RFC 6935: IPv6 and UDP Checksums for Tunneled Packets
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document updates the IPv6 specification (RFC 2460) to improve performance when a tunnel protocol uses UDP with IPv6 to tunnel packets. The performance improvement is obtained by relaxing the IPv6 UDP checksum requirement for tunnel protocols whose header information is protected on the "inner" packet being carried. Relaxing this requirement removes the overhead associated with the computation of UDP checksums on IPv6 packets that carry the tunnel protocol packets. This specification describes how the IPv6 UDP checksum requirement can be relaxed when the encapsulated packet itself contains a checksum. It also describes the limitations and risks of this approach and discusses the restrictions on the use of this method.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6935
- Published
- April 2013
- Authors
- M. Eubanks; P. Chimento; M. Westerlund
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- int
- Pages
- 12
- Also known as
- —
- Updates:
- RFC 2460
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 5512The BGP Encapsulation Subsequent Address Family Identifier (SAFI) and the BGP Tunnel Encapsulation AttributeObsoleted
April 2009
- RFC 2637Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol (PPTP)Current
July 1999
- RFC 7510Encapsulating MPLS in UDPCurrent
April 2015
- RFC 7978Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links (TRILL): RBridge Channel Header ExtensionCurrent
September 2016
- RFC 8084Network Transport Circuit BreakersCurrent
March 2017
- RFC 7341DHCPv4-over-DHCPv6 (DHCP 4o6) TransportCurrent
August 2014
- RFC 6519RADIUS Extensions for Dual-Stack LiteCurrent
February 2012
- RFC 6179The Internet Routing Overlay Network (IRON)Current
March 2011
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?