Quality

RFC coverage by profile

Each use case Ze serves and each technology it implements, with the share of mandatory and optional RFC requirements a recorded test break proves. Release profiles come first: before release, every mandatory requirement of every RFC they require must be proven. Optional RFCs a use case lists are not counted.

All RFCs

Release profiles

ProfileMandatoryOptionalRFCsNot walkedMandatory register
FTTx edge: customers to the internet over L2TP, local DNS for the LAN 338 of 747 (45.2%)Ceiling: 529 of 747 (70.8%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 18 of 747 (2.4%); Met by a lower layer: 119 of 747 (15.9%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 81 of 747 (10.8%) 7 of 335 (2.1%)Ceiling: 335 of 335 (100.0%) 18 0 not complete
L2TP network server 253 of 458 (55.2%)Ceiling: 354 of 458 (77.3%); excluded: Met by a lower layer: 96 of 458 (21.0%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 8 of 458 (1.7%) 7 of 161 (4.3%)Ceiling: 161 of 161 (100.0%) 14 0 not complete
Looking glass 162 of 307 (52.8%)Ceiling: 298 of 307 (97.1%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 9 of 307 (2.9%) 5 of 93 (5.4%)Ceiling: 93 of 93 (100.0%) 16 0 not complete
Route collector 199 of 360 (55.3%)Ceiling: 341 of 360 (94.7%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 1 of 360 (0.3%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 18 of 360 (5.0%) 8 of 99 (8.1%)Ceiling: 99 of 99 (100.0%) 18 0 not complete
IXP route server 186 of 395 (47.1%)Ceiling: 358 of 395 (90.6%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 37 of 395 (9.4%) 17 of 221 (7.7%)Ceiling: 219 of 221 (99.1%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 2 of 221 (0.9%) 24 0 not complete
IPsec VPN endpoint 228 of 545 (41.8%)Ceiling: 457 of 545 (83.9%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 1 of 545 (0.2%); Met by a lower layer: 60 of 545 (11.0%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 27 of 545 (5.0%) 7 of 168 (4.2%)Ceiling: 168 of 168 (100.0%) 11 0 not complete

Other use-case profiles

ProfileMandatoryOptionalRFCsNot walkedMandatory register
DDoS detection and mitigation by sending FlowSpec upstream 179 of 343 (52.2%)Ceiling: 290 of 343 (84.5%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 11 of 343 (3.2%); Met by a lower layer: 1 of 343 (0.3%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 41 of 343 (12.0%) 16 of 124 (12.9%)Ceiling: 124 of 124 (100.0%) 13 0 not complete
IPsec VPN concentrator for remote-access clients 346 of 716 (48.3%)Ceiling: 623 of 716 (87.0%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 6 of 716 (0.8%); Met by a lower layer: 62 of 716 (8.7%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 25 of 716 (3.5%) 13 of 223 (5.8%)Ceiling: 223 of 223 (100.0%) 15 0 not complete

Technology aggregates

ProfileMandatoryOptionalRFCsNot walkedMandatory register
BFD 88 of 143 (61.5%)Ceiling: 138 of 143 (96.5%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 5 of 143 (3.5%) 12 of 69 (17.4%)Ceiling: 69 of 69 (100.0%) 5 0 not complete
BGP communities and policy 24 of 49 (49.0%)Ceiling: 41 of 49 (83.7%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 1 of 49 (2.0%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 7 of 49 (14.3%) 4 of 37 (10.8%)Ceiling: 37 of 37 (100.0%) 11 1 not complete
BGP core 193 of 347 (55.6%)Ceiling: 335 of 347 (96.5%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 1 of 347 (0.3%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 11 of 347 (3.2%) 8 of 114 (7.0%)Ceiling: 114 of 114 (100.0%) 21 0 not complete
BGP FlowSpec 26 of 49 (53.1%)Ceiling: 47 of 49 (95.9%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 2 of 49 (4.1%) 6 of 32 (18.8%)Ceiling: 32 of 32 (100.0%) 4 0 not complete
BGP-LS 82 of 125 (65.6%)Ceiling: 109 of 125 (87.2%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 16 of 125 (12.8%) 4 of 73 (5.5%)Ceiling: 73 of 73 (100.0%) 6 0 not complete
BGP monitoring 36 of 83 (43.4%)Ceiling: 82 of 83 (98.8%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 1 of 83 (1.2%) 3 of 15 (20.0%)Ceiling: 15 of 15 (100.0%) 4 0 not complete
BGP session operations 38 of 76 (50.0%)Ceiling: 73 of 76 (96.1%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 3 of 76 (3.9%) 4 of 122 (3.3%)Ceiling: 122 of 122 (100.0%) 13 3 not complete
BGP segment routing and tunnels 89 of 244 (36.5%)Ceiling: 210 of 244 (86.1%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 34 of 244 (13.9%) 3 of 136 (2.2%)Ceiling: 136 of 136 (100.0%) 5 0 not complete
BGP transport security 12 of 12 (100.0%)Ceiling: 12 of 12 (100.0%) 1 of 7 (14.3%)Ceiling: 7 of 7 (100.0%) 3 1 not complete
BGP VPN and EVPN 31 of 202 (15.3%)Ceiling: 70 of 202 (34.7%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 2 of 202 (1.0%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 130 of 202 (64.4%) 1 of 54 (1.9%)Ceiling: 54 of 54 (100.0%) 9 2 not complete
DHCP and provisioning 159 of 473 (33.6%)Ceiling: 263 of 473 (55.6%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 17 of 473 (3.6%); Met by a lower layer: 105 of 473 (22.2%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 88 of 473 (18.6%) 2 of 220 (0.9%)Ceiling: 220 of 220 (100.0%) 13 0 not complete
DNS 34 of 299 (11.4%)Ceiling: 149 of 299 (49.8%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 1 of 299 (0.3%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 149 of 299 (49.8%) 1 of 211 (0.5%)Ceiling: 211 of 211 (100.0%) 11 0 not complete
Drafts and non-RFC standards 74 of 121 (61.2%)Ceiling: 117 of 121 (96.7%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 1 of 121 (0.8%); Met by a lower layer: 1 of 121 (0.8%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 2 of 121 (1.7%) 6 of 61 (9.8%)Ceiling: 61 of 61 (100.0%) 8 0 not complete
EAP 119 of 172 (69.2%)Ceiling: 159 of 172 (92.4%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 5 of 172 (2.9%); Met by a lower layer: 2 of 172 (1.2%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 6 of 172 (3.5%) 6 of 59 (10.2%)Ceiling: 59 of 59 (100.0%) 6 1 not complete
First-hop redundancy 96 of 166 (57.8%)Ceiling: 152 of 166 (91.6%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 2 of 166 (1.2%); Met by a lower layer: 3 of 166 (1.8%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 9 of 166 (5.4%) 1 of 65 (1.5%)Ceiling: 64 of 65 (98.5%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 1 of 65 (1.5%) 3 0 not complete
Flow telemetry 17 of 70 (24.3%)Ceiling: 33 of 70 (47.1%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 10 of 70 (14.3%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 27 of 70 (38.6%) 0 of 19 (0.0%)Ceiling: 19 of 19 (100.0%) 3 0 not complete
IKEv2 and IPsec 240 of 703 (34.1%)Ceiling: 593 of 703 (84.4%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 2 of 703 (0.3%); Met by a lower layer: 81 of 703 (11.5%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 27 of 703 (3.8%) 9 of 265 (3.4%)Ceiling: 265 of 265 (100.0%) 21 0 not complete
IS-IS 60 of 125 (48.0%)Ceiling: 102 of 125 (81.6%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 23 of 125 (18.4%) 1 of 36 (2.8%)Ceiling: 36 of 36 (100.0%) 11 1 not complete
Management 37 of 99 (37.4%)Ceiling: 94 of 99 (94.9%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 5 of 99 (5.1%) no rowsCeiling: no rows 2 0 not complete
MPLS 120 of 319 (37.6%)Ceiling: 292 of 319 (91.5%); excluded: Met by a lower layer: 3 of 319 (0.9%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 24 of 319 (7.5%) 6 of 59 (10.2%)Ceiling: 59 of 59 (100.0%) 10 0 not complete
OAuth for management 18 of 59 (30.5%)Ceiling: 29 of 59 (49.2%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 11 of 59 (18.6%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 19 of 59 (32.2%) 2 of 13 (15.4%)Ceiling: 10 of 13 (76.9%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 1 of 13 (7.7%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 2 of 13 (15.4%) 3 0 not complete
OSPF 151 of 409 (36.9%)Ceiling: 330 of 409 (80.7%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 1 of 409 (0.2%); Met by a lower layer: 6 of 409 (1.5%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 72 of 409 (17.6%) 10 of 242 (4.1%)Ceiling: 224 of 242 (92.6%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 18 of 242 (7.4%) 23 3 not complete
PPP access 179 of 296 (60.5%)Ceiling: 286 of 296 (96.6%); excluded: Met by a lower layer: 2 of 296 (0.7%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 8 of 296 (2.7%) 4 of 97 (4.1%)Ceiling: 97 of 97 (100.0%) 11 0 not complete
Network primitives 16 of 51 (31.4%)Ceiling: 36 of 51 (70.6%); excluded: Met by a lower layer: 12 of 51 (23.5%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 3 of 51 (5.9%) 0 of 34 (0.0%)Ceiling: 34 of 34 (100.0%) 6 0 not complete
RADIUS and TACACS+ 120 of 202 (59.4%)Ceiling: 194 of 202 (96.0%); excluded: Optional feature not offered (classification can be revisited): 6 of 202 (3.0%); Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 2 of 202 (1.0%) 3 of 105 (2.9%)Ceiling: 105 of 105 (100.0%) 11 0 not complete
Route archival 11 of 23 (47.8%)Ceiling: 14 of 23 (60.9%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 9 of 23 (39.1%) 0 of 13 (0.0%)Ceiling: 13 of 13 (100.0%) 3 0 not complete
RPKI 18 of 142 (12.7%)Ceiling: 71 of 142 (50.0%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 71 of 142 (50.0%) 6 of 80 (7.5%)Ceiling: 78 of 80 (97.5%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 2 of 80 (2.5%) 9 1 not complete
Tunnels 2 of 61 (3.3%)Ceiling: 2 of 61 (3.3%); excluded: Not applicable (classification can be revisited): 59 of 61 (96.7%) 0 of 64 (0.0%)Ceiling: 64 of 64 (100.0%) 5 0 not complete