#ETHERNET TESTING RFC 2544 MAC#
The format of the MAC addresses MUST be adjustable so that theĪddress mapping may be re-arranged to ensure that the DUT/SUT learns If a DUT/SUT uses a hashing algorithm with address learning, theĭUT/SUT may not learn the necessary addresses to perform the tests.
#ETHERNET TESTING RFC 2544 TRIAL#
More than one learning trial may be needed for the association of the
#ETHERNET TESTING RFC 2544 PLUS#
Plus any configuration time required by the testing device.Īddresses SHOULD NOT age out until the trial duration is completed. The period of the learning phase of the test plus the trial duration RFC 2889 LAN Switch Benchmarking Methodology August 2000 TheĭUT/SUT address aging time SHOULD be configured to be greater than Per second or even less, to guarantee successful learning. The rate at which address learningįrames are offered may have to be adjusted to be as low as 50 frames Not learned will be forwarded as flooded frames and reduce the amount In the test and the address learning SHOULD be verified. Prior to each test run, the DUT/SUT MUST learn the MAC addresses used In fully meshed traffic, each interface of aĭUT/SUT is set up to both receive and transmit frames to all the Output interfaces are grouped in mutually exclusive sending and RFC 2544 primarily describes non-meshed traffic where input and Of RFC 2544 to the benchmarking of LAN switching devices.
This document extends the general test setup described in section 6 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in thisĭocument are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119. The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", įor the sake of clarity and continuity, this RFC adopts the templateįor benchmarking tests set out in Section 26 of RFC 2544. Of this document: RFC 1242, RFC 2285, and RFC 2544. The following RFCs SHOULD be consulted before attempting to make use The terminology document SHOULD be consulted before In addition toĭefining the tests, this document also describes specific formats forĪ previous document, "Benchmarking Terminology for LAN Switchingĭevices", defined many of the terms that are used in thisĭocument. It provides a methodology forīenchmarking switching devices, forwarding performance, congestionĬontrol, latency, address handling and filtering. This RFC primarily deals with devices which switch frames at the Methodology already defined for benchmarking network interconnectingĭevices in RFC 2544 to switching devices. Of local area network (LAN) switching devices. This document is intended to provide methodology for the benchmarking RFC 2889 LAN Switch Benchmarking Methodology August 2000 1. 27 5.10 Broadcast frame Forwarding and Latency. 16 5.6 Forward Pressure and Maximum Forwarding Rate. 10 5.4 Partially meshed unidirectional traffic. 3ĥ.1 Fully meshed throughput, frame loss and forwarding rates 4ĥ.2 Partially meshed one-to-many/many-to-one. Distribution of thisĬopyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). Not specify an Internet standard of any kind. This memo provides information for the Internet community. Benchmarking Methodology for LAN Switching Devices