RFC 7290: Test Plan and Results for Advancing RFC 2680 on the Standards Track
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This memo provides the supporting test plan and results to advance RFC 2680, a performance metric RFC defining one-way packet loss metrics, along the Standards Track. Observing that the metric definitions themselves should be the primary focus rather than the implementations of metrics, this memo describes the test procedures to evaluate specific metric requirement clauses to determine if the requirement has been interpreted and implemented as intended. Two completely independent implementations have been tested against the key specifications of RFC 2680.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC7290
- Published
- July 2014
- Authors
- L. Ciavattone; R. Geib; A. Morton; M. Wieser
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- ops
- Pages
- 31
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 6679Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) for RTP over UDPUpdated
August 2012
- RFC 8961Requirements for Time-Based Loss DetectionCurrent
November 2020
- RFC 4988Mobile IPv4 Fast HandoversCurrent
October 2007
- RFC 7289Carrier-Grade NAT (CGN) Deployment with BGP/MPLS IP VPNsCurrent
June 2014
- RFC 7286Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) Server DiscoveryCurrent
November 2014
- RFC 7285Application-Layer Traffic Optimization (ALTO) ProtocolUpdated
September 2014
- RFC 7278Extending an IPv6 /64 Prefix from a Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Mobile Interface to a LAN LinkCurrent
June 2014
- RFC 7277A YANG Data Model for IP ManagementObsoleted
June 2014
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?