The RFC Archive
 The RFC Archive   RFC 6248   « Jump to any RFC number directly 
 RFC Home
Full RFC Index
Recent RFCs
RFC Standards
Best Current Practice
RFC Errata
1 April RFC



IETF RFC 6248

RFC 4148 and the IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) Registry of Metrics Are Obsolete

Last modified on Thursday, April 14th, 2011

Permanent link to RFC 6248
Search GitHub Wiki for RFC 6248
Show other RFCs mentioning RFC 6248







Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                         A. Morton
Request for Comments: 6248                                     AT&T Labs
Obsoletes: 4148                                               April 2011
Updates: 4737, 5560, 5644, 6049
Category: Informational 
ISSN: 2070-1721


   RFC 4148 and the IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) Registry of Metrics
                              Are Obsolete

 Abstract

   This memo reclassifies RFC 4148, "IP Performance Metrics (IPPM)
   Metrics Registry", as Obsolete, and withdraws the IANA IPPM Metrics
   Registry itself from use because it is obsolete.  The current
   registry structure has been found to be insufficiently detailed to
   uniquely identify IPPM metrics.  Despite apparent efforts to find
   current or even future users, no one responded to the call for
   interest in the RFC 4148 registry during the second half of 2010.

 Status of This Memo

   This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
   published for informational purposes.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not all documents
   approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet
   Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/RFC 6248.















Morton                        Informational                  PAGE 1 top


RFC 6248 RFC 4148 is Obsolete April 2011 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction ....................................................2 2. Action to Reclassify RFC 4148 and the Corresponding IANA Registry as Obsolete ............................................3 3. Security Considerations .........................................4 4. IANA Considerations .............................................4 5. Acknowledgements ................................................4 6. References ......................................................5 6.1. Normative References .......................................5 6.2. Informative References .....................................5 1. Introduction The IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) framework [RFC 2330] describes several ways to record options and metric parameter settings, in order to account for sources of measurement variability. For example, Section 13 of [RFC 2330] describes the notion of "Type P" so that metrics can be specified in general, but the specifics (such as payload length in octets and protocol type) can replace P to disambiguate the results. When the IPPM Metrics Registry [RFC 4148] was designed, the variability of the "Type P" notion, and the variability possible with the many metric parameters (see Section 4.2 of [RFC 2679]), were not fully appreciated. Further, some of the early metric definitions only indicate Poisson streams [RFC 2330] (see the metrics in [RFC 2679], [RFC 2680], and [RFC 3393]), but later work standardized the methods for Periodic Stream measurements [RFC 3432], adding to the variability possible when characterizing a metric exactly. Morton Informational PAGE 2 top

RFC 6248 RFC 4148 is Obsolete April 2011 It is not believed to be feasible or even useful to register every possible combination of Type P, metric parameters, and Stream parameters using the current structure of the IPPM Metrics Registry. The IPPM Metrics Registry is believed to have very few users, if any. Evidence of this was provided by the fact that one registry entry was syntactically incorrect for months after [RFC 5644] was published. The text ":=" was used for the metrics in that document instead of "::=". It took eight months before someone offered that a parser found the error. Even the original registry author agrees that the current registry is not efficient, and has submitted a proposal to effectively create a new registry. Despite apparent efforts to find current or even future users, no one responded to the call for interest in the RFC 4148 registry during the second half of 2010. Therefore, the IETF now declares the registry Obsolete without any further reservations. When a registry is designated Obsolete, it simply prevents the IANA from registering new objects, in this case new metrics. So, even if a registry user was eventually found, they could continue to use the current registry, and its contents will continue to be available. The most recently published memo that added metrics to the registry is [RFC 6049]. This memo updates all previous memos that registered new metrics, including [RFC 4737] and [RFC 5560], so that the registry's Obsolete status will be evident. 2. Action to Reclassify RFC 4148 and the Corresponding IANA Registry as Obsolete Due to the ambiguities between the current metrics registrations and the metrics used, and the apparent minimal adoption of the registry in practice, it is required that: o the IETF reclassify [RFC 4148] as Obsolete. o the IANA withdraw the current IPPM Metrics Registry from further updates and note that it too is Obsolete. It is assumed that parties who wish to establish a replacement registry function will work to specify such a registry. Morton Informational PAGE 3 top

RFC 6248 RFC 4148 is Obsolete April 2011 3. Security Considerations This memo and its recommendations have no known impact on the security of the Internet (especially if there is a zombie apocalypse on the day it is published; humans will have many more security issues to worry about stemming from the rise of the un-dead). 4. IANA Considerations Metrics defined in the IETF have been typically registered in the IANA IPPM Metrics Registry as described in the initial version of the registry [RFC 4148]. However, areas for improvement of this registry have been identified, and the registry structure has to be revisited when there is working group consensus to do so. The current consensus is to designate the IPPM Metrics Registry, originally described in [RFC 4148], as Obsolete. The DESCRIPTION of the registry MIB has been modified as follows, and the first two sentences should be included on any IANA-maintained web page describing this registry or its contents: DESCRIPTION "With the approval and publication of RFC 6248, this module is designated Obsolete. The registry will no longer be updated, and the current contents will be maintained as-is on the day that RFC 6248 was published. The original Description text follows below: This module defines a registry for IP Performance Metrics. ... " 5. Acknowledgements Henk Uijterwaal suggested additional rationale for the recommendation in this memo. Morton Informational PAGE 4 top

RFC 6248 RFC 4148 is Obsolete April 2011 6. References 6.1. Normative References [RFC 4148] Stephan, E., "IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) Metrics Registry", BCP 108, RFC 4148, August 2005. 6.2. Informative References [RFC 2330] Paxson, V., Almes, G., Mahdavi, J., and M. Mathis, "Framework for IP Performance Metrics", RFC 2330, May 1998. [RFC 2679] Almes, G., Kalidindi, S., and M. Zekauskas, "A One-way Delay Metric for IPPM", RFC 2679, September 1999. [RFC 2680] Almes, G., Kalidindi, S., and M. Zekauskas, "A One-way Packet Loss Metric for IPPM", RFC 2680, September 1999. [RFC 3393] Demichelis, C. and P. Chimento, "IP Packet Delay Variation Metric for IP Performance Metrics (IPPM)", RFC 3393, November 2002. [RFC 3432] Raisanen, V., Grotefeld, G., and A. Morton, "Network performance measurement with periodic streams", RFC 3432, November 2002. [RFC 4737] Morton, A., Ciavattone, L., Ramachandran, G., Shalunov, S., and J. Perser, "Packet Reordering Metrics", RFC 4737, November 2006. [RFC 5560] Uijterwaal, H., "A One-Way Packet Duplication Metric", RFC 5560, May 2009. [RFC 5644] Stephan, E., Liang, L., and A. Morton, "IP Performance Metrics (IPPM): Spatial and Multicast", RFC 5644, October 2009. [RFC 6049] Morton, A. and E. Stephan, "Spatial Composition of Metrics", RFC 6049, January 2011. Morton Informational PAGE 5 top

RFC 6248 RFC 4148 is Obsolete April 2011 Author's Address Al Morton AT&T Labs 200 Laurel Avenue South Middletown, NJ 07748 USA Phone: +1 732 420 1571 Fax: +1 732 368 1192 EMail: acmorton@att.com URI: http://home.comcast.net/~acmacm/ Morton Informational PAGE 6 top

RFC 4148 and the IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) Registry of Metrics Are Obsolete RFC TOTAL SIZE: 10192 bytes PUBLICATION DATE: Thursday, April 14th, 2011 LEGAL RIGHTS: The IETF Trust (see BCP 78)


RFC-ARCHIVE.ORG

© RFC 6248: The IETF Trust, Thursday, April 14th, 2011
© the RFC Archive, 2024, RFC-Archive.org
Maintainer: J. Tunnissen

Privacy Statement