IPv4, IPv6, and IPv4-IPv6 Coexistence: Updates for the IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) Framework
RFC 8468

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: Nevil Brownlee <n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz>, ippm-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6@ietf.org, ippm@ietf.org, Brian Trammell <ietf@trammell.ch>, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Subject: Document Action: 'IPv6, IPv4 and Coexistence Updates for IPPM's Active Metric Framework' to Informational RFC (draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6-06.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'IPv6, IPv4 and Coexistence Updates for IPPM's Active Metric Framework'
  (draft-ietf-ippm-2330-ipv6-06.txt) as Informational RFC

This document is the product of the IP Performance Measurement Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Mirja K├╝hlewind and Spencer Dawkins.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:

Technical Summary

   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, protocol encapsulation, 
   IPv6 header compression, or use of IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Area Networks 

Working Group Summary

   The need for this draft was raised by Brian Carpenter early in 2015.  It had three 
   versions as an individual draft before being adopted by the IPPM Working Group 
   in July 2016.  It's now in its third (-02) version.  Discussion within the WG has not 
   been contentious, it's simply been aimed at improving the quality and completeness 
   of this draft.

Document Quality

   This draft simply describes the aspects of IP Performance Measurement affected 
   by the change from IPv4 to IPv6.  These changes are well understood within the 
   IPPM WG. RFC 8259 is a clear example of this.
   Fred Baker and Marius Georgescu's review appear in the IPPM WG archive.  
   There were other comments at meetings.  Brian Carpenter reviewed  an early 
   version of the draft.  See the ACKS.


   The Shepherd is Nevil Brownlee.   The Responsible AD is Spencer Dawkins.