ETSI EG 202 765-3-2010 Speech and multimedia Transmission Quality (STQ) QoS and network performance metrics and measurement methods Part 3 Network performance metrics and measureme.pdf

《ETSI EG 202 765-3-2010 Speech and multimedia Transmission Quality (STQ) QoS and network performance metrics and measurement methods Part 3 Network performance metrics and measureme.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《ETSI EG 202 765-3-2010 Speech and multimedia Transmission Quality (STQ) QoS and network performance metrics and measurement methods Part 3 Network performance metrics and measureme.pdf（32页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、 ETSI EG 202 765-3 V1.1.2 (2010-07)ETSI Guide Speech and multimedia Transmission Quality (STQ);QoS and network performance metrics andmeasurement methods;Part 3: Network performance metrics andmeasurement methods in IP networksETSI ETSI EG 202 765-3 V1.1.2 (2010-07) 2Reference REG/STQ-00174-3 Keywor

2、ds performance, QoS ETSI 650 Route des Lucioles F-06921 Sophia Antipolis Cedex - FRANCE Tel.: +33 4 92 94 42 00 Fax: +33 4 93 65 47 16 Siret N 348 623 562 00017 - NAF 742 C Association but non lucratif enregistre la Sous-Prfecture de Grasse (06) N 7803/88 Important notice Individual copies of the pr

3、esent document can be downloaded from: http:/www.etsi.org The present document may be made available in more than one electronic version or in print. In any case of existing or perceived difference in contents between such versions, the reference version is the Portable Document Format (PDF). In cas

4、e of dispute, the reference shall be the printing on ETSI printers of the PDF version kept on a specific network drive within ETSI Secretariat. Users of the present document should be aware that the document may be subject to revision or change of status. Information on the current status of this an

5、d other ETSI documents is available at http:/portal.etsi.org/tb/status/status.asp If you find errors in the present document, please send your comment to one of the following services: http:/portal.etsi.org/chaircor/ETSI_support.asp Copyright Notification No part may be reproduced except as authoriz

6、ed by written permission. The copyright and the foregoing restriction extend to reproduction in all media. European Telecommunications Standards Institute 2010. All rights reserved. DECTTM, PLUGTESTSTM, UMTSTM, TIPHONTM, the TIPHON logo and the ETSI logo are Trade Marks of ETSI registered for the be

7、nefit of its Members. 3GPPTM is a Trade Mark of ETSI registered for the benefit of its Members and of the 3GPP Organizational Partners. LTE is a Trade Mark of ETSI currently being registered for the benefit of its Members and of the 3GPP Organizational Partners. GSM and the GSM logo are Trade Marks

8、registered and owned by the GSM Association. ETSI ETSI EG 202 765-3 V1.1.2 (2010-07) 3Contents Intellectual Property Rights 5g3Foreword . 5g3Introduction 5g31 Scope 7g32 References 7g32.1 Normative references . 7g32.2 Informative references 7g33 Definitions, symbols and abbreviations . 9g33.1 Defini

9、tions 9g33.2 Symbols 9g33.3 Abbreviations . 9g34 Performance Metrics Definitions and Measurement Methods . 10g34.1 One Way Delay vs. IP Packet Transfer Delay 10g34.1.1 IETF Definition 10g34.1.2 ITU-T Definition 11g34.1.3 Comparison and Recommendations . 11g34.1.4 Active Measurement Method 12g34.1.5

10、Passive Measurement Method 13g34.2 Round Trip Delay . 15g34.2.1 IETF Definition 15g34.2.2 ITU-T Definition 15g34.2.3 Comparison and Recommendations . 15g34.2.4 Active Measurement Method 15g34.2.5 Passive Measurement Method 17g34.3 IP Packet Delay Variation vs. End-to-end 2-point IP Packet Delay Vari

11、ation . 18g34.3.1 IETF Definition 18g34.3.2 ITU-T Definition 19g34.3.3 Comparison and Recommendations . 20g34.3.4 Active Measurement Method 21g34.3.5 Passive Measurement Method 21g34.4 One Way Packet Loss vs. IP Packet Loss Ratio . 21g34.4.1 IETF Definition 22g34.4.2 ITU-T Definition 22g34.4.3 Compa

12、rison and Recommendations . 22g34.4.4 Active Measurement Method 22g34.4.5 Passive Measurement Method 23g34.5 Connectivity vs. IP Service Availability 23g34.5.1 IETF Definition 23g34.5.2 ITU-T Definition 24g34.5.3 Comparison and Recommendations . 24g34.5.4 Active Measurement Method 25g34.5.5 Passive

13、Measurement Method 25g35 Other Metrics 25g35.1 Data and Packet Volume 25g35.2 Packet Reordering 26g35.3 Bandwidth Capacity, Available Bandwidth, and Utilization 26g35.4 Bulk Transport Capacity 26g35.5 Loss Patterns 26g35.6 RTCP reported metrics . 27g36 Overview of Network Performance Relevant Standa

14、rd Bodies and Working Groups 28g36.1 IETF . 28g36.1.1 IPPM (IP Performance Metrics) Working Group . 28g3ETSI ETSI EG 202 765-3 V1.1.2 (2010-07) 46.1.2 IPFIX (IP Flow Information eXport) Working Group 28g36.1.3 PSAMP (Packet SAMPling) Working Group . 29g36.2 ITU-T . 29g36.2.1 Study Group 12 (Performa

15、nce and quality of service) 29g36.2.2 Study Group 15 (Optical and other transport network infrastructures) . 29g3Annex A: Bibliography 31g3History 32g3ETSI ETSI EG 202 765-3 V1.1.2 (2010-07) 5Intellectual Property Rights IPRs essential or potentially essential to the present document may have been d

16、eclared to ETSI. The information pertaining to these essential IPRs, if any, is publicly available for ETSI members and non-members, and can be found in ETSI SR 000 314: “Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs); Essential, or potentially Essential, IPRs notified to ETSI in respect of ETSI standards“, wh

17、ich is available from the ETSI Secretariat. Latest updates are available on the ETSI Web server (http:/webapp.etsi.org/IPR/home.asp). Pursuant to the ETSI IPR Policy, no investigation, including IPR searches, has been carried out by ETSI. No guarantee can be given as to the existence of other IPRs n

18、ot referenced in ETSI SR 000 314 (or the updates on the ETSI Web server) which are, or may be, or may become, essential to the present document. Foreword This ETSI Guide (EG) has been produced by ETSI Technical Committee Speech and multimedia Transmission Quality (STQ). The present document is part

19、3 of a multi-part deliverable covering the QoS and network performance metrics and measurement methods, as identified below: EG 202 765-1: “General considerations“; ES 202 765-2: “Transmission Quality Indicator combining Voice Quality Metrics“; EG 202 765-3: “Network performance metrics and measurem

20、ent methods in IP networks“; ES 202 765-4: “Indicators for supervision of Multiplay services“. Introduction The need to define Internet performance metrics and measurement methodologies stems from the need to compare different measurements and to measure performance with a reproducible and unambiguo

21、us methodology, independent from transmission technology and implementation details. Both the ITU-T Study Group 12 and the IETF IPPM Working Group have produced such definitions (see table 1), although each with a different emphasis closely linked to the historical background of both organizations.

22、The ITU has its origins in telephony, while the IETF has a data networking background. Whereas the ITU emphasizes the evaluation of a service and its quality, the IETF measures the network and wants to provide the IT-community with an accurate, common understanding and measurement of the performance

23、 and reliability the Internet i.2. In most cases this results in different terminology rather than in incompatibilities; most differences in approach and emphasis serve the different intended use of each metric, but have no operational significance. In some cases the terminology used by each organis

24、ations can be mapped to the other, while in some others there is only approximate equivalence (e.g. ITU network section versus an IPPM cloud; one focuses on corresponding events while the other measures the fate of a single packet). Other terms have no correspondence. For example, ITU-T Recommendati

25、on I.380 i.28 has a notion of an IP packet transfer reference event while IPPM defines “wire time“. Other differences between IETF and ITU-T metrics result from their intended application. ITU-T metrics seek to provide a common language for providers to communicate about performance, so the ITU-T me

26、trics do not concentrate on performance within a single network, while the IETF focuses on performance measurement protocols and implementation. ITU-T seeks to evaluate service and to exclude unfair use, while the IETF seeks to measure network quantities and avoid biased measurement results. Due to

27、their respective backgrounds, the ITU generally produces statistical metrics geared towards a quantitative representation of the complete end-to-end user experience while the IETF IPPM working group mainly focuses more on statistical metrics which provide a detailed technical view of different aspec

28、ts of transmission quality along the network path. ETSI ETSI EG 202 765-3 V1.1.2 (2010-07) 6Table 1: Overview of Relevant Standards IETF RFCs ITU-T Recommendations Framework RFC 2330 i.2 Y.1540 i.1, sections 1 through 5 Loss RFC 2680 i.5 Y.1540 i.1, section 5.5.6 G.1020 i.17 Delay RFC 2679 i.4 (One-

29、way) RFC 2681 i.6 (Round Trip) Y.1540 i.1, section 6.2 G.1020 i.17 G.114 i.16 (One-way) Delay Variation RFC 3393 i.9 Y.1540 i.1, section 6.2.2 G.1020 i.17 Connectivity / Availability RFC 2678 i.3 Y.1540 i.1, section 7 Loss Patterns RFC 3357 i.8 G.1020 i.17 Packet Reordering Packet Duplication RFC 47

30、37 i.11 Y.1540 i.1, sections 5.5.8.1 and 6.6 Y.1540 i.1, sections 5.5.8.3, 5.5.8.4, 6.8, and 6.9 Link/Path Bandwidth Capacity, Link Utilization, Available Capacity RFC 5136 i.21 Bulk Transport Capacity RFC 3148 i.7, RFC 5136 i.21 The goal of the present document is to define network performance metr

31、ics for applications sensitive to quality of service such as Voice over IP, referring to the existing work produced by both IETF and ITU-T. The present document highlights the differences between the two standards and provides guidelines on resolving these differences, when they are due to addressin

32、g different goals. The scope of the present document is limited to IP performance metrics relevant for data transmission over IP-based networks for use in QoS sensitive applications. For each addressed metric, the document recommends one or more measurement methods. The document only focuses on intr

33、insic network QoS metrics; perceived QoS metrics applicable for voice transmission are out of scope of the present document. The remainder of the present document is organised as follows: Clause 4 describes the definitions of the most important performance metrics as defined by the standard bodies a

34、nd methods for measuring them, and discusses the applicability of the definitions and the differences between them. Clause 5 discusses other metrics applicable to QoS. Finally, clause 6 gives an overview of relevant QoS measurement standards, which can be used in end to end performance evaluation. E

35、TSI ETSI EG 202 765-3 V1.1.2 (2010-07) 71 Scope The present document provides an overview of the common metric definitions and measurement method specifications upon which the interoperability of network performance measurement (also called QoS measurement) is based. Two different standardisation bo

36、dies, the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the International Telecommunication Union - Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T), have addressed this issue. The present document addresses the following points: Survey the existing network performance related IETF standards and how th

37、ese standards can be applied to end-to-end network performance measurements. The scope of this work is also to discuss the relationship of those standards to those of ITU-T and ETSI. Discuss and compare definitions of metrics used to specify and assess performance in IP networks. The metrics address

38、ed in the present document are those defined by the IETF IPPM working group and ITU-T Study Group 12. Besides comparing the different definitions, the present document gives applicability guidelines on which metric is more appropriate for a particular application, configuration or scenario. Define m

39、easurement methods for selected performance metrics in IP networks, addressing both active and passive methods. Clarifying guidelines are given. NOTE: All text sections in the remainder of the present document which are enclosed in quotation marks (“) and formatted in italic style denote citations t

40、aken verbatim from referenced documents. 2 References References are either specific (identified by date of publication and/or edition number or version number) or non-specific. For specific references, only the cited version applies. For non-specific references, the latest version of the reference

41、document (including any amendments) applies. Referenced documents which are not found to be publicly available in the expected location might be found at http:/docbox.etsi.org/Reference. NOTE: While any hyperlinks included in this clause were valid at the time of publication ETSI cannot guarantee th

42、eir long term validity. 2.1 Normative references The following referenced documents are necessary for the application of the present document. Not applicable. 2.2 Informative references The following referenced documents are not necessary for the application of the present document but they assist t

43、he user with regard to a particular subject area. i.1 ITU-T Recommendation Y.1540: “Internet protocol data communication service - IP packet transfer and availability performance parameters“. i.2 IETF RFC 2330: “Framework for IP Performance Metrics“. V. Paxson, G. Almes, J. Mahdavi, M. Mathis. May 1

44、998. i.3 IETF RFC 2678: “IPPM Metrics for Measuring Connectivity“. J. Mahdavi, V. Paxson. September 1999. i.4 IETF RFC 2679: “A One-way Delay Metric for IPPM“. G. Almes, S. Kalidindi, M. Zekauskas. September 1999. ETSI ETSI EG 202 765-3 V1.1.2 (2010-07) 8i.5 IETF RFC 2680: “A One-way Packet Loss Met

45、ric for IPPM“. G. Almes, S. Kalidindi, M. Zekauskas. September 1999. i.6 IETF RFC 2681: “A Round-trip Delay Metric for IPPM“. G. Almes, S. Kalidindi, M. Zekauskas. September 1999. i.7 IETF RFC 3148: “A Framework for Defining Empirical Bulk Transfer Capacity Metrics“. M. Mathis, M. Allman. July 2001.

46、 i.8 IETF RFC 3357: “One-way Loss Pattern Sample Metrics“. R. Koodli, R. Ravikanth. August 2002. i.9 IETF RFC 3393: “IP Packet Delay Variation Metric for IP Performance Metrics (IPPM)“. C. Demichelis, P. Chimento. November 2002. i.10 IETF RFC 4656: “A One-way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP)“. S.

47、 Shalunov, B. Teitelbaum, A. Karp, J. Boote, M. Zekauskas. September 2006. i.11 IETF RFC 4737: “Packet Reordering Metrics“. A. Morton, L. Ciavattone, G. Ramachandran, S. Shalunov, J. Perser. November 2006. i.12 IETF RFC 5101: “Specification of the IPFIX Protocol for the Exchange of IP Traffic Flow I

48、nformation“. B. Claise, S. Bryant, S. Leinen, T. Deitz, B.Trammell. January 2008. i.13 Internet-Draft, work in progress: “IPFIX Architecture“. N.Brownlee et Al. i.14 IETF RFC 5102: “IPFIX Information Model“. J. Quittek et Al. January 2008. i.15 Internet-Draft, work in progress: “IPFIX Applicability

49、Statement“. T. Zseby, E. Boschi, N.Brownlee, B. Claise. i.16 ITU-T Recommendation G.114 (05/03): “One-way transmission time“. i.17 ITU-T Recommendation G.1020 (07/06): “Performance parameter definitions for quality of speech and other voiceband applications utilizing IP networks“. i.18 IETF RFC 3917: “Requirements for IP Flow Information Export“. J. Quittek, T. Zseby, B. Claise, S. Zander. October 2004. i.19 draft-morton-ippm-reporting-metrics-02 work in progress: “Reporting Metrics: