Defining Network Capacity
RFC 5136

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: Internet Architecture Board <iab@iab.org>,
    RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, 
    ippm mailing list <ippm@ietf.org>, 
    ippm chair <ippm-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Document Action: 'Defining Network Capacity' to 
         Informational RFC 

The IESG has approved the following document:

- 'Defining Network Capacity '
   <draft-ietf-ippm-bw-capacity-06.txt> as an Informational RFC

This document is the product of the IP Performance Metrics Working Group. 

The IESG contact persons are Lars Eggert and Magnus Westerlund.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ippm-bw-capacity-06.txt

Technical Summary
 
   Measuring network capacity is a task that sounds simple, but in
   reality can be quite complex. In addition, the lack of a unified
   nomenclature on this subject makes it increasingly difficult to
   properly build, test, and use techniques and tools built around
   these constructs. This document provides definitions for the terms
   'Capacity' and 'Available Capacity' related to IP traffic traveling
   between a source and destination in an IP network, to provide a
   common framework for the discussion and analysis of a diverse set
   of current and future measurement and estimation techniques.
 
Working Group Summary
 
   The working group has supported the document through the last
   five revisions, and it has been uncontroversial.
 
Protocol Quality
 
   The document has been given thorough review by the group over its
   revisions, and in particular Joseph Kopena and Dan Romanescu have
   given thorough reviews improving document quality.

Personnel

   Document Shepherd: Matt Zekauskas (matt@internet2.edu)
   Responsible Area Director: Lars Eggert (lars.eggert@nokia.com)

RFC Editor Note

   Expand the first use of the acronym IPPM as "IP Performance Metrics".

   Section 2.1., paragraph 1:

   OLD:
      To define capacity, we need to broaden the notions of link and path
      found in the IPPM framework document [RFC2330] to include network
      devices that can impact IP capacity without being IP aware.  For
      example, consider an Ethernet switch that can operate ports at
      different speeds.

   NEW:
      To define capacity, we need to broaden the notions of link and path
      found in the IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) framework document
      [RFC2330] to include network devices that can impact IP capacity
      without being IP aware.  For example, consider an Ethernet switch
      that can operate ports at different speeds.

   To be inserted as the last paragraph in Section 2.3.1.2:

       As a practical matter, it should be noted that some providers may
       treat packets with certain characteristics differently than other
       packets. For example, access control lists, routing policies, and
       other mechanisms may be used to filter ICMP packets or packets
       with certain IP options through different routes.  If a
       capacity-measurement tool uses these special packets and they are
       included in the "Type P" designation, the tool may not be
       measuring the path that it was intended to measure. Tool authors,
       as well as users may wish to check this point with their service
       providers.


   To be inserted as the last paragraph in Section 2.3.2: 

       As mentioned earlier, this definition is impacted by many factors
       that may change over time.  For example, a device's ability to
       process and forward IP packets for a particular link may have 
       varying impact on capacity depending on the amount or type of 
       traffic being processed.