%% You should probably cite rfc8468 instead of this I-D. @techreport{ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6-05, number = {draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6-05}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6/05/}, author = {Al Morton and Joachim Fabini and Nalini Elkins and michael ackermann and Vinayak Hegde}, title = {{IPv6, IPv4 and Coexistence Updates for IPPM's Active Metric Framework}}, pagetotal = 15, year = 2018, month = may, day = 24, abstract = {This memo updates the IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) Framework RFC 2330 with new considerations for measurement methodology and testing. It updates the definition of standard-formed packets in RFC 2330 to include IPv6 packets, deprecates the definition of minimum standard- formed packet, and augments distinguishing aspects of packets, referred to as Type-P for test packets in RFC 2330. This memo identifies that IPv4-IPv6 co-existence can challenge measurements within the scope of the IPPM Framework. Exemplary use cases include, but are not limited to IPv4-IPv6 translation, NAT, or 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.}, }