liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Hypothesis-based Comparison of IPv6 and IPv4 Path Distances
Linköping University, Department of Computer and Information Science, Database and information techniques. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7631-0625
Linköping University, Department of Computer and Information Science, Database and information techniques. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering. Technische Universitat Munchen, Germany.
Linköping University, Department of Computer and Information Science, Database and information techniques. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering.
Linköping University, Department of Computer and Information Science, Database and information techniques. Linköping University, Faculty of Science & Engineering.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1367-1594
2020 (English)In: Symposium on Modelling, Analysis, and Simulation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems (MASCOTS), Springer, 2020Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Short end-to-end path lengths and faster round-trip times (RTTs) are important for good client performance. While prior measurement studies related to IPv6 primarily focus on various adoption aspects, much less work have focused on performance metrics such as these. In this paper, we compare the relative end-to-end path distances and RTTs when using IPv6 and IPv4 between PlanetLab nodes in Europe and different subsets of popular domains. In addition to providing access to multiple measurement nodes, the use of PlanetLab also provides a use-case driven report of running IPv6 experiments on this previously prosperous experimental platform for academic research. In particular, the study provides a first report on performing IPv6 experiments on PlanetLab, highlights the lack of IP support among PlanetLab nodes and limitations of state-of-the-art traceroute tools used for IPv6 measurements, and provides a statistical methodology that uses hypothesis testing to derive insights while accounting for such testbed and traceroute shortcomings. Our performance analysis shows (among other things) that the relative RTTs of the IPv6 paths are currently faster than the corresponding IPv4 paths, and that the fraction of pairings for which this is the case is quickly increasing across a wide range of domain popularities and domain categories. These findings suggest that there is incentive to use IPv6, which may impact the rate of further IPv6 deployment. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer, 2020.
Keywords [en]
IPv4 vs IPv6, Path distances, Traceroute, PlanetLab
National Category
Computer Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-179793DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-68110-4_13Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85101833743ISBN: 9783030681098 (print)ISBN: 9783030681104 (electronic)OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-179793DiVA, id: diva2:1599786
Conference
28th International Symposium, MASCOTS 2020, Nice, France, November 17–19, 2020
Funder
Swedish Research CouncilAvailable from: 2021-10-01 Created: 2021-10-01 Last updated: 2023-04-03Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records

Hasselquist, DavidCarlsson, Niklas

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hasselquist, DavidWahl, ChristianBergdal, OttoCarlsson, Niklas
By organisation
Database and information techniquesFaculty of Science & Engineering
Computer Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
isbn
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
isbn
urn-nbn
Total: 36 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf