLoss                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           seqErrOoo                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           seqErrDup                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                         clockDeltaMin                         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          delayVarMin                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          delayVarMax                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          delayVarSum                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          delayVarCnt                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          rttMinimum                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           rttSample                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  delayMinUpd  |   reserved1   |           reserved2           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                          tiDeltaTime                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                         tiRxDatagrams                         |



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 38]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           tiRxBytes                           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                         spduTime_sec                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                         spduTime_nsec                         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   |                        padding (96 bits)                      |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                         authUnixTime                          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   |                      authDigest (256 bits)                    |
   |                                                               |
   | _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _     _ |
   |                                                               |
   |              Initialization Vector (128 bits)                 |
   |       [Reuses second half of HMAC within authDigest]          |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   authMode    |     keyId     |          reserved             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Figure 10: Status PDU Layout

   Note that the Sending Rate structure is defined in Section 6.

   The primary role of the Status Feedback message is to communicate to
   the Load PDU sender the traffic conditions at the Load PDU receiver.
   While the Sub-Interval Statistics structure (sisSav) covers the most
   recently saved (completed) sub-interval, similar fields directly in
   the Status PDU itself cover the most recent trial interval (the time
   period between Status Feedback messages, completed by this Status
   PDU).  Both sets of statistics SHALL always be populated by the Load
   PDU receiver, regardless of role (client or server).

   Details on the Status PDU measurement fields are provided in
   [RFC9097].  Additional information regarding fields not defined
   previously are as follows:

   rxDatagrams/rxBytes/deltaTime: Sub-interval received datagram and
   byte counts as well as the exact duration of the sub-interval in
   microseconds.  Used to calculate the received traffic rate for the
   sub-interval.  The rxBytes field is a 64-bit value to prevent
   overflow at high speeds.




Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 39]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   seqErrLoss/seqErrOoo/seqErrDup: Loss, out-of-order, and duplicate
   totals.  Available for both the sub-interval and trial interval.

   delayVarMin/delayVarMax/delayVarSum/delayVarCnt: The one-way delay
   variation measurements of all received Load PDUs (where avg = sum/
   cnt).  For each Load PDU received, the send time (lpduTime_sec/
   lpduTime_nsec) is subtracted from the local receive time, which is
   then normalized by subtracting the current clockDeltaMin.  Available
   for both the sub-interval and trial interval.

   rttMinimum/rttMaximum (in sisSav): The minimum and maximum RTT delay
   variation (rttSample) in the sub-interval designated by the
   subIntSeqNo.

   accumTime: The accumulated time of the test in milliseconds, based on
   the duration of each sub-interval.  Equivalent to the sum of each
   deltaTime (although in ms) sent in each Status PDU during the test.

   spduSeqNo: Status PDU sequence number (starting at 1).  Used by the
   Load PDU sender to detect Status PDU loss (in the unloaded
   direction).  The loss count is communicated back to the Load PDU
   receiver via spduSeqErr in subsequent Load PDUs.

   subIntSeqNo: Sub-interval sequence number (starting at 1) that
   corresponds to the statistics provided in sisSav, for the last saved
   (completed) sub-interval.

   sisSav: Sub-interval statistics saved (completed) for the most recent
   sub-interval (as designated by the subIntSeqNo).

   clockDeltaMin: The minimum clock delta (difference) since the
   beginning of the test.  Obtained by subtracting the send time of each
   Load PDU (lpduTime_sec/lpduTime_nsec) from the local time that it was
   received.  This value is initialized with the first Load PDU received
   and is updated with each subsequent one to maintain a current (and
   continuously updated) minimum.  If the end-point clocks are
   sufficiently synchronized, this will be the minimum one-way delay in
   milliseconds.  Otherwise, this value may be negative (but still
   completely valid for one-way delay variation measurements).












Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 40]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   rttMinimum (in Status PDU): The minimum "adjusted" RTT measured since
   the beginning of the test.  See rttRespDelay regarding "adjusted"
   measurements.  RTT is obtained by subtracting the copied
   spduTime_sec/spduTime_nsec in the received Load PDU from the local
   time at which it was received.  This minimum SHALL be kept current
   (and continuously updated) via each Load PDU received with an updated
   spduTime_sec/spduTime_nsec.  This value MUST be positive.  Before an
   initial value can be established, and because zero is itself valid,
   it SHALL be set to STATUS_NORTT when communicated in the Status PDU.

   rttSample: The most recent "adjusted" RTT delay variation
   measurement.  See rttRespDelay regarding "adjusted" measurements.
   RTT delay variation is obtained by subtracting the current (and
   continuously updated) "adjusted" RTT minimum, communicated as
   rttMinimum (in Status PDU), from each "adjusted" RTT measurement
   (which is itself obtained by subtracting the copied spduTime_sec/
   spduTime_nsec in the received Load PDU from the local time at which
   it was received).  Note that while one-way delay variation is
   measured for every Load PDU received, RTT delay variation is only
   sampled via the Status PDU sent and the very next Load PDU received
   with the corresponding updated spduTime_sec/spduTime_nsec.  When a
   new value is unavailable (possibly due to packet loss), and because
   zero is itself valid, it SHALL be set to STATUS_NORTT when
   communicated in the Status PDU.

   delayMinUpd: Boolean (0 or 1) indicating that the clockDeltaMin and/
   or rttMinimum (in Status PDU), as measured by the Load PDU receiver,
   has been updated.

   tiDeltaTime/tiRxDatagrams/tiRxBytes: The trial interval time in
   microseconds, along with the received datagram and byte counts.  Used
   to calculate the received traffic rate for the trial interval.

   spduTime_sec/spduTime_nsec: The local transmit time of the Status
   PDU.  Expected to be copied into spduTime_sec/spduTime_nsec in
   subsequent Load PDUs after being received by the Load PDU sender.
   Used for RTT measurements.

   The authentication (and encryption) fields and their operation are as
   defined previously in Sections 5 and 6.

   When a client or server prepares to send the Status PDU, it SHALL:









Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 41]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


7.2.1.  Authenticated Modes

   When operating in either of the Authenticated modes, it SHALL follow
   the requirements of Section 4.2.2 (and 4.2.3 if applicable), and
   SHALL generate the authDigest field.  The HMAC-SHA256 calculation
   SHALL cover all the fields in the header.  The current Unix time
   SHALL be read and inserted immediately prior to the calculation (as
   immediately as possible).  Computation of the authDigest HMAC-SHA256
   hash is specified in [RFC6234].

7.2.2.  Unauthenticated Mode

   When operating in Unauthenticated mode, the requirements of
   Section 4.2.1 SHALL be followed.

7.2.3.  Partial Encrypted Mode

   When operating in the Partial Encryption mode, the client SHALL
   follow the requirements of Section 4.2.4 and SHALL then encrypt the
   header up to and including the first half (128 bits) of the
   authDigest, after the 256-bit HMAC-SHA256 hash has been inserted.
   The second half (128 bits) of the HMAC-SHA256 hash within the
   authDigest SHALL then be reused as the Initialization Vector (IV).
   The IV and any subsequent fields SHALL be communicated in the clear.

8.  Stopping the Test

   When the test duration timer (testIntTime) on the server expires, it
   SHALL set the local connection test action to TEST_ACT_STOP1 (phase 1
   of graceful termination).  This is simply a non-reversible state
   awaiting the next message(s) to be sent from the server.  During this
   time, any received Load or Status PDUs are processed normally.

   Upon transmission of the next Load or Status PDUs, the server SHALL
   set the local connection test action to TEST_ACT_STOP2 (phase 2 of
   graceful termination) and mark any outgoing PDUs with a testAction
   value of TEST_ACT_STOP2.  While in this state, the server MAY reduce
   any Load PDU bursts to a size of one.

   When the client receives a Load or Status PDU with the TEST_ACT_STOP2
   indication, it SHALL finalize testing, display the test results, and
   also mark its local connection with a test action of TEST_ACT_STOP2
   (so that any PDUs subsequently received can be ignored).

   With the test action of the client's connection set to
   TEST_ACT_STOP2, the very next expiry of a send timer, for either a
   Load or Status PDU, SHALL result in it and any subsequent PDUs to be
   sent with a testAction value of TEST_ACT_STOP2 (as confirmation to



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 42]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   the server).  While in this state, the client MAY reduce any Load PDU
   bursts to a size of one.  The client SHALL then schedule an immediate
   end time for the connection.

   When the server receives the TEST_ACT_STOP2 confirmation in the Load
   or Status PDU, the server SHALL schedule an immediate end time for
   the connection which closes the socket and deallocates the associated
   resources.  The TEST_ACT_STOP2 exchange constitutes a graceful
   termination of the test.

   In a non-graceful test stop due to path failure, the watchdog
   timeouts at each end-point will expire (sometimes at one end-point
   first), notifications in logs, STDOUT, and/or formatted output SHALL
   be made, and the end-point SHALL schedule an immediate end time for
   the connection.

   If an attacker clears the TEST_ACT_STOP2 indication, then the
   configured test duration timer (testIntTime) at the server and client
   SHALL take precedence and the end-point SHALL schedule an immediate
   end time for the connection.

9.  Method of Measurement

   The architecture of the method REQUIRES two cooperating hosts
   operating in the roles of Src (test packet sender) and Dst
   (receiver), with a measured path and return path between them.

   The duration of a test, parameter I, MUST be constrained in a
   production network, since this is an active test method and it will
   likely cause congestion on the Src to Dst host path during a test.

9.1.  Notes on Interface Measurements

   Additional measurements may be useful in specific circumstances.  For
   example, interface byte counters measured by a client at a
   residential gateway are possible when the client application has
   access to an interface that sees all traffic to/from a service
   subscriber's location.  Adding a byte counter at the client for
   download or upload directions could be used to measure total traffic
   and possibly detect when non-test traffic is present (and using
   capacity).  The client may not have the CPU cycles available to count
   both the interface traffic and IP-layer Capacity simultaneously, so
   this form of diagnostic measurement may not be possible.








Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 43]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


10.  Security Considerations

   Active metrics and measurements have a long history of security
   considerations.  The security considerations that apply to any active
   measurement of live paths are relevant here.  See [RFC4656] and
   [RFC5357].

   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 [RFC7594],
   which covers active and passive techniques.

   There are some new considerations for Capacity measurement as
   described in this memo.

   1.  Cooperating client and server hosts and agreements to test the
       path between the hosts are REQUIRED.  Hosts perform in either the
       server or client roles.  One way to assure a cooperative
       agreement employs the optional Authorization mode through the use
       of the authDigest field and the known identity associated with
       the key used to create the authDigest field.  Other means are
       also possible, such as access control lists at the server.

   2.  It is REQUIRED to have a user client-initiated setup handshake
       between cooperating hosts that allows firewalls to control
       inbound unsolicited UDP traffic which either goes to a control
       port or to ephemeral ports that are only created as needed.
       Firewalls protecting each host can both continue to do their job
       normally.

   3.  Client-server authentication and integrity protection for
       feedback messages conveying measurements is REQUIRED.  To
       accommodate different host limitations and testing circumstances,
       different modes of operation are recommended, as described in
       Section 4 above.

   4.  Hosts MUST limit the number of simultaneous tests to avoid
       resource exhaustion and inaccurate results.









Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 44]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   5.  Senders MUST be rate-limited.  This can be accomplished using a
       pre-built table defining all the offered sending rates that will
       be supported.  The default and optional load rate adjustment
       algorithm results in "ramp up" from the lowest rate in the table.
       Optionally, the server could utilize the maxBandwidth field (and
       CHSR_USDIR_BIT bit) in the Setup Request from the client to limit
       the maximum that it will attempt to achieve.

   6.  Service subscribers with limited data volumes who conduct
       extensive capacity testing might experience the effects of
       Service Provider controls on their service.  Testing with the
       Service Provider's measurement hosts SHOULD be limited in
       frequency and/or overall volume of test traffic (for example, the
       range of test interval duration values SHOULD be limited).

   One specific attack that has been recognized is an on-path attack on
   the testAction field where the attacker would set or clear the STOP
   indication.  Setting the indication in successive packets terminates
   the test prematurely, with no threat to the Internet but annoyance
   for the testers.  If an attacker clears the STOP indication, the
   mitigation relies on knowledge of the test duration at the client and
   server, where these hosts cease all traffic when the specified test
   duration is complete.

11.  IANA Considerations

   This memo requests IANA to assign a "well-known" UDP port for the
   Test Setup exchange in the Control phase of protocol operation, and
   to create a new registry group for the UDP Speed Test (UDPST)
   protocol.

11.1.  New System Port Assignment

   Service:  udpst-control

   Transport Protocol:  UDP

   Assignee:  IESG <iesg@ietf.org>

   Contact:  IETF Chair <chair@ietf.org>

   Description:  UDP-based IP-Layer Capacity and performance measurement
      protocol

   Reference:  This RFC, RFCYYYY.  The protocol uses IP-Layer Unicast.

   Port Number:  <left blank, as instructed>




Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 45]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


11.2.  New UDPST Registry Group

   This section describes the design of the UDP Speed Test (UDPST)
   registry group.

   The new registry group SHALL be named, "UDPST Registry".

   The following applies to each registry in the sub-sections below:

   Registration Procedure: Specification Required

   Reference: <This RFC>

   Experts: Performance Metrics Experts

   Note: TBD

11.2.1.  PDU Identifier Registry

   The first two octets of the PDUs used in the UDPST protocol identify
   the role and format of PDU that follows.

   Identifier  Value  Reference   Change     Description
   Name                           Controller
   ===================================================================
   controlId   0xACE1 <this RFC>  IETF       Test Setup PDU

   controlId   0xACE2 <this RFC>  IETF       Test Activation PDU

   controlId   0xDEAD <this RFC>  IETF       Null PDU

   loadId      0xBEEF <this RFC>  IETF       Load PDU

   statusId    0xFEED <this RFC>  IETF       Status Feedback PDU

   Other values are unassigned.

11.2.2.  Protocol Number Registry

   The second two octets of the PDUs used in the UDPST protocol identify
   the version of the protocol in use.  The table below defines the
   assigned decimal values in the registry.









Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 46]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   Field          Value  Reference   Change     Description
   Name                              Controller
   ===================================================================
   protocolVer    0-7    <this RFC>  IETF       Reserved

   protocolVer    8      <this RFC>  IETF       Protocol version 8

   protocolVer    9      <this RFC>  IETF       Protocol version 9

   protocolVer    10     <this RFC>  IETF       Protocol version 10

   protocolVer    20     <this RFC>  IETF       Protocol version 20

   Other values are unassigned, with an upper value of 65535.

11.2.3.  Test Setup PDU Modifier Bitmap Registry

   The Test Setup PDU layout contains a modifierBitmap field.  The table
   below defines the initial bit assignments in the registry.

   Field           Value  Reference   Change     Description
   Name                                Controller
   ===================================================================
   modifierBitmap   0x00   <this RFC>  IETF      No modifications

   modifierBitmap   0x01   <this RFC>  IETF      Allow Jumbo
                                                 datagram sizes above
                                                 sending rates of 1Gbps

   modifierBitmap   0x02   <this RFC>  IETF      Use Traditional MTU
                                                 (1500 bytes with
                                                 IP-header)

   modifierBitmap   0x03-0xFF          IETF      Unassigned

11.2.4.  Test Setup PDU Authentication Mode Registry

   The Test Setup PDU layout contains an authMode field.  The table
   below defines the assigned decimal values in the registry, and a
   range for experimentation.











Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 47]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   Field     Value  Reference   Change     Description
   Name                         Controller
   =====================================================================
   authMode  0      <this RFC>  IETF       OPTIONAL Unauthenticated mode

   authMode  1      <this RFC>  IETF       REQUIRED authentication
                                           for the Control phase

   authMode  2      <this RFC>  IETF       OPTIONAL authentication
                                           for the Data phase, in
                                           addition to the Control phase

   authMode  3      <this RFC>  IETF       OPTIONAL partial encrypted
                                           mode

   authMode  60-63  <this RFC>  IETF       Range for experimentation

   Other values are unassigned, with the upper boundary of 255.

11.2.5.  Test Setup PDU Command Response Field Registry

   The Test Setup PDU layout contains an cmdResponse field.  The table
   below defines the assigned decimal values in the registry.




























Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 48]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


  Field        Value  Reference   Change     Description
  Name                            Controller
  ===================================================================
  cmdResponse  0      <this RFC>  IETF       None (used by
                                             client in Request)

  cmdResponse  1      <this RFC>  IETF       Acknowledgment

  cmdResponse  2      <this RFC>  IETF       Bad Protocol Version

  cmdResponse  3      <this RFC>  IETF       Invalid Jumbo datagram
                                             option

  cmdResponse  4      <this RFC>  IETF       Unexpected Authentication
                                             in Setup Request

  cmdResponse  5      <this RFC>  IETF       Authentication missing in
                                             Setup Request

  cmdResponse  6      <this RFC>  IETF       Invalid authentication
                                             method

  cmdResponse  7      <this RFC>  IETF       Authentication failure

  cmdResponse  8      <this RFC>  IETF       Authentication time is
                                             invalid in Setup Request

  cmdResponse  9      <this RFC>  IETF       No Maximum test Bit rate
                                             specified

  cmdResponse  10     <this RFC>  IETF       Server Maximum Bit rate
                                             exceeded

  cmdResponse  11     <this RFC>  IETF       MTU option does not match
                                             server

  cmdResponse  12     <this RFC>  IETF       Multi-connection parameters
                                             rejected by server

  cmdResponse  13     <this RFC>  IETF       Connection allocation
                                             failure on server

   Other values are unassigned, with the upper boundary of 255.








Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 49]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


11.2.6.  Test Activation PDU Modifier Bitmap Registry

   The Test Activation PDU layout (also) contains a modifierBitmap
   field.  The table below defines the initial bit assignments in the
   registry.

   Field           Value  Reference   Change     Description
   Name                               Controller
   ===================================================================
   modifierBitmap   0x00   <this RFC>  IETF      No modifications

   modifierBitmap   0x01   <this RFC>  IETF      Set when srIndexConf is
                                                 start rate for search

   modifierBitmap   0x02   <this RFC>  IETF      Set for randomized
                                                 UDP payload

   modifierBitmap   0x03-0xFF          IETF      Unassigned

11.2.7.  Test Activation PDU Command Request Registry

   The Test Activation PDU layout contains a cmdRequest field.  The
   table below defines the assigned decimal values in the registry.

   Field      Value    Reference  Change    Description
   Name                           Controller
   ===================================================================
   cmdRequest  0      <this RFC>  IETF      No Request

   cmdRequest  1      <this RFC>  IETF      Request test in Upstream
                                            direction (client to server)

   cmdRequest  2      <this RFC>  IETF      Request test in Downstream
                                            direction (server to client)

   Other values are unassigned, with the upper boundary of 255.

11.2.8.  Test Activation PDU Rate Adjustment Algo.  Registry

   The Test Activation PDU layout contains a rateAdjAlgo field.  The
   table below defines the assigned Capitalized alphabetic UTF-8 values
   in the registry.









Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 50]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   Field      Value    Reference  Change    Description
   Name                           Controller
   ===================================================================
   rateAdjAlgo  A      <this RFC>  IETF      Not used

   rateAdjAlgo  B      <this RFC>  IETF      Rate algorithm Type B

   rateAdjAlgo  C      <this RFC>  IETF      Rate algorithm Type C

   Other values are unassigned, with the upper boundary of Z.

11.2.9.  Test Activation PDU Command Response Field Registry

   The Test Activation PDU layout (also) contains a cmdResponse field.
   The table below defines the assigned decimal values in the registry.

   Field        Value  Reference   Change     Description
   Name                            Controller
   ===================================================================
   cmdResponse  0      <this RFC>  IETF       None (used by
                                              client in Request)

   cmdResponse  1      <this RFC>  IETF       Server Acknowledgment

   cmdResponse  2      <this RFC>  IETF       Server indicates an error

   Other values are unassigned, with the upper boundary of 255.

12.  Acknowledgments

   This specification has been edited by Al Morton.  Al Morton died
   before he was able to finalise this work.  As Al can't complete
   author tasks during the IETF standardisation process anymore, it was
   decided not to keep him as an author in the proper section.
   Respecting, that almost all of the content here has been edited or
   created by Al, it seems fair not just to give him credit for his
   work, but also list him as editor, if this document reaches RFC
   status.

   Thanks to Lincoln Lavoie, Can Desem, and Greg Mirsky for reviewing
   this draft and providing helpful suggestions and areas for further
   development.  Ken Kerpez and Chen Li have provided helpful reviews.
   Amanda Baber provided early reviews of the IANA Considerations
   section.

   Brian Weis provided an early SEC-DIR review; version 02 captures
   clarifications and version 03 takes on the protocol changes the Brian
   suggested.



Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 51]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


13.  References

13.1.  Normative References

   [FIPS-197] National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST.,
              "Federal Information Processing Standards Publication 197
              (FIPS-197), ADVANCED ENCRYPTION STANDARD (AES)", 26
              November 2001, <https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/fips/
              nist.fips.197.pdf>.

   [I-D.ietf-ippm-capacity-metric-method]
              Morton, A. C., Geib, R., and L. Ciavattone, "Metrics and
              Methods for One-Way IP Capacity", Work in Progress,
              Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-ippm-capacity-metric-method-12,
              9 June 2021, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-
              ietf-ippm-capacity-metric-method-12>.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC2330]  Paxson, V., Almes, G., Mahdavi, J., and M. Mathis,
              "Framework for IP Performance Metrics", RFC 2330,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2330, May 1998,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2330>.

   [RFC2681]  Almes, G., Kalidindi, S., and M. Zekauskas, "A Round-trip
              Delay Metric for IPPM", RFC 2681, DOI 10.17487/RFC2681,
              September 1999, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2681>.

   [RFC6071]  Frankel, S. and S. Krishnan, "IP Security (IPsec) and
              Internet Key Exchange (IKE) Document Roadmap", RFC 6071,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6071, February 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6071>.

   [RFC6234]  Eastlake 3rd, D. and T. Hansen, "US Secure Hash Algorithms
              (SHA and SHA-based HMAC and HKDF)", RFC 6234,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6234, May 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6234>.

   [RFC6438]  Carpenter, B. and S. Amante, "Using the IPv6 Flow Label
              for Equal Cost Multipath Routing and Link Aggregation in
              Tunnels", RFC 6438, DOI 10.17487/RFC6438, November 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6438>.






Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 52]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   [RFC7210]  Housley, R., Polk, T., Hartman, S., and D. Zhang,
              "Database of Long-Lived Symmetric Cryptographic Keys",
              RFC 7210, DOI 10.17487/RFC7210, April 2014,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7210>.

   [RFC7497]  Morton, A., "Rate Measurement Test Protocol Problem
              Statement and Requirements", RFC 7497,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7497, April 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7497>.

   [RFC7680]  Almes, G., Kalidindi, S., Zekauskas, M., and A. Morton,
              Ed., "A One-Way Loss Metric for IP Performance Metrics
              (IPPM)", STD 82, RFC 7680, DOI 10.17487/RFC7680, January
              2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7680>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

   [RFC8446]  Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol
              Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8446>.

   [RFC8468]  Morton, A., Fabini, J., Elkins, N., Ackermann, M., and V.
              Hegde, "IPv4, IPv6, and IPv4-IPv6 Coexistence: Updates for
              the IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) Framework", RFC 8468,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8468, November 2018,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8468>.

   [RFC9097]  Morton, A., Geib, R., and L. Ciavattone, "Metrics and
              Methods for One-Way IP Capacity", RFC 9097,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC9097, November 2021,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9097>.

   [RFC9147]  Rescorla, E., Tschofenig, H., and N. Modadugu, "The
              Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) Protocol Version
              1.3", RFC 9147, DOI 10.17487/RFC9147, April 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9147>.

13.2.  Informative References

   [CBC]      Dworkin, M., "NIST Special Publication 800-38A:
              Recommendation for Block Cipher Modes of Operation:
              Methods and Techniques, U.S. National Institute of
              Standards and Technology", December 2001,
              <csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-38a/final>.





Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 53]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   [copycat]  Edleine, K., Kuhlewind, K., Trammell, B., and B. Donnet,
              "copycat: Testing Differential Treatment of New Transport
              Protocols in the Wild (ANRW '17)", 15 July 2017,
              <https://irtf.org/anrw/2017/anrw17-final5.pdf>.

   [LS-SG12-A]
              12, I. S., "LS - Harmonization of IP Capacity and Latency
              Parameters: Revision of Draft Rec. Y.1540 on IP packet
              transfer performance parameters and New Annex A with Lab
              Evaluation Plan", May 2019,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1632/>.

   [LS-SG12-B]
              12, I. S., "LS on harmonization of IP Capacity and Latency
              Parameters: Consent of Draft Rec. Y.1540 on IP packet
              transfer performance parameters and New Annex A with Lab &
              Field Evaluation Plans", March 2019,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/liaison/1645/>.

   [RFC2544]  Bradner, S. and J. McQuaid, "Benchmarking Methodology for
              Network Interconnect Devices", RFC 2544,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2544, March 1999,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2544>.

   [RFC3148]  Mathis, M. and M. Allman, "A Framework for Defining
              Empirical Bulk Transfer Capacity Metrics", RFC 3148,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3148, July 2001,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3148>.

   [RFC3610]  Whiting, D., Housley, R., and N. Ferguson, "Counter with
              CBC-MAC (CCM)", RFC 3610, DOI 10.17487/RFC3610, September
              2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3610>.

   [RFC4656]  Shalunov, S., Teitelbaum, B., Karp, A., Boote, J., and M.
              Zekauskas, "A One-way Active Measurement Protocol
              (OWAMP)", RFC 4656, DOI 10.17487/RFC4656, September 2006,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4656>.

   [RFC5136]  Chimento, P. and J. Ishac, "Defining Network Capacity",
              RFC 5136, DOI 10.17487/RFC5136, February 2008,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5136>.

   [RFC5357]  Hedayat, K., Krzanowski, R., Morton, A., Yum, K., and J.
              Babiarz, "A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)",
              RFC 5357, DOI 10.17487/RFC5357, October 2008,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5357>.





Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 54]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   [RFC6815]  Bradner, S., Dubray, K., McQuaid, J., and A. Morton,
              "Applicability Statement for RFC 2544: Use on Production
              Networks Considered Harmful", RFC 6815,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6815, November 2012,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6815>.

   [RFC7312]  Fabini, J. and A. Morton, "Advanced Stream and Sampling
              Framework for IP Performance Metrics (IPPM)", RFC 7312,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7312, August 2014,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7312>.

   [RFC7594]  Eardley, P., Morton, A., Bagnulo, M., Burbridge, T.,
              Aitken, P., and A. Akhter, "A Framework for Large-Scale
              Measurement of Broadband Performance (LMAP)", RFC 7594,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7594, September 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7594>.

   [RFC7799]  Morton, A., "Active and Passive Metrics and Methods (with
              Hybrid Types In-Between)", RFC 7799, DOI 10.17487/RFC7799,
              May 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7799>.

   [RFC8337]  Mathis, M. and A. Morton, "Model-Based Metrics for Bulk
              Transport Capacity", RFC 8337, DOI 10.17487/RFC8337, March
              2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8337>.

   [RFC8762]  Mirsky, G., Jun, G., Nydell, H., and R. Foote, "Simple
              Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol", RFC 8762,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8762, March 2020,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8762>.

   [RFC8972]  Mirsky, G., Min, X., Nydell, H., Foote, R., Masputra, A.,
              and E. Ruffini, "Simple Two-Way Active Measurement
              Protocol Optional Extensions", RFC 8972,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8972, January 2021,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8972>.

   [TR-471]   Morton, A,, Editor., "Broadband Forum TR-471: IP Layer
              Capacity Metrics and Measurement, Issue 3", December 2022,
              <https://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/download/TR-
              471.pdf>.

   [udpst]    udpst Project Collaborators, "UDP Speed Test Open
              Broadband project", December 2020,
              <https://github.com/BroadbandForum/obudpst>.







Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 55]

Internet-Draft   Test Protocol: IP Capacity Measurement    February 2024


   [Y.1540]   Y.1540, I. R., "Internet protocol data communication
              service - IP packet transfer and availability performance
              parameters", December 2019,
              <https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-Y.1540-201912-I/en>.

   [Y.Sup60]  Morton, A., Rapporteur., "Recommendation Y.Sup60, (09/20)
              Interpreting ITU-T Y.1540 maximum IP-layer capacity
              measurements", 11 September 2020,
              <https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-Y.Sup60/en>.

Authors' Addresses

   Len Ciavattone
   AT&T Labs
   Middletown, NJ
   United States of America
   Email: lencia@att.com


   Ruediger Geib
   Deutsche Telekom
   Ida-Rhodes Str. 2
   64295 Darmstadt
   Germany
   Phone: +49 6151 5812747
   Email: Ruediger.Geib@telekom.de

























Ciavattone & Geib        Expires 24 August 2024                [Page 56]