Movatterモバイル変換

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                        M. BagnuloRequest for Comments: 7398                                          UC3MCategory: Informational                                     T. BurbridgeISSN: 2070-1721                                                       BT                                                             S. Crawford                                                                SamKnows                                                              P. Eardley                                                                      BT                                                               A. Morton                                                               AT&T Labs                                                           February 2015A Reference Path and Measurement Points forLarge-Scale Measurement of Broadband PerformanceAbstract   This document defines a reference path for Large-scale Measurement of   Broadband Access Performance (LMAP) and measurement points for   commonly used performance metrics.  Other similar measurement   projects may also be able to use the extensions described here for   measurement point location.  The purpose is to create an efficient   way to describe the location of the measurement point(s) used to   conduct a particular measurement.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; seeSection 2 of RFC 5741.   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained athttp://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7398.Bagnulo, et al.               Informational                     [Page 1]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 2015Copyright Notice   Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the   document authors.  All rights reserved.   This document is subject toBCP 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 Contents1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .31.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42.  Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43.  Terms and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43.1.  Reference Path  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43.2.  Subscriber  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53.3.  Dedicated Component (Links or Nodes)  . . . . . . . . . .53.4.  Shared Component (Links or Nodes) . . . . . . . . . . . .53.5.  Resource Transition Point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53.6.  Service Demarcation Point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53.7.  Managed and Unmanaged Sub-paths . . . . . . . . . . . . .64.  Reference Path  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .65.  Measurement Points  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76.  Examples of Reference Paths with Various Technologies . . . .117.  Example of Reference Path with Resource Transition  . . . . .138.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .149.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .159.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .159.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16   Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17Bagnulo, et al.               Informational                     [Page 2]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 20151.  Introduction   This document defines a reference path for Large-scale Measurement of   Broadband Access Performance (LMAP) or similar measurement projects.   The series of IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) RFCs have developed terms   that are generally useful for path description (seeSection 5 of   [RFC2330]).  There are a limited number of additional terms defined   in this memo.   The reference path (seeSection 3.1 and Figure 1 of [Y.1541],   including the accompanying discussion) is usually needed when   attempting to communicate precisely about the components that   comprise the path, and is often expressed in terms of their number   (hops) and geographic location.  This memo takes the path definition   further by establishing a set of measurement points along the path   and ascribing a unique designation to each point.  This topic has   been previously developed inSection 5.1 of [RFC3432] and as part of   the updated framework for composition and aggregation inSection 4 of   [RFC5835].Section 4.1 of [RFC5835] defines the term "measurement   point".   Measurement points and the paths they inhabit are often described in   general terms, like "end-to-end", "user-to-user", or "access".  These   terms alone are insufficient for the scientific method, since we need   to clarify issues such as: What is an end?  Where is a user located?   Is the home network included?   As an illustrative example, consider a measurement agent in an LMAP   system.  When it reports its measurement results, rather than   detailing its IP address and that of its measurement peer, it may   prefer to describe the measured path segment abstractly (perhaps for   privacy reasons), e.g., 'from a measurement agent at a home gateway   to a measurement peer at a DSLAM.'  This memo provides the definition   for such abstract 'measurement points' and, therefore, the portion of   'reference path' between them.   The motivation for this memo is to provide an unambiguous framework   to describe measurement coverage or scope of the reference path.   This is an essential part of the metadata to describe measurement   results.  Measurements conducted over different path scopes are not a   valid basis for performance comparisons.  We note that additional   measurement context information may be necessary to support a valid   comparison of results.Bagnulo, et al.               Informational                     [Page 3]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 20151.1.  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 inRFC 2119 [RFC2119].2.  Purpose and Scope   The scope of this memo is to define a reference path for LMAP   activities with a sufficient level of detail to determine the   location of different measurement points along a path without   ambiguity.  These conventions are likely to be useful in other   measurement projects and to describe the applicable measurement scope   for some metrics.   The connection between the reference path and specific network   technologies (with differing underlying architectures) is within the   scope of this memo, and examples are provided.  Both wired and   wireless technologies are in scope.   The purpose is to create an efficient way to describe the location of   the measurement point(s) used to conduct a particular measurement so   that the measurement result will be adequately described in terms of   scope or coverage.  This should serve many measurement uses,   including:   o  diagnostic, where the same metric would be measured on different      sub-paths bounded by measurement points (seeSection 4.10 of      [RFC5835]), for example, to isolate the sub-path contributing the      majority of impairment levels observed on a path.   o  comparison, where the same metric may be measured on equivalent      portions of different network infrastructures, for example, to      compare the performance of wired and wireless home network      technologies.3.  Terms and Definitions   This section defines key terms and concepts for this memo.3.1.  Reference Path   A reference path is a serial combination of hosts, routers, switches,   links, radios, and processing elements that comprise all the network   elements traversed by each packet in a flow between the source and   destination hosts.  A reference path also indicates the various   boundaries present, such as administrative boundaries.  A reference   path is intended to be equally applicable to all IP and link-layerBagnulo, et al.               Informational                     [Page 4]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 2015   networking technologies.  Therefore, the components are generically   defined, but their functions should have a clear counterpart or be   obviously omitted in any network architecture.3.2.  Subscriber   A subscriber is an entity (associated with one or more users) that is   engaged in a subscription with a service provider.  The subscriber is   allowed to subscribe and unsubscribe to services and to register a   user or a list of users authorized to enjoy these services.  [Q.1741]   Both the subscriber and service provider are allowed to set the   limits relative to the use that associated users make of subscribed   services.3.3.  Dedicated Component (Links or Nodes)   All resources of a dedicated component (typically a link or node on   the reference path) are allocated to serving the traffic of an   individual subscriber.  Resources include transmission time-slots,   queue space, processing for encapsulation and address/port   translation, and others.  A dedicated component can affect the   performance of the reference path or the performance of any sub-path   where the component is involved.3.4.  Shared Component (Links or Nodes)   A component on the reference path is designated a "shared component"   when the traffic associated with multiple subscribers is served by   common resources.3.5.  Resource Transition Point   This is a point between dedicated and shared components on a   reference path that may be a point of significance and is identified   as a transition between two types of resources.3.6.  Service Demarcation Point   This is the point where a service managed by the service provider   begins (or ends) and varies by technology.  For example, this point   is usually defined as the Ethernet interface on a residential gateway   or modem where the scope of a packet transfer service begins and   ends.  In the case of a WiFi service, this would be an air interface   within the intended service boundary (e.g., walls of the coffee   shop).  The demarcation point may be within an integrated endpoint   using an air interface (e.g., Long-Term Evolution User Equipment (LTE   UE)).  Ownership does not necessarily affect the demarcation point; aBagnulo, et al.               Informational                     [Page 5]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 2015   subscriber may own all equipment on their premises, but it is likely   that the service provider will certify such equipment for connection   to their network or that a third-party will certify standards   compliance.3.7.  Managed and Unmanaged Sub-paths   Service providers are responsible for the portion of the path they   manage.  However, most paths involve a sub-path that is beyond the   management of the subscriber's service provider.  This means that   private networks, wireless networks using unlicensed frequencies, and   the networks of other service providers are designated as unmanaged   sub-paths.  The service demarcation point always divides managed and   unmanaged sub-paths.4.  Reference Path   This section defines a reference path for Internet communication.Subsc. -- Private -- Private -- Service-- Intra IP -- GRA -- Transit ...device     Net #1     Net #2    Demarc.    Access     GW     GRA GW... Transit -- GRA -- Service -- Private -- Private -- Destination    GRA GW     GW     Demarc.    Net #n     Net #n+1   Host                GRA = Globally Routable Address                 GW = Gateway                         Figure 1: Reference Path   The following are descriptions of reference path components that may   not be clear from their name alone.   o  Subsc.  (Subscriber) device - This is a host that normally      originates and terminates communications conducted over the IP      packet transfer service.   o  Private Net #x - This is a network of devices owned and operated      by the Internet service subscriber.  In some configurations, one      or more private networks and the device that provides the service      demarcation point are collapsed in a single device (ownership may      shift to the service provider); this should be noted as part of      the path description.Bagnulo, et al.               Informational                     [Page 6]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 2015   o  Intra IP Access - This is the first point in the access      architecture, beyond the service demarcation, where a globally      routable IP address is exposed and used for routing.  In      architectures that use tunneling, this point may be equivalent to      the Globally Routable Address Gateway (GRA GW).  This point could      also collapse to the device providing the service demarcation, in      principle.  Only one Intra IP Access point is shown, but they can      be identified in any access network.   o  GRA GW - This is the point of interconnection between a service      provider's administrative domain and the rest of the Internet,      where routing will depend on the GRAs in the IP header.   o  Transit GRA GW - If one or more networks intervene between the      service provider's access networks of the subscriber and of the      destination host, then such networks are designated "transit" and      are bounded by two transit GRA GWs.   Use of multiple IP address families in the measurement path must be   noted, as the conversions between IPv4 and IPv6 certainly influence   the visibility of a GRA for each family.   In the case that a private address space is used throughout an access   architecture, then the Intra IP Access points must use the same   address space as the service demarcation point, and the Intra IP   Access points must be selected such that a test between these points   produces a useful assessment of access performance (e.g., includes   both shared and dedicated access link infrastructure).5.  Measurement Points   A key aspect of measurement points, beyond the definition inSection 4.1 of [RFC5835], is that the innermost IP header and higher-   layer information must be accessible through some means.  This is   essential to measure IP metrics.  There may be tunnels and/or other   layers that encapsulate the innermost IP header, even adding another   IP header of their own.   In general, measurement points cannot always be located exactly where   desired.  However, the definition in [RFC5835] and the discussion inSection 5.1 of [RFC3432] indicate that allowances can be made; for   example, it is nearly ideal when there are deterministic errors that   can be quantified between desired and actual measurement points.Bagnulo, et al.               Informational                     [Page 7]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 2015   The figure below illustrates the assignment of measurement points to   selected components of the reference path.Subsc. -- Private -- Private -- Service-- Intra IP -- GRA -- Transit ...device     Net #1     Net #2    Demarc.    Access     GW     GRA GWmp000                            mp100      mp150    mp190    mp200... Transit -- GRA -- Service -- Private -- Private -- Destination    GRA GW     GW     Demarc.    Net #n     Net #n+1   Host    mpX90     mp890   mp800                            mp900                GRA = Globally Routable Address                 GW = Gateway       Figure 2: Reference Path with Measurement Point Designations   Each measurement point on a specific reference path MUST be assigned   a unique number.  To facilitate interpretation of the results, the   measuring organization (and whoever it shares results with) MUST have   an unambiguous understanding of what path or point was measured.  In   order to achieve this, a set of numbering recommendations follow.   When communicating the results of measurements, the measuring   organization SHOULD supply a diagram similar to Figure 2 (with the   technology-specific information in examples that follow) and MUST   supply it when additional measurement point numbers have been defined   and used (with sufficient detail to identify measurement locations in   the path).   Ideally, the consumer of measurement results would know the location   of a measurement point on the reference path from the measurement   point number alone; the recommendations below provide a way to   accomplish this goal.  Although the initial numbering may be fully   compliant with this system, changing circumstances could, over time,   lead to gaps in network numbers or non-monotonic measurement point   number assignments along the path.  Such circumstances could include   growth, consolidation, re-arrangement, and change of ownership of the   network.  These are examples of reasonable causes for numbering   deviations that must be identified on the reference path diagram, as   required above.   While the numbering of a measurement point is in the context of a   particular path, for simplicity, the measuring organization SHOULD   use the same numbering for a device (playing the same role) on all   the measurement paths through it.  Similarly, whilst the measurement   point numbering is in the context of a particular measuring   organization, organizations with similar technologies andBagnulo, et al.               Informational                     [Page 8]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 2015   architectures are encouraged to coordinate on local numbering and   diagrams.   The measurement point numbering system, mpXnn, has two independent   parts:   1.  The X in mpXnn indicates the network number.  The network with       the subscriber's device is network 0.  The network of a different       organization (administrative or ownership domains) SHOULD be       assigned a different number.  Each successive network number       SHOULD be one greater than the previous network's number.  Two       circumstances make it necessary to designate X=9 in the       destination host's network and X=8 for the service provider       network at the destination:       A.  The number of transit networks is unknown.       B.  The number of transit networks varies over time.   2.  The nn in mpXnn indicates the measurement point and is locally       assigned by network X.  The following conventions are suggested:       A.  00 SHOULD be used for a measurement point at the subscriber's           device and at the service demarcation point or GW nearest to           the subscriber's device for transit networks.       B.  90 SHOULD be used for a measurement point at the GW of a           network (opposite from the subscriber's device or service           demarcation).       C.  In most networks, measurement point numbers SHOULD           monotonically increase from the point nearest the           subscriber's device to the opposite network boundary on the           path (but see item D for an exception).       D.  When a destination host is part of the path, 00 SHOULD be           used for a measurement point at the destination host and at           the destination's service demarcation point.  Measurement           point numbers SHOULD monotonically increase from the point           nearest the destination's host to the opposite network           boundary on the path ONLY in these networks.  This           directional numbering reversal allows consistent 00           designation for end hosts and service demarcation.       E.  50 MAY be used for an intermediate measurement point of           significance, such as a Network Address Translator (NAT).Bagnulo, et al.               Informational                     [Page 9]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 2015       F.  20 MAY be used for a traffic aggregation point, such as a           Digital Subscriber Line Access Multiplexer (DSLAM) within a           network.       G.  Any other measurement points SHOULD be assigned unused           integers between 01 and 99.  The assignment SHOULD be stable           for at least the duration of a particular measurement study           and SHOULD avoid numbers that have been assigned to other           locations within network X (unless the assignment is           considered sufficiently stale).  Subnetworks or domains           within a network are useful locations for measurement points.   When supplying a diagram of the reference path and measurement   points, the operator of the measurement system MUST indicate the   reference path, the numbers (mpXnn) of the measurement points, and   the technology-specific definition of any measurement point other   than X00 and X90 with sufficient detail to clearly define its   location (similar to the technology-specific examples inSection 6 of   this document).   If the number of intermediate networks (between the source and   destination) is not known or is unstable, then this SHOULD be   indicated on the diagram, and results from measurement points within   those networks need to be treated with caution.   Notes:   o  The terminology "on-net" and "off-net" is sometimes used when      referring to the subscriber's Internet Service Provider (ISP)      measurement coverage.  With respect to the reference path, tests      between mp100 and mp190 are "on-net".   o  Widely deployed broadband Internet access measurements have used      pass-through devices [SK] (at the subscriber's location) directly      connected to the service demarcation point; this would be located      at mp100.   o  The networking technology must be indicated for the measurement      points used, especially the interface standard and configured      speed (because the measurement connectivity itself can be a      limiting factor for the results).Bagnulo, et al.               Informational                    [Page 10]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 2015   o  If it can be shown that a link connecting to a measurement point      has reliably deterministic performance or negligible impairments,      then the remote end of the connecting link is an equivalent point      for some methods of measurement (although those methods should      describe this possibility in detail, it is not in scope to provide      such methods here).  In any case, the presence of a link and      claimed equivalent measurement point must be reported.   o  Some access network architectures may have an additional traffic      aggregation device between mp100 and mp150.  Use of a measurement      point at this location would require a local number and diagram.   o  A Carrier Grade NAT (CGN) deployed in the service provider's      access network would be positioned between mp100 and mp190, and      the egress side of the CGN may be designated mp150.  mp150 is      generally an intermediate measurement point in the same address      space as mp190.   o  In the case that private address space is used in an access      architecture, mp100 may need to use the same address space as its      "on-net" measurement point counterpart so that a test between      these points produces a useful assessment of network performance.      Tests between mp000 and mp100 could use a different private      address space, and when the globally routable side of a CGN is at      mp150, the private address side of the CGN could be designated      mp149 for tests with mp100.   o  Measurement points at transit GRA GWs are numbered mpX00 and      mpX90, where X is the lowest positive integer not already used in      the path.  The GW of the first transit network is shown with point      mp200 and the last transit network GW with mpX90.6.  Examples of Reference Paths with Various Technologies   This section and those that follow are intended to provide example   mappings between particular network technologies and the reference   path.Bagnulo, et al.               Informational                    [Page 11]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 2015   We provide an example for 3G cellular access below.   Subscriber -- Private ---  Service ------------- GRA --- Transit ...   device         Net #1      Demarc.                GW     GRA GW   mp000                       mp100                mp190    mp200   |_____________UE______________|___RAN+Core____|___GGSN__|   |_____Unmanaged sub-path_____|____Managed sub-path_____|      GRA = Globally Routable Address       GW = Gateway       UE = User Equipment      RAN = Radio Access Network     GGSN = Gateway General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) Support Node        Figure 3: Example of Reference Path with 3G Cellular Access   Next, we provide an example of DSL access.  Consider the case where:   o  The Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) has a NAT device that is      configured with a public IP address.   o  The CPE consists of a wired residential GW and modem internally      connected (via Private Net #2) to an embedded home router and WiFi      access point (Private Net #1).  All subscriber devices (UE) attach      to the CPE through the WiFi access. mp100 is on the modem side of      Private Net #2.   We believe this is a fairly common configuration in some parts of the   world and is fairly simple as well.   This case would map into the defined reference measurement points as   follows:Subsc. -- Private -- Private -- Service-- Intra IP -- GRA -- Transit ...device     Net #1     Net #2    Demarc.    Access     GW     GRA GWmp000                            mp100      mp150    mp190    mp200|--UE--|------------CPE/NAT--------|------|-BRAS-|------|                                   |------DSL Network---||________Unmanaged sub-path________|__Managed sub-path__|                GRA = Globally Routable Address                 GW = Gateway               BRAS = Broadband Remote Access Server            Figure 4: Example of Reference Path with DSL AccessBagnulo, et al.               Informational                    [Page 12]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 2015   Consider another access network case where:   o  The CPE is a NAT device that is configured with a private IP      address.   o  There is a CGN located deep in the access ISP network.   o  The CPE is a home router that has also an incorporated a WiFi      access point and this is the only networking device in the home      network, all endpoints attach directly to the CPE through the WiFi      access.   We believe this is becoming a fairly common configuration in some   parts of the world.   This case would map into the defined reference measurement points as   follows:Subsc. -- Private ------------- Service-- Intra IP -- GRA -- Transit ...device     Net #1               Demarc.    Access     GW     GRA GWmp000                            mp100      mp150    mp190    mp200|--UE--|------------CPE/NAT--------|------|-CGN-|------|                                   |--Access Network---||________Unmanaged sub-path________|_Managed sub-path__|                GRA = Globally Routable Address                 GW = Gateway                CGN = Carrier Grade NAT               Figure 5: Example of Reference Path with CGN7.  Example of Reference Path with Resource Transition   This section gives an example of shared and dedicated portions with   the reference path.  This example shows two resource transition   points.   Consider the case where:   o  The CPE consists of a wired residential GW and modem (Private Net      #2) connected to a WiFi access point (Private Net #1).  The      subscriber device (UE) attaches to the CPE through the WiFi      access.   o  The WiFi subnetwork (Private Net #1) shares unlicensed radio      channel resources with other WiFi access networks (and potentially      other sources of interference); thus, this is a shared portion of      the path.Bagnulo, et al.               Informational                    [Page 13]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 2015   o  The wired subnetwork (Private Net #2) and a portion of the service      provider's network are dedicated resources (for a single      subscriber); thus, there is a resource transition point between      Private Net #1 and Private Net #2.   o  Subscriber traffic shares common resources with other subscribers      upon reaching the CGN; thus, there is a resource transition point      and further network components are designated as shared resources.   We believe this is a fairly common configuration in parts of the   world.   This case would map into the defined reference measurement points as   follows:Subsc. -- Private -- Private -- Access -- Intra IP -- GRA -- Transit ...device     Net #1     Net #2    Demarc.    Access     GW     GRA GWmp000                            mp100      mp150    mp190    mp200|--UE--|------------CPE/NAT--------|------|-CGN-|------|       |   WiFi   |  1000Base-T    |--Access Network---|       |-Shared--|RT|------Dedicated------| RT  |-----Shared------...|_______Unmanaged sub-path________|_Managed sub-path__|                GRA = Globally Routable Address                 GW = Gateway                 RT = Resource Transition Point     Figure 6: Example of Reference Path with Two Reference Transition                                  Points8.  Security Considerations   Specification of a reference path and identification of measurement   points on the path represent agreements among interested parties.   They present no threat to the implementors of this memo, or to the   Internet resulting from implementation of the guidelines provided   here.   Attacks at end hosts or identified measurement points are possible.   However, there is no requirement to include IP addresses of hosts or   other network devices in a reference path with measurement points   that is compliant with this memo.  As a result, the path diagrams   with measurement point designation numbers do not aid such attacks.   Most network operators' diagrams of reference paths will bear a close   resemblance to similar diagrams in relevant standards or other   publicly available documents.  However, when an operator must includeBagnulo, et al.               Informational                    [Page 14]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 2015   atypical network details in their diagram, e.g., to explain why a   longer latency measurement is expected, then the diagram reveals some   topological details and should be marked as confidential and shared   with others under a specific agreement.   When considering privacy of those involved in measurement or those   whose traffic is measured, there may be sensitive information   communicated to recipients of the network diagrams illustrating paths   and measurement points described above.  We refer the reader to the   privacy considerations described in the Large Scale Measurement of   Broadband Performance (LMAP) Framework [LMAP-FRAMEWORK], which covers   active and passive measurement techniques and supporting material on   measurement context.  For example, the value of sensitive information   can be further diluted by summarizing measurement results over many   individuals or areas served by the provider.  There is an opportunity   enabled by forming anonymity sets described in [RFC6973] based on the   reference path and measurement points in this memo.  For example, all   measurements from the subscriber device can be identified as "mp000",   instead of using the IP address or other device information.  The   same anonymization applies to the Internet service provider, where   their Internet gateway would be referred to as "mp190".9.  References9.1.  Normative References   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate              Requirement Levels",BCP 14,RFC 2119, March 1997,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.   [RFC2330]  Paxson, V., Almes, G., Mahdavi, J., and M. Mathis,              "Framework for IP Performance Metrics",RFC 2330, May              1998, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2330>.   [RFC3432]  Raisanen, V., Grotefeld, G., and A. Morton, "Network              performance measurement with periodic streams",RFC 3432,              November 2002, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3432>.   [RFC5835]  Morton, A. and S. Van den Berghe, "Framework for Metric              Composition",RFC 5835, April 2010,              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5835>.Bagnulo, et al.               Informational                    [Page 15]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 20159.2.  Informative References   [LMAP-FRAMEWORK]              Eardley, P., Morton, A., Bagnulo, M., Burbridge, T.,              Aitken, P., and A. Akhter, "A framework for large-scale              measurement platforms (LMAP)", Work in Progress,draft-ietf-lmap-framework-10, January 2015.   [Q.1741]   International Telecommunications Union, "IMT-2000              references to Release 9 of GSM-evolved UMTS core network",              ITU-T Recommendation Q.1741.7, November 2011,              <http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-Q.1741.7/en>.   [RFC6973]  Cooper, A., Tschofenig, H., Aboba, B., Peterson, J.,              Morris, J., Hansen, M., and R. Smith, "Privacy              Considerations for Internet Protocols",RFC 6973, July              2013, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6973>.   [SK]       Crawford, S., "Test Methodology White Paper", SamKnows              Whitebox Briefing Note , July 2011,              <http://www.samknows.com/broadband/index.php>.   [Y.1541]   International Telecommunications Union, "Network              performance objectives for IP-based services", ITU-T              Recommendation Y.1541, November 2011,              <http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-Y.1541/en>.Acknowledgments   Thanks to Matt Mathis, Charles Cook, Dan Romascanu, Lingli Deng, and   Spencer Dawkins for review and comments.Bagnulo, et al.               Informational                    [Page 16]

RFC 7398                   LMAP Reference Path             February 2015Authors' Addresses   Marcelo Bagnulo   Universidad Carlos III de Madrid   Av. Universidad 30   Leganes, Madrid  28911   Spain   Phone: 34 91 6249500   EMail: marcelo@it.uc3m.es   URI:http://www.it.uc3m.es   Trevor Burbridge   BT   Adastral Park, Martlesham Heath   Ipswich   United Kingdom   EMail: trevor.burbridge@bt.com   Sam Crawford   SamKnows   EMail: sam@samknows.com   Philip Eardley   BT   Adastral Park, Martlesham Heath   Ipswich   United Kingdom   EMail: philip.eardley@bt.com   Al Morton   AT&T Labs   200 Laurel Avenue South   Middletown, NJ   United States   EMail: acmorton@att.comBagnulo, et al.               Informational                    [Page 17]