RFC 6673: Round-Trip Packet Loss Metrics
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
Many user applications (and the transport protocols that make them possible) require two-way communications. To assess this capability, and to achieve test system simplicity, round-trip loss measurements are frequently conducted in practice. The Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol specified in RFC 5357 establishes a round-trip loss measurement capability for the Internet. However, there is currently no round-trip packet loss metric specified according to the RFC 2330 framework. This memo adds round-trip loss to the set of IP Performance Metrics (IPPM). [STANDARDS-TRACK]
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6673
- Published
- August 2012
- Authors
- A. Morton
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- ops
- Pages
- 14
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 6808Test Plan and Results Supporting Advancement of RFC 2679 on the Standards TrackCurrent
December 2012
- RFC 6049Spatial Composition of MetricsUpdated
January 2011
- RFC 7750Differentiated Service Code Point and Explicit Congestion Notification Monitoring in the Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)Current
February 2016
- RFC 7820UDP Checksum Complement in the One-Way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP) and Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)Current
March 2016
- RFC 8186Support of the IEEE 1588 Timestamp Format in a Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)Current
June 2017
- RFC 4737Packet Reordering MetricsUpdated
November 2006
- RFC 4608Source-Specific Protocol Independent Multicast in 232/8Current
August 2006
- RFC 8911Registry for Performance MetricsCurrent
November 2021
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?