[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 RFC 6248

Network Working Group                                          A. Morton
Internet-Draft                                                 AT&T Labs
Intended status: Standards Track                        October 25, 2010
Expires: April 28, 2011


          RFC 4148 and the IPPM Metrics Registry are Obsolete
                 draft-morton-ippm-rfc4148-obsolete-02

Abstract

   This memo recommends that RFC 4148, the IP Performance Metrics (IPPM)
   Registry be reclassified as Historic, and the IANA IPPM Metrics
   Registry itself be withdrawn from use.  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 has responded to the third quarter of 2010
   call for interest in the RFC 4148 registry.

Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].


Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 28, 2011.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.




Morton                   Expires April 28, 2011                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft            RFC 4148 is Obsolete              October 2010


   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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   2.  Recommendation to Reclassify RFC 4148 and Withdraw the
       corresponding IANA registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   3.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   4.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   5.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
   6.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     6.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
     6.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5




























Morton                   Expires April 28, 2011                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft            RFC 4148 is Obsolete              October 2010


1.  Introduction

   The IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) framework [RFC2330] describes
   several ways to record options and metric parameter settings, in
   order to account for sources of measurement variability.  For
   example, Section 13 of[RFC2330] 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 Metric Registry [RFC4148] was designed, the variability
   of the Type P notion, and the variability possible with the many
   metric parameters (see Section 4.1 of [RFC2679] ) was not fully
   appreciated.  Further, some of the early metric definitions only
   indicate Poisson streams [RFC2330] (see the metrics in [RFC2679],
   [RFC2680], and [RFC3393]), but later work standardized the methods
   for Periodic Stream measurements [RFC3432], adding to the variability
   possible when characterizing a metric exactly.

   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 Metric Registry.

   The IPPM Metrics Registry is believed to have very few, if any users.
   Evidence of this provided by the fact that one registry entry was
   syntactically incorrect for months after [RFC5644] was published.
   The text ":=" was used for the metrics in that document instead of
   "::=".  It took eight months before someone complained 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
   [draft-stephan-ippm-registry-ext-00, work in progress].

   Despite apparent efforts to find current or even future users, no one
   has responded to the third quarter of 2010 call for interest in the
   RFC 4148 registry.  Therefore, the IETF could now declare the
   registry Historic without any further reservations.

   When a registry is declared Historic, it simply prevents 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.


2.  Recommendation to Reclassify RFC 4148 and Withdraw the corresponding
    IANA registry

   Due to the ambiguities between the current metrics registrations and



Morton                   Expires April 28, 2011                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft            RFC 4148 is Obsolete              October 2010


   the metrics used, and the apparent minimal adoption of the registry
   in practice, this memo RECOMMENDS that:

   o  the IETF reclassify [RFC4148] as Historic

   o  the IANA withdraw the current IPPM Metrics Registry

   It is assumed that parties who wish to establish a replacement
   registry function will work to specify such a registry.


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 IETF are typically registered in the IANA IPPM
   METRICS REGISTRY as described in initial version of the registry
   [RFC4148].  However, areas for improvement of this registry have been
   identified, and the registry structure has to be revisited when there
   is consensus to do so.

   The current consensus is to withdraw the IPPM Metrics Registry, as
   originally described in [RFC4148].


5.  Acknowledgements

   Henk Uijterwaal suggested additional rationale for the recommendation
   in this memo.


6.  References

6.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC2330]  Paxson, V., Almes, G., Mahdavi, J., and M. Mathis,
              "Framework for IP Performance Metrics", RFC 2330,
              May 1998.




Morton                   Expires April 28, 2011                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft            RFC 4148 is Obsolete              October 2010


   [RFC2679]  Almes, G., Kalidindi, S., and M. Zekauskas, "A One-way
              Delay Metric for IPPM", RFC 2679, September 1999.

   [RFC2680]  Almes, G., Kalidindi, S., and M. Zekauskas, "A One-way
              Packet Loss Metric for IPPM", RFC 2680, September 1999.

   [RFC3393]  Demichelis, C. and P. Chimento, "IP Packet Delay Variation
              Metric for IP Performance Metrics (IPPM)", RFC 3393,
              November 2002.

   [RFC3432]  Raisanen, V., Grotefeld, G., and A. Morton, "Network
              performance measurement with periodic streams", RFC 3432,
              November 2002.

   [RFC4148]  Stephan, E., "IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) Metrics
              Registry", BCP 108, RFC 4148, August 2005.

   [RFC5644]  Stephan, E., Liang, L., and A. Morton, "IP Performance
              Metrics (IPPM): Spatial and Multicast", RFC 5644,
              October 2009.

6.2.  Informative References

   [....]     "None",   .


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                   Expires April 28, 2011                 [Page 5]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.108, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/