RFC 9533: One-Way and Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol Extensions for Performance Measurement on a Link Aggregation Group
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document defines extensions to the One-Way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP) and the Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP) to implement performance measurement on every member link of a Link Aggregation Group (LAG). Knowing the measured metrics of each member link of a LAG enables operators to enforce the performance-based traffic steering policy across the member links.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC9533
- Published
- January 2024
- Authors
- Z. Li; T. Zhou; J. Guo; G. Mirsky; R. Gandhi
- Status
- PROPOSED STANDARD
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- ops
- Pages
- 13
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 9534Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol Extensions for Performance Measurement on a Link Aggregation GroupCurrent
January 2024
- RFC 8545Well-Known Port Assignments for the One-Way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP) and the Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)Current
March 2019
- RFC 9544Precision Availability Metrics (PAMs) for Services Governed by Service Level Objectives (SLOs)Current
March 2024
- RFC 8972Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol Optional ExtensionsCurrent
January 2021
- RFC 8186Support of the IEEE 1588 Timestamp Format in a Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)Current
June 2017
- RFC 7750Differentiated Service Code Point and Explicit Congestion Notification Monitoring in the Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)Current
February 2016
- RFC 9545Path Segment Identifier in MPLS-Based Segment Routing NetworksCurrent
February 2024
- RFC 6777Label Switched Path (LSP) Data Path Delay Metrics in Generalized MPLS and MPLS Traffic Engineering (MPLS-TE) NetworksCurrent
November 2012
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?