RFC 5560: A One-Way Packet Duplication Metric
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
When a packet is sent from one host to the other, one normally expects that exactly one copy of the packet that was sent arrives at the destination. It is, however, possible that a packet is either lost or that multiple copies arrive. In earlier work, a metric for packet loss was defined. This metric quantifies the case where a packet that is sent does not arrive at its destination within a reasonable time. In this memo, a metric for another case is defined: a packet is sent, but multiple copies arrive. The document also discusses streams and methods to summarize the results of streams. [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC5560
- Published
- May 2009
- Authors
- H. Uijterwaal
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- ops
- Pages
- 14
- Also known as
- —
- Updated by:
- RFC 6248
Topics
Referenced by
One later RFC formally updates or obsoletes part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 3763One-way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP) RequirementsCurrent
April 2004
- RFC 7398A Reference Path and Measurement Points for Large-Scale Measurement of Broadband PerformanceCurrent
February 2015
- RFC 5539NETCONF over Transport Layer Security (TLS)Obsoleted
May 2009
- RFC 5610Exporting Type Information for IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Information ElementsCurrent
July 2009
- RFC 5618Mixed Security Mode for the Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)Current
August 2009
- RFC 5624Quality of Service Parameters for Usage with DiameterCurrent
August 2009
- RFC 5635Remote Triggered Black Hole Filtering with Unicast Reverse Path Forwarding (uRPF)Current
August 2009
- RFC 5481Packet Delay Variation Applicability StatementCurrent
March 2009
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?