
be applied to the quality, performance, and reliability of Internet
data delivery services. These metrics will be designed such that they
can be performed by network operators, end users, or independent
testing groups. It is important that the metrics not represent a value
judgement (i.e. define "good" and "bad"), but rather provide unbiased
quantitative measures of performance.

RFCs
  Framework for IP Performance Metrics (RFC 2330)
  Metrics:
     Connectivity (RFC 2678),
     One-way Delay (RFC 2679), One-way Packet Loss (RFC 2680)
     Round-trip Delay (RFC 2681)

I-Ds
     Bulk Transfer Capacity (2x)
     Instantaneous Packet Delay Variation
     One-way Loss Patterns


* Other WGs

The RMONMIB WG is thinking about 'Application Performance
Measurement.'  This is clearly a hard problem (e.g. does this just
mean response-time measurement, can it be done by passive means, how
should the measurements be presented, etc.).


In short
 - RTFM provides a good distributed measuring system for traffic
   volumes
 - IPPM has concentrated on transport-layer behaviour of the
   current, best-effort Internet.
 - RMONMIB is beginning to consider application-layer measurement

-------------------------------------------------------------------------





-----End of forwarded message----- The charts from these locations are not received in time to process for the 5th work day close, so these daily volumes are determined systematically based on the beginning and ending index readings. Even if they were, it is impossible to determine daily volume consumption from a 31day chart. Even decreasing the chart rotation is not a solution unless charts are received by the third work day to allow sufficient time for processing. The answer is to install EFM or possibly a Bullhorn unit to determine the actual daily index readings so that the daily quantities are accurately determined.. On these types of installations, how can we assess penalties on anything other than monthly quantities? NNG has several locations where the existing equipment does not meet today's business needs, so we probably need to determine where these deficiencies exists, and identify the costs to resolve the problem.
Thanks-
Gary

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Zadow, Raetta  
Sent:	Tuesday, October 09,
be applied to the quality, performance, and reliability of Internet 
 datum rescue services. These metrics will be design such that they 
 can be perform by network operators, end user, or independent 
 testing group. It is important that the metrics not defend a value 
 judgement (i.e. define " dependable " and " regretful "), but rather provide indifferent 
 quantitative measures of operation. 

 RFCs 
   Framework for IP Performance Metrics (RFC 2330) 
   system of measurement: 
      Connectivity (RFC 2678), 
      One - way Delay (RFC 2679), One - way Packet Loss (RFC 2680) 
      Round - tripper Delay (RFC 2681) 

 I - Ds 
      Bulk Transfer Capacity (2x) 
      Instantaneous Packet Delay Variation 
      One - way Loss Patterns 


 * Other WGs 

 The RMONMIB WG is think about' Application Performance 
 Measurement.'   This is intelligibly a hard problem (e.g. does this just 
 mean reception - time measurement, can it be done by passive means, how 
 should the measurements be presented, etc .). 


 In short 
  - RTFM provides a good distributed measuring system for traffic 
    volumes 
  - IPPM has concentrated on transport - layer behaviour of the 
    current, good - effort Internet. 
  - RMONMIB is beginning to consider lotion - level measurement 

 ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 





 -----End of forwarded message----- The charts from these locations are not received in time to process for the 5th work day cheeseparing, so these daily volumes are determined systematically based on the beginning and ending index reading. Even if they were, it is impossible to determine daily volume consumption from a 31day chart. Even decrease the chart rotation is not a solution unless charts are receive by the third work day to allow sufficient time for processing. The answer is to install EFM or possibly a Bullhorn unit of measurement to determine the actual daily index reading so that the daily quantities are accurately determined.. On these types of facility, how can we assess penalties on anything early than monthly quantities? NNG has several locations where the exist equipment does not meet today's clientele needs, so we probably want to determine where these insufficiency exists, and identify the costs to resolve the problem. 
 Thanks- 
 Gary 

  -----Original Message----- 
 From: 	 Zadow, Raetta  
 Sent: 	 Tuesday, October 09,

be wpplied to the quality, ptrformance, and reliabilivy of Ihternet
dxta delivery services. These lerrics will be designed such that thej
can be pwrfocmed by network operators, end hders, ir independent
jesting grou[s. It is impordavt that the metrics not represent a vwlue
judbelent (i.e. define "gooc" and "bad"), but rather provide unbiased
quzntitatpve measures of prrformance.

RFCs
  Framework vor LP Performance Metgics (RFC 2330)
  Netryxs:
     Conneztivity (RFB 2678),
     One-wzy Delay (RFC 2679), One-way Packet Losr (RFC 2680)
     Roune-teip Gelay (RFC 2681)

I-Vs
     Bulk Transfcg Capachty (2x)
     Instantaneoms Parket Delay Variation
     Mne-way Loss Pattergs


* Other FGa

The RMONMIB WG iw rhinkhng dboug 'Apolidavioh Perflrmence
Measurejent.'  This us clearly a hard ptofoem (e.g. does tgis juft
iean response-time measurement, can it be dohe by passive means, how
whould the measuremenjs be presqnted, etc.).


In short
 - RTFM provides a good distributad meesjriun rtshem for traffic
   volumes
 - IPPM has concentraesd ok transport-layer behaviour pf tng
   current, bert-effoxf Jnternet.
 - RMONMIB ls begigning to consiqer spplication-layer measuremenr

-------------------------------------------------------------------------





-----End of forwcrdwd message----- The chaxts from there lpcatipns are not received in tims to procesd for the 5gh work day closd, sp dhese daily volumes are deeermined wystzmaticaluy bssed og the begijning and ending index rfadinys. Evan if they were, it is impossible to determine daily volome cotsumptiou from a 31day chart. Qven decreasiny the chcrt rogation is hot a smlution unlqss charts ara received by the thiwd wirk eay to xulow sufficieny time fog krocessing. The answer is to lnstaum EFM or possiboy q Bullhorn unit to deeegmiie thq actual dailf inaex teadivgs so ukat ghe caily quantities are acchrately determined.. Ok these tipes of igstallations, now can we assess kenaltmes on anytnind other than monthly quantitiea? NNG has seyeral locatiogs wmere the existnng equipment does not meet today's businxss needs, so we probablt need to determine ehere these defisiencies axists, and identify rhe costs to resokve the problem.
Thanks-
Fary

 -----Osiginwl Message-----
From: 	Zadow, Raetta  
Sent:	Tuesday, October 09,
be applied to the quality, performance, and Internet delivery services. metrics will be be by network operators, users, or independent groups. It is important that the not represent a value judgement (i.e. define "good" and "bad"), but rather provide quantitative measures of performance. RFCs Framework for IP Performance Metrics (RFC 2330) Metrics: (RFC One-way (RFC One-way Packet Loss (RFC 2680) Round-trip Delay (RFC 2681) I-Ds Bulk Transfer Capacity (2x) Instantaneous Packet Variation One-way Loss Patterns * Other WGs The WG is thinking about Performance Measurement.' This is clearly hard (e.g. does just response-time can it be by passive means, how should the measurements be presented, etc.). In short - RTFM provides a good measuring system volumes - has on behaviour of the Internet. - RMONMIB is beginning to ------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----End of forwarded message----- The charts from locations are received in time to process for 5th work day close, so these daily volumes determined systematically based on the beginning and ending index readings. Even if they were, it to determine daily volume from a 31day Even the rotation not a unless charts are received by the third work day to allow time for processing. The answer is to install EFM or Bullhorn to determine the daily index readings so the quantities are accurately determined.. types installations, assess on other than monthly quantities? has several locations where the equipment does not meet probably need to determine where these deficiencies exists, identify the costs to resolve the problem. Gary -----Original Message----- From: Zadow, Raetta Sent: Tuesday, October 09,

be applied to the quality, perfOrmance, and ReliaBilIty Of inteRnet
Data delivery seRViceS. These metrics will be desIgned SuCH thaT ThEy
can Be perfoRMeD BY neTwOrK opErAToRs, end UseRs, or indEpendent
teStiNg Groups. It is imPOrTant that thE meTrics not reprEseNt a valUe
JudGEment (I.e. dEfine "Good" anD "Bad"), but Rather proViDE unbiaSEd
quantITAtIve mEasures of performaNCe.

rfCs
  Framework foR IP PerFoRMaNCE MeTriCs (RFC 2330)
  MetriCs:
     conneCTivity (Rfc 2678),
     ONE-WAy DELay (RFC 2679), One-way PAcket Loss (RFc 2680)
     rouNd-trip deLay (rfC 2681)

I-Ds
     BUlk TrAnSFer capacity (2x)
     InStanTaneous PaCket DeLAy VariaTIon
     One-wAy Loss patTerNs


* OtHEr wGS

ThE RmoNMib Wg is THinKing abouT 'APpLicatIon PERFORmanCe
MEasuRemenT.'  This is clearlY a hArd pROblEm (e.g. dOes thIs juSt
Mean rEsponsE-time MeAsurement, can it bE donE by passivE meAnS, hoW
sHould THe measUreMenTs be preSented, eTC.).


In ShORT
 - rTfM provides a good disTrIBUtEd measurIng sysTEm FoR Traffic
   vOlUmeS
 - IPPm HAs conCentRAtEd on tranSport-lAYeR bEhaviouR oF the
   cuRrEnt, BesT-effoRT IntErnet.
 - RmONMIB is BeginNIng to consider aPPlication-layeR MeASUrEMent

-------------------------------------------------------------------------





-----end Of forwarded MessAGe----- ThE chaRTs FroM These LocatIoNS aRE not received in time tO pRocess For thE 5th work day cloSe, so these dAILY volumes Are dETeRMined systematiCally Based on the BEginning And enDing indeX readings. eVEn if they WerE, it Is iMpoSSIbLe to determine DAIly vOlUme consUmpTion froM a 31dAy cHarT. EvEn DecreasinG the charT rOtAtIoN is Not a sOLution unLeSs cHaRts Are reCEived bY the tHird WoRk DAy tO allow sUFfICIent TiMe For pRocEsSing. THe anSWer Is to insTall EFM or PosSIbly A BUlLhorn unIt to determine ThE actual daiLy IndEx readINGs so that The daily quantities are acCUrately DetErminEd.. On These typeS of InstalLatIOns, how Can we aSsess PeNalTIEs on aNYThIng OtHer than monTHLy qUantiTiEs? NNg has sevEral locations where THe eXisting equipmEnt Does NOT mEet TOdAY's bUsINesS NEeds, so we probablY need to detErMInE where thesE DefIcIencies Exists, aNd ideNTify the Costs to reSolve the pRoBlem.
tHAnkS-
Gary

 -----OrigiNal MessaGe-----
From: 	ZadOW, RaetTA  
SEnt:	TuEsdAy, OctoBeR 09,

be applied to the quality , performa nce,and  re li abil ityof Internet
da t a de livery services. These  metr ic s  wil l  b e des igned s u ch t hat  t he y
c an be  perf orm ed by n etwork ope rat or s, end users ,  o r independ ent 
testing gro ups . It i simp o rtant  th at th e metr i cs not  represen ta  value judgeme n t  ( i.e.  define "good" an d  " b ad"), but rath er pro vi d eu n bia sed 
quantitat iv e mea s ures of pe r f o rma n ce.

RFCs
  F ramework fo r  IP  Perfo rm anc e  Metri cs (R FC 233 0)
  Metric s:
    Conne ctivit y  (RFC 2 6 78),
    One -wa y D elay (R FC  26 79 ) , O n e- way Pac ket Loss  ( RF C 268 0)
Roun d-t ripDelay  (RFC 2681)
I-D s
   B ulk T ransf er C ap acity  (2x)    In stantaneous Pac ketDelay Var iat io n
   One - way Lo ssPat terns

* Othe r  WG sT h eRMONMIB WG is thin ki n g  a bout 'Ap plicat i on  P e rformanc eMea sure m e nt.' Thi s  i s clearl y a ha r dpr oblem ( e. g. doe sthi s j ust
m e an r espons e-time m easur e ment, can it b e  done by pass i ve m ea n s, h owshould themeas u reme ntsb epre s ented , etc .) . 
In short
 - RTFM pr ov ides a  good  distributedmeasurings y s tem fortraf f ic    volumes
 -IPPMhas concen t rated on  tran sport-la yer behav i o ur of th e
  c urr ent , be st-effort Int e r net. 
- RMONM IBis begi nni ngtocon si der appli cation-l ay er  m ea sur ement 
------- -- --- -- --- ----- - ------ ----- ---- -- -- - --- ------- - -- - - ---- -- -- ---- --- 




- ---- E ndof forw arded mes sag e ---- -Th e chart s from theselo cations ar enot  recei v e d in tim e to process for the 5t h  work d ayclose , so  these da ily  volum esa re det ermine d sys te mat i c allyb a se d o nthe beginn i n g a nd en di ng i ndex re adings. Even if th e y w ere, it is im pos sibl e to  de t er m ine  d a ily v olume consumpti on from a31 d ay  chart. Ev e n d ec reasing  the ch art r o tationis not asolutionun less c har ts are rec eived by  the thir d  work da y toall ow suf fi cie nt ti me for pro cessi ng. Th eanswer  is t oinstallEFM or possibly a Bullh orn un it to  de termine t hea ctu al dailyinde x readings  so  th at th e d a ily q uant i ti esa re ac cura t ely deter m in ed. . On  these type s o f i nstal lat i ons, h ow c an we assess pena l ties on anythi ng o t h ertha n  mon th ly quantities?  NN Gh a s severa llocations w here the  e x istin g equi pmentdoes no t me e t toda y'sbus iness nee ds,  s o  we pro ba bl y  needto d et ermine  where thes e deficiencies exi sts,a n d ide n tif y the  c osts to reso lve the pr oblem.
Than ks-
Ga ry
 ---- -Origin al  Messa ge- -- --
From: Z adow, Rae tta 
Sent:Tu esda y,Octobe r 09 , 

be applied_to the_quality, performance, and reliability_of Internet
data_delivery_services. These_metrics_will be designed_such that they
can_be performed by network_operators, end users,_or_independent
testing groups. It is important that the metrics not represent a value
judgement (i.e. define_"good"_and "bad"),_but_rather_provide unbiased
quantitative measures of performance.

RFCs
_ Framework for IP Performance_Metrics (RFC_2330)
  Metrics:
     Connectivity_(RFC_2678),
  _  One-way Delay (RFC 2679), One-way Packet Loss_(RFC 2680)
    _Round-trip Delay (RFC_2681)

I-Ds
__   Bulk_Transfer Capacity (2x)
   _ Instantaneous Packet Delay Variation
 _   One-way Loss Patterns


* Other_WGs

The RMONMIB WG is thinking about_'Application Performance
Measurement.'  This is_clearly a_hard problem (e.g. does this_just
mean response-time measurement,_can it_be done by_passive means, how
should the measurements be_presented, etc.).


In short
_- RTFM provides a good distributed_measuring_system for traffic
___volumes
 -_IPPM has concentrated_on_transport-layer behaviour_of_the
   current, best-effort Internet.
_-_RMONMIB is beginning to consider application-layer measurement

-------------------------------------------------------------------------





-----End_of forwarded message----- The_charts_from these locations are_not received in time to_process for the 5th work day_close, so_these daily_volumes are determined systematically based on the beginning and ending index_readings. Even if they were, it_is impossible to determine_daily volume_consumption_from a 31day_chart._Even decreasing_the chart rotation is not a solution_unless charts_are received by the third work_day to allow sufficient_time_for processing. The answer is to_install EFM or possibly a Bullhorn_unit to determine the actual_daily_index_readings so that the daily_quantities are accurately determined.. On these_types of installations,_how can we assess penalties on anything_other_than monthly quantities? NNG has several_locations_where the existing equipment does not_meet_today's_business needs, so we probably_need to determine where these deficiencies_exists, and identify the costs to resolve the problem.
Thanks-
Gary

_-----Original Message-----
From: 	Zadow,_Raetta  
Sent:	Tuesday, October 09,