RFC 4814: Hash and Stuffing: Overlooked Factors in Network Device Benchmarking
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Test engineers take pains to declare all factors that affect a given measurement, including intended load, packet length, test duration, and traffic orientation. However, current benchmarking practice overlooks two factors that have a profound impact on test results. First, existing methodologies do not require the reporting of addresses or other test traffic contents, even though these fields can affect test results. Second, "stuff" bits and bytes inserted in test traffic by some link-layer technologies add significant and variable overhead, which in turn affects test results. This document describes the effects of these factors; recommends guidelines for test traffic contents; and offers formulas for determining the probability of bit- and byte-stuffing in test traffic. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC4814
- Published
- March 2007
- Authors
- D. Newman; T. Player
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- ops
- Pages
- 26
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 6038Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP) Reflect Octets and Symmetrical Size FeaturesCurrent
October 2010
- RFC 6076Basic Telephony SIP End-to-End Performance MetricsCurrent
January 2011
- RFC 6815Applicability Statement for RFC 2544: Use on Production Networks Considered HarmfulCurrent
November 2012
- RFC 6985IMIX Genome: Specification of Variable Packet Sizes for Additional TestingCurrent
July 2013
- RFC 1944Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect DevicesObsoleted
May 1996
- RFC 7747Basic BGP Convergence Benchmarking Methodology for Data-Plane ConvergenceCurrent
April 2016
- RFC 7799Active and Passive Metrics and Methods (with Hybrid Types In-Between)Current
May 2016
- RFC 9411Benchmarking Methodology for Network Security Device PerformanceCurrent
March 2023
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?