<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Yves Vanaubel</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Pascal Mérindol</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jean-Jacques Pansiot</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Benoit Donnet</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A Brief History of MPLS Usage in IPv6</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Passive and Active Measurement Conference (PAM)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">6PE tunnels</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">IPv6</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">LSE Stack</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">MPLS</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2016</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">03/2016</style></date></pub-dates></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Recent researches have stated the fast deployment of IPv6. It&amp;nbsp;has been demonstrated that IPv6 grows much faster, being so more and more&amp;nbsp;adopted by both Internet service providers but also by servers and end-hosts.&amp;nbsp;In parallel, researches have been conducted to discover and assess the usage of&amp;nbsp;MPLS tunnels. Indeed, recent developments in the ICMP protocol make certain&lt;br /&gt;categories of MPLS tunnels transparent to traceroute probing. However, these&amp;nbsp;studies focus only on IPv4, where MPLS is strongly deployed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In this paper, we provide a first look at how MPLS is used under IPv6&amp;nbsp;networks using traceroute data collected by CAIDA.&amp;nbsp;We have observed, at the first glance, that the MPLS deployment and usage seem to greatly differ between IPv4 and IPv6,&amp;nbsp;in particular in the way MPLS label stacks are used. While label stacks are not that frequent&amp;nbsp;in IPv4 (and mostly correspond to a VPN usage), they are prevalent in IPv6. &amp;nbsp;However, after a deeper look at the label stack typical content in IPv6, we understand that 2-label stack tunnels are mainly used for dual stack 6PE tunnels and ECMP load sharing purpose. &amp;nbsp;The technical deployment of such tunnels is really similar to VPN in practice but the objective is not the same (they are standard tunnels made with the IPv4 LDP for carrying IPv6 traffic).&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>47</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Korian Edeline</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Benoit Donnet</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Towards a Middlebox Policy Taxonomy: Path Impairments</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">International Workshop on Network Science for Communication Networks (NetSciCom)</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">classification</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">IPv6</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">middleboxes</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">path impairment</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">tracebox</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2015</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">04/2015</style></date></pub-dates></dates><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;Recent years have seen the rise of middleboxes, such as firewalls, NATs, proxies,&amp;nbsp;or Deep Packet Inspectors. Those middleboxes play an important role in today's&amp;nbsp;Internet, including enterprise networks and cellular networks. However, despite&amp;nbsp;their huge success in modern network architecture, they have a negative impact&amp;nbsp;on the Internet evolution as they can slow down the TCP protocol evolution and its&amp;nbsp;extensions. Making available a summary of the potential middlebox network&amp;nbsp;interferences is of the highest importance as it could allow researchers to&amp;nbsp;confront their new transport protocol to potential issues caused by middleboxes.&amp;nbsp;And, consequently, allowing again innovation in the Internet.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;This is exactly what we tackle in this paper. We propose a path impairment&amp;nbsp;oriented middlebox taxonomy that aims at categorizing the initial purpose of a&amp;nbsp;middlebox policy as well as its potential unexpected complications. Based on a&amp;nbsp;measurement campaign on IPv4 and IPv6 networks, we confront our taxonomy to the&amp;nbsp;real world. Our dataset is freely available.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record></records></xml>