summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/ansible/migrate_pinning_setup.yaml
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorVolodymyr Mytnyk <volodymyrx.mytnyk@intel.com>2018-12-28 16:04:52 +0000
committerGerrit Code Review <gerrit@opnfv.org>2018-12-28 16:04:52 +0000
commit3d96c4a4ca8ed8ea2d769a150f99632343179e31 (patch)
tree07023b57422daa72068397ae2dd5f6aa78f1deb2 /ansible/migrate_pinning_setup.yaml
parent2b321003001e71fec83a5138afd9638d3f97fb7d (diff)
parentffe3f6bfb42b656ebf11880d6668038eb9b63fe2 (diff)
Merge "[docs][glossary] Update the glossary"
Diffstat (limited to 'ansible/migrate_pinning_setup.yaml')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions
f='#n152'>152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 1561 1562 1563 1564 1565 1566 1567 1568 1569 1570 1571 1572 1573 1574 1575 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 1581 1582 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589 1590 1591 1592 1593 1594 1595 1596 1597 1598 1599 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613 1614 1615 1616 1617 1618 1619 1620 1621 1622 1623 1624 1625 1626 1627 1628 1629 1630 1631 1632 1633 1634 1635 1636 1637 1638 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 1644 1645 1646 1647 1648 1649 1650 1651 1652 1653 1654 1655 1656 1657 1658 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 1665 1666 1667 1668 1669 1670 1671 1672 1673 1674 1675 1676 1677 1678 1679 1680 1681 1682 1683 1684 1685 1686 1687 1688 1689 1690 1691 1692 1693 1694 1695 1696 1697 1698 1699 1700 1701 1702 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711 1712 1713 1714 1715 1716 1717 1718 1719 1720 1721 1722 1723 1724 1725 1726 1727 1728 1729 1730 1731 1732 1733 1734 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1742 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1751 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1758 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1768 1769 1770 1771 1772 1773 1774 1775 1776 1777 1778 1779 1780 1781 1782 1783 1784 1785 1786 1787 1788 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 1794 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 2043 2044 2045 2046 2047 2048 2049 2050 2051 2052 2053 2054 2055 2056 2057 2058 2059 2060 2061 2062 2063 2064 2065 2066 2067 2068 2069 2070 2071 2072 2073 2074 2075 2076 2077 2078 2079 2080 2081 2082 2083 2084 2085 2086 2087 2088 2089 2090 2091 2092 2093 2094 2095 2096 2097 2098 2099 2100 2101 2102 2103 2104 2105 2106 2107 2108 2109 2110 2111 2112 2113 2114 2115 2116 2117 2118 2119 2120 2121 2122 2123 2124 2125 2126 2127 2128 2129 2130 2131 2132 2133 2134 2135 2136 2137 2138 2139 2140 2141 2142 2143 2144 2145 2146 2147 2148 2149 2150 2151 2152 2153 2154 2155 2156 2157 2158 2159 2160 2161 2162 2163 2164 2165 2166 2167 2168 2169 2170 2171 2172 2173 2174 2175 2176 2177 2178 2179 2180 2181 2182 2183 2184 2185 2186 2187 2188 2189 2190 2191 2192 2193 2194 2195 2196 2197 2198 2199 2200 2201 2202 2203 2204 2205 2206 2207 2208 2209 2210 2211 2212 2213 2214 2215 2216 2217 2218 2219 2220 2221 2222 2223 2224 2225 2226 2227 2228 2229 2230 2231 2232 2233 2234 2235 2236 2237 2238 2239 2240 2241 2242 2243 2244 2245 2246 2247 2248 2249 2250 2251 2252 2253 2254 2255 2256 2257 2258 2259 2260 2261 2262 2263 2264 2265 2266 2267 2268 2269 2270 2271 2272 2273 2274 2275 2276 2277 2278 2279 2280 2281 2282 2283 2284 2285 2286 2287 2288 2289 2290 2291 2292 2293 2294 2295 2296 2297 2298 2299 2300 2301 2302 2303 2304 2305 2306 2307 2308 2309 2310 2311 2312 2313 2314 2315 2316 2317 2318 2319 2320 2321 2322 2323 2324 2325 2326 2327 2328 2329 2330 2331 2332 2333 2334 2335 2336 2337 2338 2339 2340 2341 2342 2343 2344 2345 2346 2347 2348 2349 2350 2351 2352 2353 2354 2355 2356 2357 2358 2359 2360 2361 2362 2363 2364 2365 2366 2367 2368 2369 2370 2371 2372 2373 2374 2375 2376 2377 2378 2379 2380 2381 2382 2383 2384 2385 2386 2387 2388 2389 2390 2391 2392 2393 2394 2395 2396 2397 2398 2399 2400 2401 2402 2403 2404 2405 2406 2407 2408 2409 2410 2411 2412 2413 2414 2415 2416 2417 2418 2419 2420 2421 2422 2423 2424 2425 2426 2427 2428 2429 2430 2431 2432 2433 2434 2435 2436 2437 2438 2439 2440 2441 2442 2443 2444 2445 2446 2447 2448 2449 2450 2451 2452 2453 2454 2455 2456 2457 2458 2459 2460 2461 2462 2463 2464 2465 2466 2467 2468 2469 2470 2471 2472 2473 2474 2475 2476 2477 2478 2479 2480 2481 2482 2483 2484 2485 2486 2487 2488 2489 2490 2491 2492 2493 2494 2495 2496 2497 2498 2499 2500 2501 2502 2503 2504 2505 2506 2507 2508 2509 2510 2511 2512 2513 2514 2515 2516 2517 2518 2519 2520 2521 2522 2523 2524 2525 2526 2527 2528 2529 2530 2531 2532 2533 2534 2535 2536 2537 2538 2539 2540 2541 2542 2543 2544 2545 2546 2547 2548 2549 2550 2551 2552 2553 2554 2555 2556 2557 2558 
.. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
.. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
.. (c) OPNFV, Intel Corporation, AT&T and others.

.. 3.1

===============
Introduction
===============

The objective of the OPNFV project titled
**“Characterize vSwitch Performance for Telco NFV Use Cases”**, is to
evaluate a virtual switch to identify its suitability for a Telco
Network Function Virtualization (NFV) environment. The intention of this
Level Test Design (LTD) document is to specify the set of tests to carry
out in order to objectively measure the current characteristics of a
virtual switch in the Network Function Virtualization Infrastructure
(NFVI) as well as the test pass criteria. The detailed test cases will
be defined in details-of-LTD_, preceded by the doc-id_ and the scope_.

This document is currently in draft form.

.. 3.1.1


.. _doc-id:

Document identifier
=========================

The document id will be used to uniquely
identify versions of the LTD. The format for the document id will be:
OPNFV\_vswitchperf\_LTD\_REL\_STATUS, where by the
status is one of: draft, reviewed, corrected or final. The document id
for this version of the LTD is:
OPNFV\_vswitchperf\_LTD\_Brahmaputra\_REVIEWED.

.. 3.1.2

.. _scope:

Scope
==========

The main purpose of this project is to specify a suite of
performance tests in order to objectively measure the current packet
transfer characteristics of a virtual switch in the NFVI. The intent of
the project is to facilitate testing of any virtual switch. Thus, a
generic suite of tests shall be developed, with no hard dependencies to
a single implementation. In addition, the test case suite shall be
architecture independent.

The test cases developed in this project shall not form part of a
separate test framework, all of these tests may be inserted into the
Continuous Integration Test Framework and/or the Platform Functionality
Test Framework - if a vSwitch becomes a standard component of an OPNFV
release.

.. 3.1.3

References
===============

*  `RFC 1242 Benchmarking Terminology for Network Interconnection
   Devices <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1242.txt>`__
*  `RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect
   Devices <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__
*  `RFC 2285 Benchmarking Terminology for LAN Switching
   Devices <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2285.txt>`__
*  `RFC 2889 Benchmarking Methodology for LAN Switching
   Devices <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2889.txt>`__
*  `RFC 3918 Methodology for IP Multicast
   Benchmarking <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3918.txt>`__
*  `RFC 4737 Packet Reordering
   Metrics <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4737.txt>`__
*  `RFC 5481 Packet Delay Variation Applicability
   Statement <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5481.txt>`__
*  `RFC 6201 Device Reset
   Characterization <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6201>`__

.. 3.2

.. _details-of-LTD:

===================================
Details of the Level Test Design
===================================

This section describes the features to be tested (
FeaturesToBeTested_), the test approach (Approach_);
it also identifies the sets of test cases or scenarios (
TestIdentification_) along with the pass/fail criteria and
the test deliverables.

.. 3.2.1

.. _FeaturesToBeTested:

Features to be tested
==========================

Characterizing virtual switches (i.e. Device Under Test (DUT) in this document)
includes measuring the following performance metrics:

- **Throughput** as defined by `RFC1242
  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1242.txt>`__: The maximum rate at which
  **none** of the offered frames are dropped by the DUT. The maximum frame
  rate and bit rate that can be transmitted by the DUT without any error
  should be recorded. Note there is an equivalent bit rate and a specific
  layer at which the payloads contribute to the bits. Errors and
  improperly formed frames or packets are dropped.
- **Packet delay** introduced by the DUT and its cumulative effect on
  E2E networks. Frame delay can be measured equivalently.
- **Packet delay variation**: measured from the perspective of the
  VNF/application. Packet delay variation is sometimes called "jitter".
  However, we will avoid the term "jitter" as the term holds different
  meaning to different groups of people. In this document we will
  simply use the term packet delay variation. The preferred form for this
  metric is the PDV form of delay variation defined in `RFC5481
  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5481.txt>`__. The most relevant
  measurement of PDV considers the delay variation of a single user flow,
  as this will be relevant to the size of end-system buffers to compensate
  for delay variation. The measurement system's ability to store the
  delays of individual packets in the flow of interest is a key factor
  that determines the specific measurement method. At the outset, it is
  ideal to view the complete PDV distribution. Systems that can capture
  and store packets and their delays have the freedom to calculate the
  reference minimum delay and to determine various quantiles of the PDV
  distribution accurately (in post-measurement processing routines).
  Systems without storage must apply algorithms to calculate delay and
  statistical measurements on the fly. For example, a system may store
  temporary estimates of the mimimum delay and the set of (100) packets
  with the longest delays during measurement (to calculate a high quantile,
  and update these sets with new values periodically.
  In some cases, a limited number of delay histogram bins will be
  available, and the bin limits will need to be set using results from
  repeated experiments. See section 8 of `RFC5481
  <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5481.txt>`__.
- **Packet loss** (within a configured waiting time at the receiver): All
  packets sent to the DUT should be accounted for.
- **Burst behaviour**: measures the ability of the DUT to buffer packets.
- **Packet re-ordering**: measures the ability of the device under test to
  maintain sending order throughout transfer to the destination.
- **Packet correctness**: packets or Frames must be well-formed, in that
  they include all required fields, conform to length requirements, pass
  integrity checks, etc.
- **Availability and capacity** of the DUT i.e. when the DUT is fully “up”
  and connected, following measurements should be captured for
  DUT without any network packet load:

  - Includes average power consumption of the CPUs (in various power states) and
    system over specified period of time. Time period should not be less
    than 60 seconds.
  - Includes average per core CPU utilization over specified period of time.
    Time period should not be less than 60 seconds.
  - Includes the number of NIC interfaces supported.
  - Includes headroom of VM workload processing cores (i.e. available
    for applications).

.. 3.2.2

.. _Approach:

Approach
==============

In order to determine the packet transfer characteristics of a virtual
switch, the tests will be broken down into the following categories:

.. 3.2.2.1

Test Categories
----------------------
- **Throughput Tests** to measure the maximum forwarding rate (in
  frames per second or fps) and bit rate (in Mbps) for a constant load
  (as defined by `RFC1242 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1242.txt>`__)
  without traffic loss.
- **Packet and Frame Delay Tests** to measure average, min and max
  packet and frame delay for constant loads.
- **Stream Performance Tests** (TCP, UDP) to measure bulk data transfer
  performance, i.e. how fast systems can send and receive data through
  the virtual switch.
- **Request/Response Performance** Tests (TCP, UDP) the measure the
  transaction rate through the virtual switch.
- **Packet Delay Tests** to understand latency distribution for
  different packet sizes and over an extended test run to uncover
  outliers.
- **Scalability Tests** to understand how the virtual switch performs
  as the number of flows, active ports, complexity of the forwarding
  logic's configuration... it has to deal with increases.
- **Control Path and Datapath Coupling** Tests, to understand how
  closely coupled the datapath and the control path are as well as the
  effect of this coupling on the performance of the DUT.
- **CPU and Memory Consumption Tests** to understand the virtual
  switch’s footprint on the system, this includes:

  * CPU core utilization.
  * CPU cache utilization.
  * Memory footprint.
  * System bus (QPI, PCI, ..) utilization.
  * Memory lanes utilization.
  * CPU cycles consumed per packet.
  * Time To Establish Flows Tests.

- **Noisy Neighbour Tests**, to understand the effects of resource
  sharing on the performance of a virtual switch.

**Note:** some of the tests above can be conducted simultaneously where
the combined results would be insightful, for example Packet/Frame Delay
and Scalability.

.. 3.2.2.2

Deployment Scenarios
--------------------------
The following represents possible deployment test scenarios which can
help to determine the performance of both the virtual switch and the
datapaths to physical ports (to NICs) and to logical ports (to VNFs):

.. 3.2.2.2.1

Physical port → vSwitch → physical port
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.. code-block:: console

                                                            _
       +--------------------------------------------------+  |
       |              +--------------------+              |  |
       |              |                    |              |  |
       |              |                    v              |  |  Host
       |   +--------------+            +--------------+   |  |
       |   |   phy port   |  vSwitch   |   phy port   |   |  |
       +---+--------------+------------+--------------+---+ _|
                  ^                           :
                  |                           |
                  :                           v
       +--------------------------------------------------+
       |                                                  |
       |                traffic generator                 |
       |                                                  |
       +--------------------------------------------------+

.. 3.2.2.2.2

Physical port → vSwitch → VNF → vSwitch → physical port
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.. code-block:: console

                                                             _
       +---------------------------------------------------+  |
       |                                                   |  |
       |   +-------------------------------------------+   |  |
       |   |                 Application               |   |  |
       |   +-------------------------------------------+   |  |
       |       ^                                  :        |  |
       |       |                                  |        |  |  Guest
       |       :                                  v        |  |
       |   +---------------+           +---------------+   |  |
       |   | logical port 0|           | logical port 1|   |  |
       +---+---------------+-----------+---------------+---+ _|
               ^                                  :
               |                                  |
               :                                  v         _
       +---+---------------+----------+---------------+---+  |
       |   | logical port 0|          | logical port 1|   |  |
       |   +---------------+          +---------------+   |  |
       |       ^                                  :       |  |
       |       |                                  |       |  |  Host
       |       :                                  v       |  |
       |   +--------------+            +--------------+   |  |
       |   |   phy port   |  vSwitch   |   phy port   |   |  |
       +---+--------------+------------+--------------+---+ _|
                  ^                           :
                  |                           |
                  :                           v
       +--------------------------------------------------+
       |                                                  |
       |                traffic generator                 |
       |                                                  |
       +--------------------------------------------------+

.. 3.2.2.2.3

Physical port → vSwitch → VNF → vSwitch → VNF → vSwitch → physical port
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.. code-block:: console

                                                       _
    +----------------------+  +----------------------+  |
    |   Guest 1            |  |   Guest 2            |  |
    |   +---------------+  |  |   +---------------+  |  |
    |   |  Application  |  |  |   |  Application  |  |  |
    |   +---------------+  |  |   +---------------+  |  |
    |       ^       |      |  |       ^       |      |  |
    |       |       v      |  |       |       v      |  |  Guests
    |   +---------------+  |  |   +---------------+  |  |
    |   | logical ports |  |  |   | logical ports |  |  |
    |   |   0       1   |  |  |   |   0       1   |  |  |
    +---+---------------+--+  +---+---------------+--+ _|
            ^       :                 ^       :
            |       |                 |       |
            :       v                 :       v        _
    +---+---------------+---------+---------------+--+  |
    |   |   0       1   |         |   3       4   |  |  |
    |   | logical ports |         | logical ports |  |  |
    |   +---------------+         +---------------+  |  |
    |       ^       |                 ^       |      |  |  Host
    |       |       L-----------------+       v      |  |
    |   +--------------+          +--------------+   |  |
    |   |   phy ports  | vSwitch  |   phy ports  |   |  |
    +---+--------------+----------+--------------+---+ _|
            ^       ^                 :       :
            |       |                 |       |
            :       :                 v       v
    +--------------------------------------------------+
    |                                                  |
    |                traffic generator                 |
    |                                                  |
    +--------------------------------------------------+

.. 3.2.2.2.4

Physical port → VNF → vSwitch → VNF → physical port
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.. code-block:: console

                                                        _
    +----------------------+  +----------------------+   |
    |   Guest 1            |  |   Guest 2            |   |
    |+-------------------+ |  | +-------------------+|   |
    ||     Application   | |  | |     Application   ||   |
    |+-------------------+ |  | +-------------------+|   |
    |       ^       |      |  |       ^       |      |   |  Guests
    |       |       v      |  |       |       v      |   |
    |+-------------------+ |  | +-------------------+|   |
    ||   logical ports   | |  | |   logical ports   ||   |
    ||  0              1 | |  | | 0              1  ||   |
    ++--------------------++  ++--------------------++  _|
        ^              :          ^              :
    (PCI passthrough)  |          |     (PCI passthrough)
        |              v          :              |      _
    +--------++------------+-+------------++---------+   |
    |   |    ||        0   | |    1       ||     |   |   |
    |   |    ||logical port| |logical port||     |   |   |
    |   |    |+------------+ +------------+|     |   |   |
    |   |    |     |                 ^     |     |   |   |
    |   |    |     L-----------------+     |     |   |   |
    |   |    |                             |     |   |   |  Host
    |   |    |           vSwitch           |     |   |   |
    |   |    +-----------------------------+     |   |   |
    |   |                                        |   |   |
    |   |                                        v   |   |
    | +--------------+              +--------------+ |   |
    | | phy port/VF  |              | phy port/VF  | |   |
    +-+--------------+--------------+--------------+-+  _|
        ^                                        :
        |                                        |
        :                                        v
    +--------------------------------------------------+
    |                                                  |
    |                traffic generator                 |
    |                                                  |
    +--------------------------------------------------+

.. 3.2.2.2.5

Physical port → vSwitch → VNF
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.. code-block:: console

                                                          _
    +---------------------------------------------------+  |
    |                                                   |  |
    |   +-------------------------------------------+   |  |
    |   |                 Application               |   |  |
    |   +-------------------------------------------+   |  |
    |       ^                                           |  |
    |       |                                           |  |  Guest
    |       :                                           |  |
    |   +---------------+                               |  |
    |   | logical port 0|                               |  |
    +---+---------------+-------------------------------+ _|
            ^
            |
            :                                            _
    +---+---------------+------------------------------+  |
    |   | logical port 0|                              |  |
    |   +---------------+                              |  |
    |       ^                                          |  |
    |       |                                          |  |  Host
    |       :                                          |  |
    |   +--------------+                               |  |
    |   |   phy port   |  vSwitch                      |  |
    +---+--------------+------------ -------------- ---+ _|
               ^
               |
               :
    +--------------------------------------------------+
    |                                                  |
    |                traffic generator                 |
    |                                                  |
    +--------------------------------------------------+

.. 3.2.2.2.6

VNF → vSwitch → physical port
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.. code-block:: console

                                                          _
    +---------------------------------------------------+  |
    |                                                   |  |
    |   +-------------------------------------------+   |  |
    |   |                 Application               |   |  |
    |   +-------------------------------------------+   |  |
    |                                          :        |  |
    |                                          |        |  |  Guest
    |                                          v        |  |
    |                               +---------------+   |  |
    |                               | logical port  |   |  |
    +-------------------------------+---------------+---+ _|
                                               :
                                               |
                                               v         _
    +------------------------------+---------------+---+  |
    |                              | logical port  |   |  |
    |                              +---------------+   |  |
    |                                          :       |  |
    |                                          |       |  |  Host
    |                                          v       |  |
    |                               +--------------+   |  |
    |                     vSwitch   |   phy port   |   |  |
    +-------------------------------+--------------+---+ _|
                                           :
                                           |
                                           v
    +--------------------------------------------------+
    |                                                  |
    |                traffic generator                 |
    |                                                  |
    +--------------------------------------------------+

.. 3.2.2.2.7

VNF → vSwitch → VNF → vSwitch
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.. code-block:: console

                                                             _
    +-------------------------+  +-------------------------+  |
    |   Guest 1               |  |   Guest 2               |  |
    |   +-----------------+   |  |   +-----------------+   |  |
    |   |   Application   |   |  |   |   Application   |   |  |
    |   +-----------------+   |  |   +-----------------+   |  |
    |                :        |  |       ^                 |  |
    |                |        |  |       |                 |  |  Guest
    |                v        |  |       :                 |  |
    |     +---------------+   |  |   +---------------+     |  |
    |     | logical port 0|   |  |   | logical port 0|     |  |
    +-----+---------------+---+  +---+---------------+-----+ _|
                    :                    ^
                    |                    |
                    v                    :                    _
    +----+---------------+------------+---------------+-----+  |
    |    |     port 0    |            |     port 1    |     |  |
    |    +---------------+            +---------------+     |  |
    |              :                    ^                   |  |
    |              |                    |                   |  |  Host
    |              +--------------------+                   |  |
    |                                                       |  |
    |                     vswitch                           |  |
    +-------------------------------------------------------+ _|

.. 3.2.2.2.8

HOST 1(Physical port → virtual switch → VNF → virtual switch → Physical port)
→ HOST 2(Physical port → virtual switch → VNF → virtual switch → Physical port)

HOST 1 (PVP) → HOST 2 (PVP)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.. code-block:: console

                                                       _
    +----------------------+  +----------------------+  |
    |   Guest 1            |  |   Guest 2            |  |
    |   +---------------+  |  |   +---------------+  |  |
    |   |  Application  |  |  |   |  Application  |  |  |
    |   +---------------+  |  |   +---------------+  |  |
    |       ^       |      |  |       ^       |      |  |
    |       |       v      |  |       |       v      |  |  Guests
    |   +---------------+  |  |   +---------------+  |  |
    |   | logical ports |  |  |   | logical ports |  |  |
    |   |   0       1   |  |  |   |   0       1   |  |  |
    +---+---------------+--+  +---+---------------+--+ _|
            ^       :                 ^       :
            |       |                 |       |
            :       v                 :       v        _
    +---+---------------+--+  +---+---------------+--+  |
    |   |   0       1   |  |  |   |   3       4   |  |  |
    |   | logical ports |  |  |   | logical ports |  |  |
    |   +---------------+  |  |   +---------------+  |  |
    |       ^       |      |  |       ^       |      |  |  Hosts
    |       |       v      |  |       |       v      |  |
    |   +--------------+   |  |   +--------------+   |  |
    |   |   phy ports  |   |  |   |   phy ports  |   |  |
    +---+--------------+---+  +---+--------------+---+ _|
            ^       :                 :       :
            |       +-----------------+       |
            :                                 v
    +--------------------------------------------------+
    |                                                  |
    |                traffic generator                 |
    |                                                  |
    +--------------------------------------------------+



**Note:** For tests where the traffic generator and/or measurement
receiver are implemented on VM and connected to the virtual switch
through vNIC, the issues of shared resources and interactions between
the measurement devices and the device under test must be considered.

**Note:** Some RFC 2889 tests require a full-mesh sending and receiving
pattern involving more than two ports. This possibility is illustrated in the
Physical port → vSwitch → VNF → vSwitch → VNF → vSwitch → physical port
diagram above (with 2 sending and 2 receiving ports, though all ports
could be used bi-directionally).

**Note:** When Deployment Scenarios are used in RFC 2889 address learning
or cache capacity testing, an additional port from the vSwitch must be
connected to the test device. This port is used to listen for flooded
frames.

.. 3.2.2.3

General Methodology:
--------------------------
To establish the baseline performance of the virtual switch, tests would
initially be run with a simple workload in the VNF (the recommended
simple workload VNF would be `DPDK <http://www.dpdk.org/>`__'s testpmd
application forwarding packets in a VM or vloop\_vnf a simple kernel
module that forwards traffic between two network interfaces inside the
virtualized environment while bypassing the networking stack).
Subsequently, the tests would also be executed with a real Telco
workload running in the VNF, which would exercise the virtual switch in
the context of higher level Telco NFV use cases, and prove that its
underlying characteristics and behaviour can be measured and validated.
Suitable real Telco workload VNFs are yet to be identified.

.. 3.2.2.3.1

Default Test Parameters
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The following list identifies the default parameters for suite of
tests:

-  Reference application: Simple forwarding or Open Source VNF.
-  Frame size (bytes): 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 1280, 1518, 2K, 4k OR
   Packet size based on use-case (e.g. RTP 64B, 256B) OR Mix of packet sizes as
   maintained by the Functest project <https://wiki.opnfv.org/traffic_profile_management>.
-  Reordering check: Tests should confirm that packets within a flow are
   not reordered.
-  Duplex: Unidirectional / Bidirectional. Default: Full duplex with
   traffic transmitting in both directions, as network traffic generally
   does not flow in a single direction. By default the data rate of
   transmitted traffic should be the same in both directions, please
   note that asymmetric traffic (e.g. downlink-heavy) tests will be
   mentioned explicitly for the relevant test cases.
-  Number of Flows: Default for non scalability tests is a single flow.
   For scalability tests the goal is to test with maximum supported
   flows but where possible will test up to 10 Million flows. Start with
   a single flow and scale up. By default flows should be added
   sequentially, tests that add flows simultaneously will explicitly
   call out their flow addition behaviour. Packets are generated across
   the flows uniformly with no burstiness. For multi-core tests should
   consider the number of packet flows based on vSwitch/VNF multi-thread
   implementation and behavior.

-  Traffic Types: UDP, SCTP, RTP, GTP and UDP traffic.
-  Deployment scenarios are:
-  Physical → virtual switch → physical.
-  Physical → virtual switch → VNF → virtual switch → physical.
-  Physical → virtual switch → VNF → virtual switch → VNF → virtual
   switch → physical.
-  Physical → VNF → virtual switch → VNF → physical.
-  Physical → virtual switch → VNF.
-  VNF → virtual switch → Physical.
-  VNF → virtual switch → VNF.

Tests MUST have these parameters unless otherwise stated. **Test cases
with non default parameters will be stated explicitly**.

**Note**: For throughput tests unless stated otherwise, test
configurations should ensure that traffic traverses the installed flows
through the virtual switch, i.e. flows are installed and have an appropriate
time out that doesn't expire before packet transmission starts.

.. 3.2.2.3.2

Flow Classification
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Virtual switches classify packets into flows by processing and matching
particular header fields in the packet/frame and/or the input port where
the packets/frames arrived. The vSwitch then carries out an action on
the group of packets that match the classification parameters. Thus a
flow is considered to be a sequence of packets that have a shared set of
header field values or have arrived on the same port and have the same
action applied to them. Performance results can vary based on the
parameters the vSwitch uses to match for a flow. The recommended flow
classification parameters for L3 vSwitch performance tests are: the
input port, the source IP address, the destination IP address and the
Ethernet protocol type field. It is essential to increase the flow
time-out time on a vSwitch before conducting any performance tests that
do not measure the flow set-up time. Normally the first packet of a
particular flow will install the flow in the vSwitch which adds an
additional latency, subsequent packets of the same flow are not subject
to this latency if the flow is already installed on the vSwitch.

.. 3.2.2.3.3

Test Priority
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Tests will be assigned a priority in order to determine which tests
should be implemented immediately and which tests implementations
can be deferred.

Priority can be of following types: - Urgent: Must be implemented
immediately. - High: Must be implemented in the next release. - Medium:
May be implemented after the release. - Low: May or may not be
implemented at all.

.. 3.2.2.3.4

SUT Setup
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The SUT should be configured to its "default" state. The
SUT's configuration or set-up must not change between tests in any way
other than what is required to do the test. All supported protocols must
be configured and enabled for each test set up.

.. 3.2.2.3.5

Port Configuration
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The DUT should be configured with n ports where
n is a multiple of 2. Half of the ports on the DUT should be used as
ingress ports and the other half of the ports on the DUT should be used
as egress ports. Where a DUT has more than 2 ports, the ingress data
streams should be set-up so that they transmit packets to the egress
ports in sequence so that there is an even distribution of traffic
across ports. For example, if a DUT has 4 ports 0(ingress), 1(ingress),
2(egress) and 3(egress), the traffic stream directed at port 0 should
output a packet to port 2 followed by a packet to port 3. The traffic
stream directed at port 1 should also output a packet to port 2 followed
by a packet to port 3.

.. 3.2.2.3.6

Frame Formats
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

**Frame formats Layer 2 (data link layer) protocols**

-  Ethernet II

.. code-block:: console

     +---------------------------+-----------+
     | Ethernet Header | Payload | Check Sum |
     +-----------------+---------+-----------+
     |_________________|_________|___________|
           14 Bytes     46 - 1500   4 Bytes
                          Bytes


**Layer 3 (network layer) protocols**

-  IPv4

.. code-block:: console

     +-----------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
     | Ethernet Header | IP Header | Payload | Checksum  |
     +-----------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
     |_________________|___________|_________|___________|
           14 Bytes       20 bytes  26 - 1480   4 Bytes
                                      Bytes

-  IPv6

.. code-block:: console

     +-----------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
     | Ethernet Header | IP Header | Payload | Checksum  |
     +-----------------+-----------+---------+-----------+
     |_________________|___________|_________|___________|
           14 Bytes       40 bytes  26 - 1460   4 Bytes
                                      Bytes

**Layer 4 (transport layer) protocols**

  - TCP
  - UDP
  - SCTP

.. code-block:: console

     +-----------------+-----------+-----------------+---------+-----------+
     | Ethernet Header | IP Header | Layer 4 Header  | Payload | Checksum  |
     +-----------------+-----------+-----------------+---------+-----------+
     |_________________|___________|_________________|_________|___________|
           14 Bytes      40 bytes      20 Bytes       6 - 1460   4 Bytes
                                                       Bytes


**Layer 5 (application layer) protocols**

  - RTP
  - GTP

.. code-block:: console

     +-----------------+-----------+-----------------+---------+-----------+
     | Ethernet Header | IP Header | Layer 4 Header  | Payload | Checksum  |
     +-----------------+-----------+-----------------+---------+-----------+
     |_________________|___________|_________________|_________|___________|
           14 Bytes      20 bytes     20 Bytes        >= 6 Bytes   4 Bytes

.. 3.2.2.3.7

Packet Throughput
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There is a difference between an Ethernet frame,
an IP packet, and a UDP datagram. In the seven-layer OSI model of
computer networking, packet refers to a data unit at layer 3 (network
layer). The correct term for a data unit at layer 2 (data link layer) is
a frame, and at layer 4 (transport layer) is a segment or datagram.

Important concepts related to 10GbE performance are frame rate and
throughput. The MAC bit rate of 10GbE, defined in the IEEE standard 802
.3ae, is 10 billion bits per second. Frame rate is based on the bit rate
and frame format definitions. Throughput, defined in IETF RFC 1242, is
the highest rate at which the system under test can forward the offered
load, without loss.

The frame rate for 10GbE is determined by a formula that divides the 10
billion bits per second by the preamble + frame length + inter-frame
gap.

The maximum frame rate is calculated using the minimum values of the
following parameters, as described in the IEEE 802 .3ae standard:

-  Preamble: 8 bytes \* 8 = 64 bits
-  Frame Length: 64 bytes (minimum) \* 8 = 512 bits
-  Inter-frame Gap: 12 bytes (minimum) \* 8 = 96 bits

Therefore, Maximum Frame Rate (64B Frames)
= MAC Transmit Bit Rate / (Preamble + Frame Length + Inter-frame Gap)
= 10,000,000,000 / (64 + 512 + 96)
= 10,000,000,000 / 672
= 14,880,952.38 frame per second (fps)

.. 3.2.2.3.8

System isolation and validation
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A key consideration when conducting any sort of benchmark is trying to
ensure the consistency and repeatability of test results between runs.
When benchmarking the performance of a virtual switch there are many
factors that can affect the consistency of results. This section
describes these factors and the measures that can be taken to limit
their effects. In addition, this section will outline some system tests
to validate the platform and the VNF before conducting any vSwitch
benchmarking tests.

**System Isolation:**

When conducting a benchmarking test on any SUT, it is essential to limit
(and if reasonable, eliminate) any noise that may interfere with the
accuracy of the metrics collected by the test. This noise may be
introduced by other hardware or software (OS, other applications), and
can result in significantly varying performance metrics being collected
between consecutive runs of the same test. In the case of characterizing
the performance of a virtual switch, there are a number of configuration
parameters that can help increase the repeatability and stability of
test results, including:

-  OS/GRUB configuration:

   -  maxcpus = n where n >= 0; limits the kernel to using 'n'
      processors. Only use exactly what you need.
   -  isolcpus: Isolate CPUs from the general scheduler. Isolate all
      CPUs bar one which will be used by the OS.
   -  use taskset to affinitize the forwarding application and the VNFs
      onto isolated cores. VNFs and the vSwitch should be allocated
      their own cores, i.e. must not share the same cores. vCPUs for the
      VNF should be affinitized to individual cores also.
   -  Limit the amount of background applications that are running and
      set OS to boot to runlevel 3. Make sure to kill any unnecessary
      system processes/daemons.
   -  Only enable hardware that you need to use for your test – to
      ensure there are no other interrupts on the system.
   -  Configure NIC interrupts to only use the cores that are not
      allocated to any other process (VNF/vSwitch).

-  NUMA configuration: Any unused sockets in a multi-socket system
   should be disabled.
-  CPU pinning: The vSwitch and the VNF should each be affinitized to
   separate logical cores using a combination of maxcpus, isolcpus and
   taskset.
-  BIOS configuration: BIOS should be configured for performance where
   an explicit option exists, sleep states should be disabled, any
   virtualization optimization technologies should be enabled, and
   hyperthreading should also be enabled, turbo boost and overclocking
   should be disabled.

**System Validation:**

System validation is broken down into two sub-categories: Platform
validation and VNF validation. The validation test itself involves
verifying the forwarding capability and stability for the sub-system
under test. The rationale behind system validation is two fold. Firstly
to give a tester confidence in the stability of the platform or VNF that
is being tested; and secondly to provide base performance comparison
points to understand the overhead introduced by the virtual switch.

* Benchmark platform forwarding capability: This is an OPTIONAL test
  used to verify the platform and measure the base performance (maximum
  forwarding rate in fps and latency) that can be achieved by the
  platform without a vSwitch or a VNF. The following diagram outlines
  the set-up for benchmarking Platform forwarding capability:

  .. code-block:: console

                                                            __
       +--------------------------------------------------+   |
       |   +------------------------------------------+   |   |
       |   |                                          |   |   |
       |   |          l2fw or DPDK L2FWD app          |   |  Host
       |   |                                          |   |   |
       |   +------------------------------------------+   |   |
       |   |                 NIC                      |   |   |
       +---+------------------------------------------+---+ __|
                  ^                           :
                  |                           |
                  :                           v
       +--------------------------------------------------+
       |                                                  |
       |                traffic generator                 |
       |                                                  |
       +--------------------------------------------------+

* Benchmark VNF forwarding capability: This test is used to verify
  the VNF and measure the base performance (maximum forwarding rate in
  fps and latency) that can be achieved by the VNF without a vSwitch.
  The performance metrics collected by this test will serve as a key
  comparison point for NIC passthrough technologies and vSwitches. VNF
  in this context refers to the hypervisor and the VM. The following
  diagram outlines the set-up for benchmarking VNF forwarding
  capability:

  .. code-block:: console

                                                            __
       +--------------------------------------------------+   |
       |   +------------------------------------------+   |   |
       |   |                                          |   |   |
       |   |                 VNF                      |   |   |
       |   |                                          |   |   |
       |   +------------------------------------------+   |   |
       |   |          Passthrough/SR-IOV              |   |  Host
       |   +------------------------------------------+   |   |
       |   |                 NIC                      |   |   |
       +---+------------------------------------------+---+ __|
                  ^                           :
                  |                           |
                  :                           v
       +--------------------------------------------------+
       |                                                  |
       |                traffic generator                 |
       |                                                  |
       +--------------------------------------------------+


**Methodology to benchmark Platform/VNF forwarding capability**


The recommended methodology for the platform/VNF validation and
benchmark is: - Run `RFC2889 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2289.txt>`__
Maximum Forwarding Rate test, this test will produce maximum
forwarding rate and latency results that will serve as the
expected values. These expected values can be used in
subsequent steps or compared with in subsequent validation tests. -
Transmit bidirectional traffic at line rate/max forwarding rate
(whichever is higher) for at least 72 hours, measure throughput (fps)
and latency. - Note: Traffic should be bidirectional. - Establish a
baseline forwarding rate for what the platform can achieve. - Additional
validation: After the test has completed for 72 hours run bidirectional
traffic at the maximum forwarding rate once more to see if the system is
still functional and measure throughput (fps) and latency. Compare the
measure the new obtained values with the expected values.

**NOTE 1**: How the Platform is configured for its forwarding capability
test (BIOS settings, GRUB configuration, runlevel...) is how the
platform should be configured for every test after this

**NOTE 2**: How the VNF is configured for its forwarding capability test
(# of vCPUs, vNICs, Memory, affinitization…) is how it should be
configured for every test that uses a VNF after this.

.. 3.2.2.4

RFCs for testing virtual switch performance
--------------------------------------------------

The starting point for defining the suite of tests for benchmarking the
performance of a virtual switch is to take existing RFCs and standards
that were designed to test their physical counterparts and adapting them
for testing virtual switches. The rationale behind this is to establish
a fair comparison between the performance of virtual and physical
switches. This section outlines the RFCs that are used by this
specification.

.. 3.2.2.4.1

RFC 1242 Benchmarking Terminology for Network Interconnection
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Devices RFC 1242 defines the terminology that is used in describing
performance benchmarking tests and their results. Definitions and
discussions covered include: Back-to-back, bridge, bridge/router,
constant load, data link frame size, frame loss rate, inter frame gap,
latency, and many more.

.. 3.2.2.4.2

RFC 2544 Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect Devices
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RFC 2544 outlines a benchmarking methodology for network Interconnect
Devices. The methodology results in performance metrics such as latency,
frame loss percentage, and maximum data throughput.

In this document network “throughput” (measured in millions of frames
per second) is based on RFC 2544, unless otherwise noted. Frame size
refers to Ethernet frames ranging from smallest frames of 64 bytes to
largest frames of 9K bytes.

Types of tests are:

1. Throughput test defines the maximum number of frames per second
   that can be transmitted without any error, or 0% loss ratio.
   In some Throughput tests (and those tests with long duration),
   evaluation of an additional frame loss ratio is suggested. The
   current ratio (10^-7 %) is based on understanding the typical
   user-to-user packet loss ratio needed for good application
   performance and recognizing that a single transfer through a
   vswitch must contribute a tiny fraction of user-to-user loss.
   Further, the ratio 10^-7 % also recognizes practical limitations
   when measuring loss ratio.

2. Latency test measures the time required for a frame to travel from
   the originating device through the network to the destination device.
   Please note that RFC2544 Latency measurement will be superseded with
   a measurement of average latency over all successfully transferred
   packets or frames.

3. Frame loss test measures the network’s
   response in overload conditions - a critical indicator of the
   network’s ability to support real-time applications in which a
   large amount of frame loss will rapidly degrade service quality.

4. Burst test assesses the buffering capability of a virtual switch. It
   measures the maximum number of frames received at full line rate
   before a frame is lost. In carrier Ethernet networks, this
   measurement validates the excess information rate (EIR) as defined in
   many SLAs.

5. System recovery to characterize speed of recovery from an overload
   condition.

6. Reset to characterize speed of recovery from device or software
   reset. This type of test has been updated by `RFC6201
   <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6201.txt>`__ as such,
   the methodology defined by this specification will be that of RFC 6201.

Although not included in the defined RFC 2544 standard, another crucial
measurement in Ethernet networking is packet delay variation. The
definition set out by this specification comes from
`RFC5481 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5481.txt>`__.

.. 3.2.2.4.3

RFC 2285 Benchmarking Terminology for LAN Switching Devices
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RFC 2285 defines the terminology that is used to describe the
terminology for benchmarking a LAN switching device. It extends RFC
1242 and defines: DUTs, SUTs, Traffic orientation and distribution,
bursts, loads, forwarding rates, etc.

.. 3.2.2.4.4

RFC 2889 Benchmarking Methodology for LAN Switching
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RFC 2889 outlines a benchmarking methodology for LAN switching, it
extends RFC 2544. The outlined methodology gathers performance
metrics for forwarding, congestion control, latency, address handling
and finally filtering.

.. 3.2.2.4.5

RFC 3918 Methodology for IP Multicast Benchmarking
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RFC 3918 outlines a methodology for IP Multicast benchmarking.

.. 3.2.2.4.6

RFC 4737 Packet Reordering Metrics
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RFC 4737 describes metrics for identifying and counting re-ordered
packets within a stream, and metrics to measure the extent each
packet has been re-ordered.

.. 3.2.2.4.7

RFC 5481 Packet Delay Variation Applicability Statement
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RFC 5481 defined two common, but different forms of delay variation
metrics, and compares the metrics over a range of networking
circumstances and tasks. The most suitable form for vSwitch
benchmarking is the "PDV" form.

.. 3.2.2.4.8

RFC 6201 Device Reset Characterization
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
RFC 6201 extends the methodology for characterizing the speed of
recovery of the DUT from device or software reset described in RFC
2544.

.. 3.2.2.5

Details of the Test Report
---------------------------------

There are a number of parameters related to the system, DUT and tests
that can affect the repeatability of a test results and should be
recorded. In order to minimise the variation in the results of a test,
it is recommended that the test report includes the following information:

-  Hardware details including:

   -  Platform details.
   -  Processor details.
   -  Memory information (see below)
   -  Number of enabled cores.
   -  Number of cores used for the test.
   -  Number of physical NICs, as well as their details (manufacturer,
      versions, type and the PCI slot they are plugged into).
   -  NIC interrupt configuration.
   -  BIOS version, release date and any configurations that were
      modified.

-  Software details including:

   -  OS version (for host and VNF)
   -  Kernel version (for host and VNF)
   -  GRUB boot parameters (for host and VNF).
   -  Hypervisor details (Type and version).
   -  Selected vSwitch, version number or commit id used.
   -  vSwitch launch command line if it has been parameterised.
   -  Memory allocation to the vSwitch – which NUMA node it is using,
      and how many memory channels.
   -  Where the vswitch is built from source: compiler details including
      versions and the flags that were used to compile the vSwitch.
   -  DPDK or any other SW dependency version number or commit id used.
   -  Memory allocation to a VM - if it's from Hugpages/elsewhere.
   -  VM storage type: snapshot/independent persistent/independent
      non-persistent.
   -  Number of VMs.
   -  Number of Virtual NICs (vNICs), versions, type and driver.
   -  Number of virtual CPUs and their core affinity on the host.
   -  Number vNIC interrupt configuration.
   -  Thread affinitization for the applications (including the vSwitch
      itself) on the host.
   -  Details of Resource isolation, such as CPUs designated for
      Host/Kernel (isolcpu) and CPUs designated for specific processes
      (taskset).

-  Memory Details

   -  Total memory
   -  Type of memory
   -  Used memory
   -  Active memory
   -  Inactive memory
   -  Free memory
   -  Buffer memory
   -  Swap cache
   -  Total swap
   -  Used swap
   -  Free swap

-  Test duration.
-  Number of flows.
-  Traffic Information:

   -  Traffic type - UDP, TCP, IMIX / Other.
   -  Packet Sizes.

-  Deployment Scenario.

**Note**: Tests that require additional parameters to be recorded will
explicitly specify this.

.. _TestIdentification:

.. 3.2.3

Test identification
=========================

.. 3.2.3.1

Throughput tests
----------------------
The following tests aim to determine the maximum forwarding rate that
can be achieved with a virtual switch. The list is not exhaustive but
should indicate the type of tests that should be required. It is
expected that more will be added.

.. 3.2.3.1.1

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC 2544 X% packet loss ratio Throughput and Latency Test

    **Prerequisite Test**: N/A

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    This test determines the DUT's maximum forwarding rate with X% traffic
    loss for a constant load (fixed length frames at a fixed interval time).
    The default loss percentages to be tested are: - X = 0% - X = 10^-7%

    Note: Other values can be tested if required by the user.

    The selected frame sizes are those previously defined under `Default
    Test Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__. The test can also be used to
    determine the average latency of the traffic.

    Under the `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__
    test methodology, the test duration will
    include a number of trials; each trial should run for a minimum period
    of 60 seconds. A binary search methodology must be applied for each
    trial to obtain the final result.

    **Expected Result**: At the end of each trial, the presence or absence
    of loss determines the modification of offered load for the next trial,
    converging on a maximum rate, or
    `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__ Throughput with X%
    loss.
    The Throughput load is re-used in related
    `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__ tests and other
    tests.

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The maximum forwarding rate in Frames Per Second (FPS) and Mbps of
       the DUT for each frame size with X% packet loss.
    -  The average latency of the traffic flow when passing through the DUT
       (if testing for latency, note that this average is different from the
       test specified in Section 26.3 of
       `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__).
    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.

.. 3.2.3.1.2

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatioFrameModification
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC 2544 X% packet loss Throughput and Latency Test with
    packet modification

    **Prerequisite Test**: N/A

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    This test determines the DUT's maximum forwarding rate with X% traffic
    loss for a constant load (fixed length frames at a fixed interval time).
    The default loss percentages to be tested are: - X = 0% - X = 10^-7%

    Note: Other values can be tested if required by the user.

    The selected frame sizes are those previously defined under `Default
    Test Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__. The test can also be used to
    determine the average latency of the traffic.

    Under the `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__
    test methodology, the test duration will
    include a number of trials; each trial should run for a minimum period
    of 60 seconds. A binary search methodology must be applied for each
    trial to obtain the final result.

    During this test, the DUT must perform the following operations on the
    traffic flow:

    -  Perform packet parsing on the DUT's ingress port.
    -  Perform any relevant address look-ups on the DUT's ingress ports.
    -  Modify the packet header before forwarding the packet to the DUT's
       egress port. Packet modifications include:

       -  Modifying the Ethernet source or destination MAC address.
       -  Modifying/adding a VLAN tag. (**Recommended**).
       -  Modifying/adding a MPLS tag.
       -  Modifying the source or destination ip address.
       -  Modifying the TOS/DSCP field.
       -  Modifying the source or destination ports for UDP/TCP/SCTP.
       -  Modifying the TTL.

    **Expected Result**: The Packet parsing/modifications require some
    additional degree of processing resource, therefore the
    `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__
    Throughput is expected to be somewhat lower than the Throughput level
    measured without additional steps. The reduction is expected to be
    greatest on tests with the smallest packet sizes (greatest header
    processing rates).

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The maximum forwarding rate in Frames Per Second (FPS) and Mbps of
       the DUT for each frame size with X% packet loss and packet
       modification operations being performed by the DUT.
    -  The average latency of the traffic flow when passing through the DUT
       (if testing for latency, note that this average is different from the
       test specified in Section 26.3 of
       `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__).
    -  The `RFC5481 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5481.txt>`__
       PDV form of delay variation on the traffic flow,
       using the 99th percentile.
    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.

.. 3.2.3.1.3

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.Profile
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC 2544 Throughput and Latency Profile

    **Prerequisite Test**: N/A

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    This test reveals how throughput and latency degrades as the offered
    rate varies in the region of the DUT's maximum forwarding rate as
    determined by LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio (0% Packet Loss).
    For example it can be used to determine if the degradation of throughput
    and latency as the offered rate increases is slow and graceful or sudden
    and severe.

    The selected frame sizes are those previously defined under `Default
    Test Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__.

    The offered traffic rate is described as a percentage delta with respect
    to the DUT's RFC 2544 Throughput as determined by
    LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLoss Ratio (0% Packet Loss case). A delta
    of 0% is equivalent to an offered traffic rate equal to the RFC 2544
    Maximum Throughput; A delta of +50% indicates an offered rate half-way
    between the Maximum RFC2544 Throughput and line-rate, whereas a delta of
    -50% indicates an offered rate of half the RFC 2544 Maximum Throughput.
    Therefore the range of the delta figure is natuarlly bounded at -100%
    (zero offered traffic) and +100% (traffic offered at line rate).

    The following deltas to the maximum forwarding rate should be applied:

    -  -50%, -10%, 0%, +10% & +50%

    **Expected Result**: For each packet size a profile should be produced
    of how throughput and latency vary with offered rate.

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The forwarding rate in Frames Per Second (FPS) and Mbps of the DUT
       for each delta to the maximum forwarding rate and for each frame
       size.
    -  The average latency for each delta to the maximum forwarding rate and
       for each frame size.
    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.
    -  Any failures experienced (for example if the vSwitch crashes, stops
       processing packets, restarts or becomes unresponsive to commands)
       when the offered load is above Maximum Throughput MUST be recorded
       and reported with the results.

.. 3.2.3.1.4

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.SystemRecoveryTime
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC 2544 System Recovery Time Test

    **Prerequisite Test** LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    The aim of this test is to determine the length of time it takes the DUT
    to recover from an overload condition for a constant load (fixed length
    frames at a fixed interval time). The selected frame sizes are those
    previously defined under `Default Test Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__,
    traffic should be sent to the DUT under normal conditions. During the
    duration of the test and while the traffic flows are passing though the
    DUT, at least one situation leading to an overload condition for the DUT
    should occur. The time from the end of the overload condition to when
    the DUT returns to normal operations should be measured to determine
    recovery time. Prior to overloading the DUT, one should record the
    average latency for 10,000 packets forwarded through the DUT.

    The overload condition SHOULD be to transmit traffic at a very high
    frame rate to the DUT (150% of the maximum 0% packet loss rate as
    determined by LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio or line-rate
    whichever is lower), for at least 60 seconds, then reduce the frame rate
    to 75% of the maximum 0% packet loss rate. A number of time-stamps
    should be recorded: - Record the time-stamp at which the frame rate was
    reduced and record a second time-stamp at the time of the last frame
    lost. The recovery time is the difference between the two timestamps. -
    Record the average latency for 10,000 frames after the last frame loss
    and continue to record average latency measurements for every 10,000
    frames, when latency returns to within 10% of pre-overload levels record
    the time-stamp.

    **Expected Result**:

    **Metrics collected**

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The length of time it takes the DUT to recover from an overload
       condition.
    -  The length of time it takes the DUT to recover the average latency to
       pre-overload conditions.

    **Deployment scenario**:

    -  Physical → virtual switch → physical.

.. 3.2.3.1.5

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.BackToBackFrames
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC2544 Back To Back Frames Test

    **Prerequisite Test**: N

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    The aim of this test is to characterize the ability of the DUT to
    process back-to-back frames. For each frame size previously defined
    under `Default Test Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__, a burst of traffic
    is sent to the DUT with the minimum inter-frame gap between each frame.
    If the number of received frames equals the number of frames that were
    transmitted, the burst size should be increased and traffic is sent to
    the DUT again. The value measured is the back-to-back value, that is the
    maximum burst size the DUT can handle without any frame loss. Please note
    a trial must run for a minimum of 2 seconds and should be repeated 50
    times (at a minimum).

    **Expected Result**:

    Tests of back-to-back frames with physical devices have produced
    unstable results in some cases. All tests should be repeated in multiple
    test sessions and results stability should be examined.

    **Metrics collected**

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The average back-to-back value across the trials, which is
       the number of frames in the longest burst that the DUT will
       handle without the loss of any frames.
    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.

    **Deployment scenario**:

    -  Physical → virtual switch → physical.

.. 3.2.3.1.6

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.MaxForwardingRateSoak
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC 2889 X% packet loss Max Forwarding Rate Soak Test

    **Prerequisite Test** LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    The aim of this test is to understand the Max Forwarding Rate stability
    over an extended test duration in order to uncover any outliers. To allow
    for an extended test duration, the test should ideally run for 24 hours
    or, if this is not possible, for at least 6 hours. For this test, each frame
    size must be sent at the highest Throughput rate with X% packet loss, as
    determined in the prerequisite test. The default loss percentages to be
    tested are: - X = 0% - X = 10^-7%

    Note: Other values can be tested if required by the user.

    **Expected Result**:

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  Max Forwarding Rate stability of the DUT.

       -  This means reporting the number of packets lost per time interval
          and reporting any time intervals with packet loss. The
          `RFC2889 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2289.txt>`__
          Forwarding Rate shall be measured in each interval.
          An interval of 60s is suggested.

    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.
    -  The `RFC5481 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5481.txt>`__
       PDV form of delay variation on the traffic flow,
       using the 99th percentile.

.. 3.2.3.1.7

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.MaxForwardingRateSoakFrameModification
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC 2889 Max Forwarding Rate Soak Test with Frame Modification

    **Prerequisite Test**:
    LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatioFrameModification (0% Packet Loss)

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    The aim of this test is to understand the Max Forwarding Rate stability over an
    extended test duration in order to uncover any outliers. To allow for an
    extended test duration, the test should ideally run for 24 hours or, if
    this is not possible, for at least 6 hour. For this test, each frame
    size must be sent at the highest Throughput rate with 0% packet loss, as
    determined in the prerequisite test.

    During this test, the DUT must perform the following operations on the
    traffic flow:

    -  Perform packet parsing on the DUT's ingress port.
    -  Perform any relevant address look-ups on the DUT's ingress ports.
    -  Modify the packet header before forwarding the packet to the DUT's
       egress port. Packet modifications include:

       -  Modifying the Ethernet source or destination MAC address.
       -  Modifying/adding a VLAN tag (**Recommended**).
       -  Modifying/adding a MPLS tag.
       -  Modifying the source or destination ip address.
       -  Modifying the TOS/DSCP field.
       -  Modifying the source or destination ports for UDP/TCP/SCTP.
       -  Modifying the TTL.

    **Expected Result**:

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  Max Forwarding Rate stability of the DUT.

       -  This means reporting the number of packets lost per time interval
          and reporting any time intervals with packet loss. The
          `RFC2889 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2289.txt>`__
          Forwarding Rate shall be measured in each interval.
          An interval of 60s is suggested.

    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.
    -  The `RFC5481 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5481.txt>`__
       PDV form of delay variation on the traffic flow, using the 99th
       percentile.

.. 3.2.3.1.8

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC6201.ResetTime
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC 6201 Reset Time Test

    **Prerequisite Test**: N/A

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    The aim of this test is to determine the length of time it takes the DUT
    to recover from a reset.

    Two reset methods are defined - planned and unplanned. A planned reset
    requires stopping and restarting the virtual switch by the usual
    'graceful' method defined by it's documentation. An unplanned reset
    requires simulating a fatal internal fault in the virtual switch - for
    example by using kill -SIGKILL on a Linux environment.

    Both reset methods SHOULD be exercised.

    For each frame size previously defined under `Default Test
    Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__, traffic should be sent to the DUT under
    normal conditions. During the duration of the test and while the traffic
    flows are passing through the DUT, the DUT should be reset and the Reset
    time measured. The Reset time is the total time that a device is
    determined to be out of operation and includes the time to perform the
    reset and the time to recover from it (cf. `RFC6201
    <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6201.txt>`__).

    `RFC6201 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6201.txt>`__ defines two methods
    to measure the Reset time:

      - Frame-Loss Method: which requires the monitoring of the number of
        lost frames and calculates the Reset time based on the number of
        frames lost and the offered rate according to the following
        formula:

        .. code-block:: console

                                    Frames_lost (packets)
                 Reset_time = -------------------------------------
                                Offered_rate (packets per second)

      - Timestamp Method: which measures the time from which the last frame
        is forwarded from the DUT to the time the first frame is forwarded
        after the reset. This involves time-stamping all transmitted frames
        and recording the timestamp of the last frame that was received prior
        to the reset and also measuring the timestamp of the first frame that
        is received after the reset. The Reset time is the difference between
        these two timestamps.

    According to `RFC6201 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6201.txt>`__ the
    choice of method depends on the test tool's capability; the Frame-Loss
    method SHOULD be used if the test tool supports:

     * Counting the number of lost frames per stream.
     * Transmitting test frame despite the physical link status.

    whereas the Timestamp method SHOULD be used if the test tool supports:
     * Timestamping each frame.
     * Monitoring received frame's timestamp.
     * Transmitting frames only if the physical link status is up.

    **Expected Result**:

    **Metrics collected**

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

     * Average Reset Time over the number of trials performed.

    Results of this test should include the following information:

     * The reset method used.
     * Throughput in Fps and Mbps.
     * Average Frame Loss over the number of trials performed.
     * Average Reset Time in milliseconds over the number of trials performed.
     * Number of trials performed.
     * Protocol: IPv4, IPv6, MPLS, etc.
     * Frame Size in Octets
     * Port Media: Ethernet, Gigabit Ethernet (GbE), etc.
     * Port Speed: 10 Gbps, 40 Gbps etc.
     * Interface Encapsulation: Ethernet, Ethernet VLAN, etc.

    **Deployment scenario**:

    * Physical → virtual switch → physical.

.. 3.2.3.1.9

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.MaxForwardingRate
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC2889 Forwarding Rate Test

    **Prerequisite Test**: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    This test measures the DUT's Max Forwarding Rate when the Offered Load
    is varied between the throughput and the Maximum Offered Load for fixed
    length frames at a fixed time interval. The selected frame sizes are
    those previously defined under `Default Test
    Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__. The throughput is the maximum offered
    load with 0% frame loss (measured by the prerequisite test), and the
    Maximum Offered Load (as defined by
    `RFC2285 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2285.txt>`__) is *"the highest
    number of frames per second that an external source can transmit to a
    DUT/SUT for forwarding to a specified output interface or interfaces"*.

    Traffic should be sent to the DUT at a particular rate (TX rate)
    starting with TX rate equal to the throughput rate. The rate of
    successfully received frames at the destination counted (in FPS). If the
    RX rate is equal to the TX rate, the TX rate should be increased by a
    fixed step size and the RX rate measured again until the Max Forwarding
    Rate is found.

    The trial duration for each iteration should last for the period of time
    needed for the system to reach steady state for the frame size being
    tested. Under `RFC2889 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2289.txt>`__
    (Sec. 5.6.3.1) test methodology, the test
    duration should run for a minimum period of 30 seconds, regardless
    whether the system reaches steady state before the minimum duration
    ends.

    **Expected Result**: According to
    `RFC2889 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2289.txt>`__ The Max Forwarding
    Rate is the highest forwarding rate of a DUT taken from an iterative set of
    forwarding rate measurements. The iterative set of forwarding rate measurements
    are made by setting the intended load transmitted from an external source and
    measuring the offered load (i.e what the DUT is capable of forwarding). If the
    Throughput == the Maximum Offered Load, it follows that Max Forwarding Rate is
    equal to the Maximum Offered Load.

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The Max Forwarding Rate for the DUT for each packet size.
    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.

    **Deployment scenario**:

    -  Physical → virtual switch → physical. Note: Full mesh tests with
       multiple ingress and egress ports are a key aspect of RFC 2889
       benchmarks, and scenarios with both 2 and 4 ports should be tested.
       In any case, the number of ports used must be reported.

.. 3.2.3.1.10

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.ForwardPressure
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC2889 Forward Pressure Test

    **Prerequisite Test**: LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.MaxForwardingRate

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    The aim of this test is to determine if the DUT transmits frames with an
    inter-frame gap that is less than 12 bytes. This test overloads the DUT
    and measures the output for forward pressure. Traffic should be
    transmitted to the DUT with an inter-frame gap of 11 bytes, this will
    overload the DUT by 1 byte per frame. The forwarding rate of the DUT
    should be measured.

    **Expected Result**: The forwarding rate should not exceed the maximum
    forwarding rate of the DUT collected by
    LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.MaxForwardingRate.

    **Metrics collected**

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  Forwarding rate of the DUT in FPS or Mbps.
    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.

    **Deployment scenario**:

    -  Physical → virtual switch → physical.

.. 3.2.3.1.11

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.ErrorFramesFiltering
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC2889 Error Frames Filtering Test

    **Prerequisite Test**: N/A

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    The aim of this test is to determine whether the DUT will propagate any
    erroneous frames it receives or whether it is capable of filtering out
    the erroneous frames. Traffic should be sent with erroneous frames
    included within the flow at random intervals. Illegal frames that must
    be tested include: - Oversize Frames. - Undersize Frames. - CRC Errored
    Frames. - Dribble Bit Errored Frames - Alignment Errored Frames

    The traffic flow exiting the DUT should be recorded and checked to
    determine if the erroneous frames where passed through the DUT.

    **Expected Result**: Broken frames are not passed!

    **Metrics collected**

    No Metrics are collected in this test, instead it determines:

    -  Whether the DUT will propagate erroneous frames.
    -  Or whether the DUT will correctly filter out any erroneous frames
       from traffic flow with out removing correct frames.

    **Deployment scenario**:

    -  Physical → virtual switch → physical.

.. 3.2.3.1.12

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.BroadcastFrameForwarding
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC2889 Broadcast Frame Forwarding Test

    **Prerequisite Test**: N

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    The aim of this test is to determine the maximum forwarding rate of the
    DUT when forwarding broadcast traffic. For each frame previously defined
    under `Default Test Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__, the traffic should
    be set up as broadcast traffic. The traffic throughput of the DUT should
    be measured.

    The test should be conducted with at least 4 physical ports on the DUT.
    The number of ports used MUST be recorded.

    As broadcast involves forwarding a single incoming packet to several
    destinations, the latency of a single packet is defined as the average
    of the latencies for each of the broadcast destinations.

    The incoming packet is transmitted on each of the other physical ports,
    it is not transmitted on the port on which it was received. The test MAY
    be conducted using different broadcasting ports to uncover any
    performance differences.

    **Expected Result**:

    **Metrics collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The forwarding rate of the DUT when forwarding broadcast traffic.
    -  The minimum, average & maximum packets latencies observed.

    **Deployment scenario**:

    -  Physical → virtual switch 3x physical. In the Broadcast rate testing,
       four test ports are required. One of the ports is connected to the test
       device, so it can send broadcast frames and listen for miss-routed frames.

.. 3.2.3.1.13

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.WorstN-BestN
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: Modified RFC 2544 X% packet loss ratio Throughput and Latency Test

    **Prerequisite Test**: N/A

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    This test determines the DUT's maximum forwarding rate with X% traffic
    loss for a constant load (fixed length frames at a fixed interval time).
    The default loss percentages to be tested are: X = 0%, X = 10^-7%

    Modified RFC 2544 throughput benchmarking methodology aims to quantify
    the throughput measurement variations observed during standard RFC 2544
    benchmarking measurements of virtual switches and VNFs. The RFC2544
    binary search algorithm is modified to use more samples per test trial
    to drive the binary search and yield statistically more meaningful
    results. This keeps the heart of the RFC2544 methodology, still relying
    on the binary search of throughput at specified loss tolerance, while
    providing more useful information about the range of results seen in
    testing. Instead of using a single traffic trial per iteration step,
    each traffic trial is repeated N times and the success/failure of the
    iteration step is based on these N traffic trials. Two types of revised
    tests are defined - *Worst-of-N* and *Best-of-N*.

    **Worst-of-N**

    *Worst-of-N* indicates the lowest expected maximum throughput for (
    packet size, loss tolerance) when repeating the test.

    1.  Repeat the same test run N times at a set packet rate, record each
        result.
    2.  Take the WORST result (highest packet loss) out of N result samples,
        called the Worst-of-N sample.
    3.  If Worst-of-N sample has loss less than the set loss tolerance, then
        the step is successful - increase the test traffic rate.
    4.  If Worst-of-N sample has loss greater than the set loss tolerance
        then the step failed - decrease the test traffic rate.
    5.  Go to step 1.

    **Best-of-N**

    *Best-of-N* indicates the highest expected maximum throughput for (
    packet size, loss tolerance) when repeating the test.

    1.  Repeat the same traffic run N times at a set packet rate, record
        each result.
    2.  Take the BEST result (least packet loss) out of N result samples,
        called the Best-of-N sample.
    3.  If Best-of-N sample has loss less than the set loss tolerance, then
        the step is successful - increase the test traffic rate.
    4.  If Best-of-N sample has loss greater than the set loss tolerance,
        then the step failed - decrease the test traffic rate.
    5.  Go to step 1.

    Performing both Worst-of-N and Best-of-N benchmark tests yields lower
    and upper bounds of expected maximum throughput under the operating
    conditions, giving a very good indication to the user of the
    deterministic performance range for the tested setup.

    **Expected Result**: At the end of each trial series, the presence or
    absence of loss determines the modification of offered load for the
    next trial series, converging on a maximum rate, or
    `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__ Throughput
    with X% loss.
    The Throughput load is re-used in related
    `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__ tests and other
    tests.

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The maximum forwarding rate in Frames Per Second (FPS) and Mbps of
       the DUT for each frame size with X% packet loss.
    -  The average latency of the traffic flow when passing through the DUT
       (if testing for latency, note that this average is different from the
       test specified in Section 26.3 of
       `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__).
    -  Following may also be collected as part of this test, to determine
       the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system:

      -  CPU core utilization.
      -  CPU cache utilization.
      -  Memory footprint.
      -  System bus (QPI, PCI, ...) utilization.
      -  CPU cycles consumed per packet.

.. 3.2.3.1.14

Test ID: LTD.Throughput.Overlay.Network.<tech>.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
       **Title**: <tech> Overlay Network RFC 2544 X% packet loss ratio Throughput and Latency Test


       NOTE: Throughout this test, four interchangeable overlay technologies are covered by the
       same test description.  They are: VXLAN, GRE, NVGRE and GENEVE.

      **Prerequisite Test**: N/A

      **Priority**:

      **Description**:
      This test evaluates standard switch performance benchmarks for the scenario where an
      Overlay Network is deployed for all paths through the vSwitch. Overlay Technologies covered
      (replacing <tech> in the test name) include:

      - VXLAN
      - GRE
      - NVGRE
      - GENEVE

      Performance will be assessed for each of the following overlay network functions:

      - Encapsulation only
      - De-encapsulation only
      - Both Encapsulation and De-encapsulation

      For each native packet, the DUT must perform the following operations:

      - Examine the packet and classify its correct overlay net (tunnel) assignment
      - Encapsulate the packet
      - Switch the packet to the correct port

      For each encapsulated packet, the DUT must perform the following operations:

      - Examine the packet and classify its correct native network assignment
      - De-encapsulate the packet, if required
      - Switch the packet to the correct port

    The selected frame sizes are those previously defined under `Default
    Test Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__.

    Thus, each test comprises an overlay technology, a network function,
    and a packet size *with* overlay network overhead included
    (but see also the discussion at
    https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/vSwitchTestsDrafts ).

    The test can also be used to determine the average latency of the traffic.

    Under the `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__
    test methodology, the test duration will
    include a number of trials; each trial should run for a minimum period
    of 60 seconds. A binary search methodology must be applied for each
    trial to obtain the final result for Throughput.

    **Expected Result**: At the end of each trial, the presence or absence
    of loss determines the modification of offered load for the next trial,
    converging on a maximum rate, or
    `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__ Throughput with X%
    loss (where the value of X is typically equal to zero).
    The Throughput load is re-used in related
    `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__ tests and other
    tests.

    **Metrics Collected**:
    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The maximum Throughput in Frames Per Second (FPS) and Mbps of
       the DUT for each frame size with X% packet loss.
    -  The average latency of the traffic flow when passing through the DUT
       and VNFs (if testing for latency, note that this average is different from the
       test specified in Section 26.3 of
       `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__).
    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.


.. 3.2.3.2

Packet Latency tests
---------------------------
These tests will measure the store and forward latency as well as the packet
delay variation for various packet types through the virtual switch. The
following list is not exhaustive but should indicate the type of tests
that should be required. It is expected that more will be added.

.. 3.2.3.2.1

Test ID: LTD.PacketLatency.InitialPacketProcessingLatency
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: Initial Packet Processing Latency

    **Prerequisite Test**: N/A

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    In some virtual switch architectures, the first packets of a flow will
    take the system longer to process than subsequent packets in the flow.
    This test determines the latency for these packets. The test will
    measure the latency of the packets as they are processed by the
    flow-setup-path of the DUT. There are two methods for this test, a
    recommended method and a nalternative method that can be used if it is
    possible to disable the fastpath of the virtual switch.

    Recommended method: This test will send 64,000 packets to the DUT, each
    belonging to a different flow. Average packet latency will be determined
    over the 64,000 packets.

    Alternative method: This test will send a single packet to the DUT after
    a fixed interval of time. The time interval will be equivalent to the
    amount of time it takes for a flow to time out in the virtual switch
    plus 10%. Average packet latency will be determined over 1,000,000
    packets.

    This test is intended only for non-learning virtual switches; For learning
    virtual switches use RFC2889.

    For this test, only unidirectional traffic is required.

    **Expected Result**: The average latency for the initial packet of all
    flows should be greater than the latency of subsequent traffic.

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  Average latency of the initial packets of all flows that are
       processed by the DUT.

    **Deployment scenario**:

    -  Physical → Virtual Switch → Physical.

.. 3.2.3.2.2

Test ID: LTD.PacketDelayVariation.RFC3393.Soak
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: Packet Delay Variation Soak Test

    **Prerequisite Tests**: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio (0% Packet Loss)

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    The aim of this test is to understand the distribution of packet delay
    variation for different frame sizes over an extended test duration and
    to determine if there are any outliers. To allow for an extended test
    duration, the test should ideally run for 24 hours or, if this is not
    possible, for at least 6 hour. For this test, each frame size must be
    sent at the highest possible throughput with 0% packet loss, as
    determined in the prerequisite test.

    **Expected Result**:

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The packet delay variation value for traffic passing through the DUT.
    -  The `RFC5481 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5481.txt>`__
       PDV form of delay variation on the traffic flow,
       using the 99th percentile, for each 60s interval during the test.
    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.

.. 3.2.3.3

Scalability tests
------------------------
The general aim of these tests is to understand the impact of large flow
table size and flow lookups on throughput. The following list is not
exhaustive but should indicate the type of tests that should be required.
It is expected that more will be added.

.. 3.2.3.3.1

Test ID: LTD.Scalability.Flows.RFC2544.0PacketLoss
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC 2544 0% loss Flow Scalability throughput test

    **Prerequisite Test**: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio, IF the
    delta Throughput between the single-flow RFC2544 test and this test with
    a variable number of flows is desired.

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    The aim of this test is to measure how throughput changes as the number
    of flows in the DUT increases. The test will measure the throughput
    through the fastpath, as such the flows need to be installed on the DUT
    before passing traffic.

    For each frame size previously defined under `Default Test
    Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__ and for each of the following number of
    flows:

    -  1,000
    -  2,000
    -  4,000
    -  8,000
    -  16,000
    -  32,000
    -  64,000
    -  Max supported number of flows.

    This test will be conducted under two conditions following the
    establishment of all flows as required by RFC 2544, regarding the flow
    expiration time-out:

    1) The time-out never expires during each trial.

    2) The time-out expires for all flows periodically. This would require a
    short time-out compared with flow re-appearance for a small number of
    flows, and may not be possible for all flow conditions.

    The maximum 0% packet loss Throughput should be determined in a manner
    identical to LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio.

    **Expected Result**:

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The maximum number of frames per second that can be forwarded at the
       specified number of flows and the specified frame size, with zero
       packet loss.

.. 3.2.3.3.2

Test ID: LTD.MemoryBandwidth.RFC2544.0PacketLoss.Scalability
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC 2544 0% loss Memory Bandwidth Scalability test

    **Prerequisite Tests**: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio, IF the
    delta Throughput between an undisturbed RFC2544 test and this test with
    the Throughput affected by cache and memory bandwidth contention is desired.

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    The aim of this test is to understand how the DUT's performance is
    affected by cache sharing and memory bandwidth between processes.

    During the test all cores not used by the vSwitch should be running a
    memory intensive application. This application should read and write
    random data to random addresses in unused physical memory. The random
    nature of the data and addresses is intended to consume cache, exercise
    main memory access (as opposed to cache) and exercise all memory buses
    equally. Furthermore:

    - the ratio of reads to writes should be recorded. A ratio of 1:1
      SHOULD be used.
    - the reads and writes MUST be of cache-line size and be cache-line aligned.
    - in NUMA architectures memory access SHOULD be local to the core's node.
      Whether only local memory or a mix of local and remote memory is used
      MUST be recorded.
    - the memory bandwidth (reads plus writes) used per-core MUST be recorded;
      the test MUST be run with a per-core memory bandwidth equal to half the
      maximum system memory bandwidth divided by the number of cores. The test
      MAY be run with other values for the per-core memory bandwidth.
    - the test MAY also be run with the memory intensive application running
      on all cores.

    Under these conditions the DUT's 0% packet loss throughput is determined
    as per LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio.

    **Expected Result**:

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The DUT's 0% packet loss throughput in the presence of cache sharing and
       memory bandwidth between processes.

.. 3.2.3.3.3

Test ID: LTD.Scalability.VNF.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: VNF Scalability RFC 2544 X% packet loss ratio Throughput and
               Latency Test

    **Prerequisite Test**: N/A

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    This test determines the DUT's throughput rate with X% traffic loss for
    a constant load (fixed length frames at a fixed interval time) when the
    number of VNFs on the DUT increases. The default loss percentages
    to be tested are: - X = 0% - X = 10^-7% . The minimum number of
    VNFs to be tested are 3.

    Flow classification should be conducted with L2, L3 and L4 matching
    to understand the matching and scaling capability of the vSwitch. The
    matching fields which were used as part of the test should be reported
    as part of the benchmark report.

    The vSwitch is responsible for forwarding frames between the VNFs

    The SUT (vSwitch and VNF daisy chain) operation should be validated
    before running the test. This may be completed by running a burst or
    continuous stream of traffic through the SUT to ensure proper operation
    before a test.

    **Note**: The traffic rate used to validate SUT operation should be low
    enough not to stress the SUT.

    **Note**: Other values can be tested if required by the user.

    **Note**: The same VNF should be used in the "daisy chain" formation.
    Each addition of a VNF should be conducted in a new test setup (The DUT
    is brought down, then the DUT is brought up again). An atlernative approach
    would be to continue to add VNFs without bringing down the DUT. The
    approach used needs to be documented as part of the test report.

    The selected frame sizes are those previously defined under `Default
    Test Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__. The test can also be used to
    determine the average latency of the traffic.

    Under the `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__
    test methodology, the test duration will
    include a number of trials; each trial should run for a minimum period
    of 60 seconds. A binary search methodology must be applied for each
    trial to obtain the final result for Throughput.

    **Expected Result**: At the end of each trial, the presence or absence
    of loss determines the modification of offered load for the next trial,
    converging on a maximum rate, or
    `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__ Throughput with X%
    loss.
    The Throughput load is re-used in related
    `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__ tests and other
    tests.

    If the test VNFs are rather light-weight in terms of processing, the test
    provides a view of multiple passes through the vswitch on logical
    interfaces. In other words, the test produces an optimistic count of
    daisy-chained VNFs, but the cumulative effect of traffic on the vSwitch is
    "real" (assuming that the vSwitch has some dedicated resources, and the
    effects on shared resources is understood).


    **Metrics Collected**:
    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The maximum Throughput in Frames Per Second (FPS) and Mbps of
       the DUT for each frame size with X% packet loss.
    -  The average latency of the traffic flow when passing through the DUT
       and VNFs (if testing for latency, note that this average is different from the
       test specified in Section 26.3 of
       `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__).
    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.

.. 3.2.3.3.4

Test ID: LTD.Scalability.VNF.RFC2544.PacketLossProfile
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     **Title**: VNF Scalability RFC 2544 Throughput and Latency Profile

     **Prerequisite Test**: N/A

     **Priority**:

     **Description**:

     This test reveals how throughput and latency degrades as the number
     of VNFs increases and offered rate varies in the region of the DUT's
     maximum forwarding rate as determined by
     LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio (0% Packet Loss).
     For example it can be used to determine if the degradation of throughput
     and latency as the number of VNFs and offered rate increases is slow
     and graceful, or sudden and severe. The minimum number of VNFs to
     be tested is 3.

     The selected frame sizes are those previously defined under `Default
     Test Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__.

     The offered traffic rate is described as a percentage delta with respect
     to the DUT's RFC 2544 Throughput as determined by
     LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLoss Ratio (0% Packet Loss case). A delta
     of 0% is equivalent to an offered traffic rate equal to the RFC 2544
     Throughput; A delta of +50% indicates an offered rate half-way
     between the Throughput and line-rate, whereas a delta of
     -50% indicates an offered rate of half the maximum rate. Therefore the
     range of the delta figure is natuarlly bounded at -100% (zero offered
     traffic) and +100% (traffic offered at line rate).

     The following deltas to the maximum forwarding rate should be applied:

     -  -50%, -10%, 0%, +10% & +50%

    **Note**: Other values can be tested if required by the user.

    **Note**: The same VNF should be used in the "daisy chain" formation.
    Each addition of a VNF should be conducted in a new test setup (The DUT
    is brought down, then the DUT is brought up again). An atlernative approach
    would be to continue to add VNFs without bringing down the DUT. The
    approach used needs to be documented as part of the test report.

    Flow classification should be conducted with L2, L3 and L4 matching
    to understand the matching and scaling capability of the vSwitch. The
    matching fields which were used as part of the test should be reported
    as part of the benchmark report.

    The SUT (vSwitch and VNF daisy chain) operation should be validated
    before running the test. This may be completed by running a burst or
    continuous stream of traffic through the SUT to ensure proper operation
    before a test.

    **Note**: the traffic rate used to validate SUT operation should be low
    enough not to stress the SUT

    **Expected Result**: For each packet size a profile should be produced
    of how throughput and latency vary with offered rate.

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The forwarding rate in Frames Per Second (FPS) and Mbps of the DUT
       for each delta to the maximum forwarding rate and for each frame
       size.
    -  The average latency for each delta to the maximum forwarding rate and
       for each frame size.
    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.
    -  Any failures experienced (for example if the vSwitch crashes, stops
       processing packets, restarts or becomes unresponsive to commands)
       when the offered load is above Maximum Throughput MUST be recorded
       and reported with the results.

.. 3.2.3.4

Activation tests
----------------
The general aim of these tests is to understand the capacity of the
and speed with which the vswitch can accommodate new flows.

.. 3.2.3.4.1

Test ID: LTD.Activation.RFC2889.AddressCachingCapacity
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC2889 Address Caching Capacity Test

    **Prerequisite Test**: N/A

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    Please note this test is only applicable to virtual switches that are capable of
    MAC learning. The aim of this test is to determine the address caching
    capacity of the DUT for a constant load (fixed length frames at a fixed
    interval time). The selected frame sizes are those previously defined
    under `Default Test Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__.

    In order to run this test the aging time, that is the maximum time the
    DUT will keep a learned address in its flow table, and a set of initial
    addresses, whose value should be >= 1 and <= the max number supported by
    the implementation must be known. Please note that if the aging time is
    configurable it must be longer than the time necessary to produce frames
    from the external source at the specified rate. If the aging time is
    fixed the frame rate must be brought down to a value that the external
    source can produce in a time that is less than the aging time.

    Learning Frames should be sent from an external source to the DUT to
    install a number of flows. The Learning Frames must have a fixed
    destination address and must vary the source address of the frames. The
    DUT should install flows in its flow table based on the varying source
    addresses. Frames should then be transmitted from an external source at
    a suitable frame rate to see if the DUT has properly learned all of the
    addresses. If there is no frame loss and no flooding, the number of
    addresses sent to the DUT should be increased and the test is repeated
    until the max number of cached addresses supported by the DUT
    determined.

    **Expected Result**:

    **Metrics collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  Number of cached addresses supported by the DUT.
    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.

    **Deployment scenario**:

    -  Physical → virtual switch → 2 x physical (one receiving, one listening).

.. 3.2.3.4.2

Test ID: LTD.Activation.RFC2889.AddressLearningRate
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC2889 Address Learning Rate Test

    **Prerequisite Test**: LTD.Memory.RFC2889.AddressCachingCapacity

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    Please note this test is only applicable to virtual switches that are capable of
    MAC learning. The aim of this test is to determine the rate of address
    learning of the DUT for a constant load (fixed length frames at a fixed
    interval time). The selected frame sizes are those previously defined
    under `Default Test Parameters <#DefaultParams>`__, traffic should be
    sent with each IPv4/IPv6 address incremented by one. The rate at which
    the DUT learns a new address should be measured. The maximum caching
    capacity from LTD.Memory.RFC2889.AddressCachingCapacity should be taken
    into consideration as the maximum number of addresses for which the
    learning rate can be obtained.

    **Expected Result**: It may be worthwhile to report the behaviour when
    operating beyond address capacity - some DUTs may be more friendly to
    new addresses than others.

    **Metrics collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The address learning rate of the DUT.

    **Deployment scenario**:

    -  Physical → virtual switch → 2 x physical (one receiving, one listening).

.. 3.2.3.5

Coupling between control path and datapath Tests
-------------------------------------------------------
The following tests aim to determine how tightly coupled the datapath
and the control path are within a virtual switch. The following list
is not exhaustive but should indicate the type of tests that should be
required. It is expected that more will be added.

.. 3.2.3.5.1

Test ID: LTD.CPDPCouplingFlowAddition
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: Control Path and Datapath Coupling

    **Prerequisite Test**:

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    The aim of this test is to understand how exercising the DUT's control
    path affects datapath performance.

    Initially a certain number of flow table entries are installed in the
    vSwitch. Then over the duration of an RFC2544 throughput test
    flow-entries are added and removed at the rates specified below. No
    traffic is 'hitting' these flow-entries, they are simply added and
    removed.

    The test MUST be repeated with the following initial number of
    flow-entries installed: - < 10 - 1000 - 100,000 - 10,000,000 (or the
    maximum supported number of flow-entries)

    The test MUST be repeated with the following rates of flow-entry
    addition and deletion per second: - 0 - 1 (i.e. 1 addition plus 1
    deletion) - 100 - 10,000

    **Expected Result**:

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  The maximum forwarding rate in Frames Per Second (FPS) and Mbps of
       the DUT.
    -  The average latency of the traffic flow when passing through the DUT
       (if testing for latency, note that this average is different from the
       test specified in Section 26.3 of
       `RFC2544 <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2544.txt>`__).
    -  CPU and memory utilization may also be collected as part of this
       test, to determine the vSwitch's performance footprint on the system.

    **Deployment scenario**:

    -  Physical → virtual switch → physical.

.. 3.2.3.6

CPU and memory consumption
---------------------------------
The following tests will profile a virtual switch's CPU and memory
utilization under various loads and circumstances. The following
list is not exhaustive but should indicate the type of tests that
should be required. It is expected that more will be added.

.. 3.2.3.6.1

Test ID: LTD.Stress.RFC2544.0PacketLoss
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    **Title**: RFC 2544 0% Loss CPU OR Memory Stress Test

    **Prerequisite Test**:

    **Priority**:

    **Description**:

    The aim of this test is to understand the overall performance of the
    system when a CPU or Memory intensive application is run on the same DUT as
    the Virtual Switch. For each frame size, an
    LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio (0% Packet Loss) test should be
    performed. Throughout the entire test a CPU or Memory intensive application
    should be run on all cores on the system not in use by the Virtual Switch.
    For NUMA system only cores on the same NUMA node are loaded.

    It is recommended that stress-ng be used for loading the non-Virtual
    Switch cores but any stress tool MAY be used.

    **Expected Result**:

    **Metrics Collected**:

    The following are the metrics collected for this test:

    -  Memory and CPU utilization of the cores running the Virtual Switch.
    -  The number of identity of the cores allocated to the Virtual Switch.
    -  The configuration of the stress tool (for example the command line
       parameters used to start it.)

    **Note:** Stress in the test ID can be replaced with the name of the
              component being stressed, when reporting the results:
              LTD.CPU.RFC2544.0PacketLoss or LTD.Memory.RFC2544.0PacketLoss

.. 3.2.3.7

Summary List of Tests
----------------------------
1. Throughput tests

  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio
  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.PacketLossRatioFrameModification
  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.Profile
  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.SystemRecoveryTime
  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.BackToBackFrames
  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.Soak
  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.SoakFrameModification
  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC6201.ResetTime
  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.MaxForwardingRate
  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.ForwardPressure
  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.ErrorFramesFiltering
  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2889.BroadcastFrameForwarding
  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.RFC2544.WorstN-BestN
  - Test ID: LTD.Throughput.Overlay.Network.<tech>.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio

2. Packet Latency tests

  - Test ID: LTD.PacketLatency.InitialPacketProcessingLatency
  - Test ID: LTD.PacketDelayVariation.RFC3393.Soak

3. Scalability tests

  - Test ID: LTD.Scalability.Flows.RFC2544.0PacketLoss
  - Test ID: LTD.MemoryBandwidth.RFC2544.0PacketLoss.Scalability
  - LTD.Scalability.VNF.RFC2544.PacketLossProfile
  - LTD.Scalability.VNF.RFC2544.PacketLossRatio

4. Acivation tests

  - Test ID: LTD.Activation.RFC2889.AddressCachingCapacity
  - Test ID: LTD.Activation.RFC2889.AddressLearningRate

5. Coupling between control path and datapath Tests

  - Test ID: LTD.CPDPCouplingFlowAddition

6. CPU and memory consumption

  - Test ID: LTD.Stress.RFC2544.0PacketLoss