RFC 8468: IPv4, IPv6, and IPv4-IPv6 Coexistence: Updates for the IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) Framework
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This memo updates the IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) framework defined by RFC 2330 with new considerations for measurement methodology and testing. It updates the definition of standard-formed packets to include IPv6 packets, deprecates the definition of minimal IP packet, and augments distinguishing aspects, referred to as Type-P, for test packets in RFC 2330. This memo identifies that IPv4-IPv6 coexistence can challenge measurements within the scope of the IPPM framework. Example use cases include, but are not limited to, IPv4-IPv6 translation, NAT, and protocol encapsulation. IPv6 header compression and use of IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Area Networks (6LoWPAN) are considered and excluded from the standard-formed packet evaluation.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC8468
- Published
- November 2018
- Authors
- A. Morton; J. Fabini; N. Elkins; M. Ackermann; V. Hegde
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- ops
- Pages
- 15
- Also known as
- —
- Updates:
- RFC 2330
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 8585Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers to Support IPv4-as-a-ServiceCurrent
May 2019
- RFC 8215Local-Use IPv4/IPv6 Translation PrefixCurrent
August 2017
- RFC 7757Explicit Address Mappings for Stateless IP/ICMP TranslationCurrent
February 2016
- RFC 7756Stateless IP/ICMP Translation for IPv6 Internet Data Center Environments (SIIT-DC): Dual Translation ModeCurrent
February 2016
- RFC 7755SIIT-DC: Stateless IP/ICMP Translation for IPv6 Data Center EnvironmentsCurrent
February 2016
- RFC 7680A One-Way Loss Metric for IP Performance Metrics (IPPM)Current
January 2016
- RFC 7679A One-Way Delay Metric for IP Performance Metrics (IPPM)Current
January 2016
- RFC 9342Clustered Alternate-Marking MethodCurrent
December 2022
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?