Re: Experience with Online Protocol Testing

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Jun 28, 2013, at 7:14 PM, Hannes Tschofenig <Hannes.Tschofenig@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
> 
>> For SCTP we did a number of interoperability tests, which were
>> face to face meetings and the people who were developing stacks
>> we there. This events were always very helpful not only for improving
>> the stacks but also for improving the IETF documents.
>> I also developed a test tool for conformance testing based on some
>> test descriptions provided by ETSI. However, it would have made sense to
>> specify also some tests within the IETF. That can also help to clarify
>> some protocol aspects and to focus on "common mistakes".
>> Providing tests is a very good thing in my experience. Unfortunately,
>> at the point we did this for SCTP, the IETF position was that testing
>> isn't an objective. Maybe it is time to change that...
>> 
>> Best regards
>> Michael
> 
> 
> I guess the code you wrote for your online test cases was your own work and you didn't re-use some else's test framework? 
Not a test framework, but a scheme interpreter (guile) was extended with the
necessary stuff for sending/receiving packets, such that tests can be implemented
as simple scheme functions. Doing a test is calling a scheme function which
returns whether the corresponding test was passed or failed. Some shell scripts
allows you running a test suite.
> The SCTP case is also a bit simpler than the OAuth scenario since in SCTP might have only tested client-server interactions (right?)
Well, the testtool only deals with network layer events. Taking interactions
with the application (API) into account is a different story. We also have
an API tester, which is also self written. We currently don't have something
which takes network and API events into account.

Best regards
Michael
> 
> Ciao
> Hannes
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.19 (Darwin)
> Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
> 
> iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJRzcSCAAoJEGhJURNOOiAt064H/3iowM2lBBunk58jOq1/eAfK
> Cy+y+dpEqJoXeqMI7RLtTsXXDbblxI83cxO6OXol7HU37elmomdiD7qGg2KPeeOJ
> 1GyEWnXXJ1oaC9AcWAkPiRan2EhdXGxu6yWG1iuHniOSkC3WvU9nhVU8PLUkSPwB
> WSzh4hsj6tnTpR67oYoHkDwtQsFuvcvxiYkNV9rI3fy+FIXJ5ygf9UPmgVJpNqIx
> azmc8W9iWUUeGGnaU+/2APRybe8PpCZf6y+QKVFA/6Zkai86/HfTaDFdAnL/eOXV
> xhdXjHsn8Ci4CkCXJ7Pn2JRpIYX1y7ccMOvu8WHuvJnSQ2S091/EFHBY2w/Wydk=
> =vU1M
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 






[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]