66th IETF MeetingMontreal

IETF BMWG WLAN Switch & Mesh

Benchmarking

Jerry Perserjperser@veriwave.com

2

Where is Jerry?

Jerry says hello, and is sorry he couldn’t be here in personHe’s busy with a bit of applied WLAN switch benchmarking

Tom A. will serve as ”virtual Jerry”

Jerry in his usual position

DUT

LargeRack of

TestGear

3

Motivation and Background

Enterprise WLANs highly IP-centric and switched WLAN switches and lightweight APs Layer 3/4 aware (sometimes even Layer-7 aware) Incorporates many IETF-defined functions: ARP caching and

proxying, DHCP service, firewalling, IPsec, etc

Considerable work in IETF in this area CAPWAP – WLAN switch protocols MANET – WLAN mesh protocols

Equipment vendors would like to use the same benchmarking techniques as their customers, for measuring WLAN switch and mesh performance

It’s all very ad-hoc today

Test tool vendors would like to have the same approach to testing as service providers and equipment vendors

4

Scope of Proposed Work

Extend existing router/switch RFCs and drafts to cover WLAN switches and meshes

RFC 1242, RFC 2285, RFC 2544, RFC 2889, etc. Hash & stuffing draft

Random MACs + wireless security = problems Extend for higher-layer functions of WLAN switches and

meshes Add in wireless device specific requirements

Include general WLAN switch data plane performance What does “throughput with zero loss” mean for wireless,

which has error rates of 10-5 and retransmissions?

Add WLAN-specific terminology/methodology Roaming and scalability (support of CAPWAP) Multi-hop mesh performance, recovery (support of MANET)

5

What About IEEE 802.11T?

IEEE 802.11T PAR limits scope to 802.11 WLAN devices and networks; no mention of IPv4 or IPv6

WLAN switches have Ethernet interfaces, not 802.11 WLAN switches do not contain conforming implementations of the

802.11 PHY or MAC WLAN switches usually transport IP-encapsulated packets

BMWG standardizes IP-level benchmark terminology & methodology

Layer 3-7 functions outside the scope of normal 802 work

BMWG has far more background in switching & routing benchmarking

Can draw on a large experience base (RFC 1242 and 2285)

CAPWAP and MANET are already IETF work items Makes sense to keep it all together

6

Next steps

Start discussion on work proposals Solicit help

Submit drafts Terminology Methodology Ensure no overlap with IEEE 802.11T

Comments?