diff options
| author | Thomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> | 2024-11-27 20:54:24 +0100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Thomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> | 2024-11-27 20:54:24 +0100 |
| commit | 4bfd864f10b68b71482b35c818559068ef8d5797 (patch) | |
| tree | e3989f47a7994642eb325063d46e8f08ffa681dc /doc/rfc/rfc2200.txt | |
| parent | ea76e11061bda059ae9f9ad130a9895cc85607db (diff) | |
doc: Add RFC documents
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc2200.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc2200.txt | 2187 |
1 files changed, 2187 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc2200.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc2200.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..17139a4 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc2200.txt @@ -0,0 +1,2187 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group Internet Architecture Board +Request for Comments: 2200 J. Postel, Editor +Obsoletes: 2000, 1920, 1880, 1800, 1780, June 1997 +1720, 1610, 1600, 1540, 1500, 1410, 1360, +1280, 1250, 1200, 1140, 1130, 1100, 1083 +STD: 1 +Category: Standards Track + + + INTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS + + +Status of this Memo + + This memo describes the state of standardization of protocols used in + the Internet as determined by the Internet Architecture Board (IAB). + This memo is an Internet Standard. Distribution of this memo is + unlimited. + +Table of Contents + + Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 + 1. The Standardization Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 + 2. The Request for Comments Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 3. Other Reference Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 3.1. Assigned Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 3.2. Gateway Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 3.3. Host Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 3.4. The MIL-STD Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 4. Explanation of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + 4.1. Definitions of Protocol State (Maturity Level) . . . . . . 8 + 4.1.1. Standard Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 4.1.2. Draft Standard Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 4.1.3. Proposed Standard Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 4.1.4. Experimental Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 4.1.5. Informational Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4.1.6. Historic Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4.2. Definitions of Protocol Status (Requirement Level) . . . 9 + 4.2.1. Required Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4.2.2. Recommended Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4.2.3. Elective Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4.2.4. Limited Use Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 4.2.5. Not Recommended Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 5. The Standards Track . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 5.1. The RFC Processing Decision Table . . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 5.2. The Standards Track Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 + 6. The Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 6.1. Recent Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 1] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + 6.1.1. New RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 + 6.1.2. Other Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 + 6.2. Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 + 6.3. Network-Specific Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . 20 + 6.4. Draft Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + 6.5. Proposed Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 + 6.6. Telnet Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 + 6.7. Experimental Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 + 6.8. Informational Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 + 6.9. Historic Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 + 6.10 Obsolete Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 + 7. Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 + 7.1. IAB, IETF, and IRTF Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 + 7.1.1. Internet Architecture Board (IAB) Contact . . . . . . 35 + 7.1.2. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Contact . . . . 36 + 7.1.3. Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) Contact . . . . . 37 + 7.2. Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Contact . . . 37 + 7.3. Request for Comments Editor Contact . . . . . . . . . . 38 + 7.4. Network Information Center Contact . . . . . . . . . . . 38 + 7.5. Sources for Requests for Comments . . . . . . . . . . . 39 + 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 + 9. Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 + +Introduction + + A discussion of the standardization process and the RFC document + series is presented first, followed by an explanation of the terms. + Sections 6.2 - 6.10 contain the lists of protocols in each stage of + standardization. Finally are pointers to references and contacts for + further information. + + This memo is intended to be issued approximately quarterly; please be + sure the copy you are reading is current. Current copies may be + obtained from the Network Information Center (INTERNIC) or from the + Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) (see the contact + information at the end of this memo). Do not use this edition after + 15-Oct-97. + + See Section 6.1 for a description of recent changes. In the official + lists in sections 6.2 - 6.10, an asterisk (*) next to a protocol + denotes that it is new to this document or has been moved from one + protocol level to another, or differs from the previous edition of + this document. + + + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 2] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +1. The Standardization Process + + The Internet Architecture Board maintains this list of documents that + define standards for the Internet protocol suite. See RFC-1601 for + the charter of the IAB and RFC-1160 for an explanation of the role + and organization of the IAB and its subsidiary groups, the Internet + Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the Internet Research Task Force + (IRTF). Each of these groups has a steering group called the IESG + and IRSG, respectively. The IETF develops these standards with the + goal of co-ordinating the evolution of the Internet protocols; this + co-ordination has become quite important as the Internet protocols + are increasingly in general commercial use. The definitive + description of the Internet standards process is found in RFC-1602. + + The majority of Internet protocol development and standardization + activity takes place in the working groups of the IETF. + + Protocols which are to become standards in the Internet go through a + series of states or maturity levels (proposed standard, draft + standard, and standard) involving increasing amounts of scrutiny and + testing. When a protocol completes this process it is assigned a STD + number (see RFC-1311). At each step, the Internet Engineering + Steering Group (IESG) of the IETF must make a recommendation for + advancement of the protocol. + + To allow time for the Internet community to consider and react to + standardization proposals, a minimum delay of 6 months before a + proposed standard can be advanced to a draft standard and 4 months + before a draft standard can be promoted to standard. + + It is general practice that no proposed standard can be promoted to + draft standard without at least two independent implementations (and + the recommendation of the IESG). Promotion from draft standard to + standard generally requires operational experience and demonstrated + interoperability of two or more implementations (and the + recommendation of the IESG). + + In cases where there is uncertainty as to the proper decision + concerning a protocol a special review committee may be appointed + consisting of experts from the IETF, IRTF and the IAB with the + purpose of recommending an explicit action. + + Advancement of a protocol to proposed standard is an important step + since it marks a protocol as a candidate for eventual standardization + (it puts the protocol "on the standards track"). Advancement to + draft standard is a major step which warns the community that, unless + major objections are raised or flaws are discovered, the protocol is + likely to be advanced to standard in six months. + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 3] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + Some protocols have been superseded by better ones or are otherwise + unused. Such protocols are still documented in this memorandum with + the designation "historic". + + Because it is useful to document the results of early protocol + research and development work, some of the RFCs document protocols + which are still in an experimental condition. The protocols are + designated "experimental" in this memorandum. They appear in this + report as a convenience to the community and not as evidence of their + standardization. + + Other protocols, such as those developed by other standards + organizations, or by particular vendors, may be of interest or may be + recommended for use in the Internet. The specifications of such + protocols may be published as RFCs for the convenience of the + Internet community. These protocols are labeled "informational" in + this memorandum. + + In addition to the working groups of the IETF, protocol development + and experimentation may take place as a result of the work of the + research groups of the Internet Research Task Force, or the work of + other individuals interested in Internet protocol development. The + the documentation of such experimental work in the RFC series is + encouraged, but none of this work is considered to be on the track + for standardization until the IESG has made a recommendation to + advance the protocol to the proposed standard state. + + A few protocols have achieved widespread implementation without the + approval of the IESG. For example, some vendor protocols have become + very important to the Internet community even though they have not + been recommended by the IESG. However, the IAB strongly recommends + that the standards process be used in the evolution of the protocol + suite to maximize interoperability (and to prevent incompatible + protocol requirements from arising). The use of the terms + "standard", "draft standard", and "proposed standard" are reserved in + any RFC or other publication of Internet protocols to only those + protocols which the IESG has approved. + + In addition to a state (like "Proposed Standard"), a protocol is also + assigned a status, or requirement level, in this document. The + possible requirement levels ("Required", "Recommended", "Elective", + "Limited Use", and "Not Recommended") are defined in Section 4.2. + When a protocol is on the standards track, that is in the proposed + standard, draft standard, or standard state (see Section 5), the + status shown in Section 6 is the current status. + + Few protocols are required to be implemented in all systems; this is + because there is such a variety of possible systems, for example, + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 4] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + gateways, routers, terminal servers, workstations, and multi-user + hosts. The requirement level shown in this document is only a one + word label, which may not be sufficient to characterize the + implementation requirements for a protocol in all situations. For + some protocols, this document contains an additional status paragraph + (an applicability statement). In addition, more detailed status + information may be contained in separate requirements documents (see + Section 3). + +2. The Request for Comments Documents + + The documents called Request for Comments (or RFCs) are the working + notes of the "Network Working Group", that is the Internet research + and development community. A document in this series may be on + essentially any topic related to computer communication, and may be + anything from a meeting report to the specification of a standard. + + Notice: + + All standards are published as RFCs, but not all RFCs specify + standards. + + Anyone can submit a document for publication as an RFC. Submissions + must be made via electronic mail to the RFC Editor (see the contact + information at the end of this memo, and see RFC 1543). + + While RFCs are not refereed publications, they do receive technical + review from the task forces, individual technical experts, or the RFC + Editor, as appropriate. + + The RFC series comprises a wide range of documents, ranging from + informational documents of general interests to specifications of + standard Internet protocols. In cases where submission is intended + to document a proposed standard, draft standard, or standard + protocol, the RFC Editor will publish the document only with the + approval of the IESG. For documents describing experimental work, + the RFC Editor will notify the IESG before publication, allowing for + the possibility of review by the relevant IETF working group or IRTF + research group and provide those comments to the author. See Section + 5.1 for more detail. + + Once a document is assigned an RFC number and published, that RFC is + never revised or re-issued with the same number. There is never a + question of having the most recent version of a particular RFC. + However, a protocol (such as File Transfer Protocol (FTP)) may be + improved and re-documented many times in several different RFCs. It + is important to verify that you have the most recent RFC on a + particular protocol. This "Internet Official Protocol Standards" + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 5] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + memo is the reference for determining the correct RFC for the current + specification of each protocol. + + The RFCs are available from the INTERNIC, and a number of other + sites. For more information about obtaining RFCs, see Sections 7.4 + and 7.5. + +3. Other Reference Documents + + There are three other reference documents of interest in checking the + current status of protocol specifications and standardization. These + are the Assigned Numbers, the Gateway Requirements, and the Host + Requirements. Note that these documents are revised and updated at + different times; in case of differences between these documents, the + most recent must prevail. + + Also, one should be aware of the MIL-STD publications on IP, TCP, + Telnet, FTP, and SMTP. These are described in Section 3.4. + +3.1. Assigned Numbers + + The "Assigned Numbers" document lists the assigned values of the + parameters used in the various protocols. For example, IP protocol + codes, TCP port numbers, Telnet Option Codes, ARP hardware types, and + Terminal Type names. Assigned Numbers was most recently issued as + RFC-1700. + +3.2. Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers + + This document reviews the specifications that apply to gateways and + supplies guidance and clarification for any ambiguities. + Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers is RFC-1812. + +3.3. Host Requirements + + This pair of documents reviews and updates the specifications that + apply to hosts, and it supplies guidance and clarification for any + ambiguities. Host Requirements was issued as RFC-1122 and RFC-1123. + +3.4. The MIL-STD Documents + + The DoD MIL-STD Internet specifications are out of date and have been + discontinued. The DoD's Joint Technical Architecture (JTA) lists the + current set of IETF STDs and RFCs that the DoD intends to use in all + new and upgraded Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and + Intelligence (C4I) acquisitions. A copy of the JTA can be obtained + from http://www-jta.itsi.disa.mil. + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 6] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +4. Explanation of Terms + + There are two independent categorization of protocols. The first is + the "maturity level" or STATE of standardization, one of "standard", + "draft standard", "proposed standard", "experimental", + "informational" or "historic". The second is the "requirement level" + or STATUS of this protocol, one of "required", "recommended", + "elective", "limited use", or "not recommended". + + The status or requirement level is difficult to portray in a one word + label. These status labels should be considered only as an + indication, and a further description, or applicability statement, + should be consulted. + + When a protocol is advanced to proposed standard or draft standard, + it is labeled with a current status. + + At any given time a protocol occupies a cell of the following matrix. + Protocols are likely to be in cells in about the following + proportions (indicated by the relative number of Xs). A new protocol + is most likely to start in the (proposed standard, elective) cell, or + the (experimental, limited use) cell. + + S T A T U S + Req Rec Ele Lim Not + +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ + Std | X | XXX | XXX | | | + S +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ + Draft | X | X | XXX | | | + T +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ + Prop | | X | XXX | | | + A +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ + Info | | | | | | + T +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ + Expr | | | | XXX | | + E +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ + Hist | | | | | XXX | + +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ + + What is a "system"? + + Some protocols are particular to hosts and some to gateways; a few + protocols are used in both. The definitions of the terms below + will refer to a "system" which is either a host or a gateway (or + both). It should be clear from the context of the particular + protocol which types of systems are intended. + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 7] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +4.1. Definitions of Protocol State + + Every protocol listed in this document is assigned to a "maturity + level" or STATE of standardization: "standard", "draft standard", + "proposed standard", "experimental", or "historic". + + 4.1.1. Standard Protocol + + The IESG has established this as an official standard protocol for + the Internet. These protocols are assigned STD numbers (see RFC- + 1311). These are separated into two groups: (1) IP protocol and + above, protocols that apply to the whole Internet; and (2) + network-specific protocols, generally specifications of how to do + IP on particular types of networks. + + 4.1.2. Draft Standard Protocol + + The IESG is actively considering this protocol as a possible + Standard Protocol. Substantial and widespread testing and comment + are desired. Comments and test results should be submitted to the + IESG. There is a possibility that changes will be made in a Draft + Standard Protocol before it becomes a Standard Protocol. + + 4.1.3. Proposed Standard Protocol + + These are protocol proposals that may be considered by the IESG + for standardization in the future. Implementation and testing by + several groups is desirable. Revision of the protocol + specification is likely. + + 4.1.4. Experimental Protocol + + A system should not implement an experimental protocol unless it + is participating in the experiment and has coordinated its use of + the protocol with the developer of the protocol. + + Typically, experimental protocols are those that are developed as + part of an ongoing research project not related to an operational + service offering. While they may be proposed as a service + protocol at a later stage, and thus become proposed standard, + draft standard, and then standard protocols, the designation of a + protocol as experimental may sometimes be meant to suggest that + the protocol, although perhaps mature, is not intended for + operational use. + + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 8] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + 4.1.5. Informational Protocol + + Protocols developed by other standard organizations, or vendors, + or that are for other reasons outside the purview of the IESG, may + be published as RFCs for the convenience of the Internet community + as informational protocols. + + 4.1.6. Historic Protocol + + These are protocols that are unlikely to ever become standards in + the Internet either because they have been superseded by later + developments or due to lack of interest. + +4.2. Definitions of Protocol Status + + This document lists a "requirement level" or STATUS for each + protocol. The status is one of "required", "recommended", + "elective", "limited use", or "not recommended". + + 4.2.1. Required Protocol + + A system must implement the required protocols. + + 4.2.2. Recommended Protocol + + A system should implement the recommended protocols. + + 4.2.3. Elective Protocol + + A system may or may not implement an elective protocol. The + general notion is that if you are going to do something like this, + you must do exactly this. There may be several elective protocols + in a general area, for example, there are several electronic mail + protocols, and several routing protocols. + + 4.2.4. Limited Use Protocol + + These protocols are for use in limited circumstances. This may be + because of their experimental state, specialized nature, limited + functionality, or historic state. + + 4.2.5. Not Recommended Protocol + + These protocols are not recommended for general use. This may be + because of their limited functionality, specialized nature, or + experimental or historic state. + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 9] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +5. The Standards Track + + This section discusses in more detail the procedures used by the RFC + Editor and the IESG in making decisions about the labeling and + publishing of protocols as standards. + +5.1. The RFC Processing Decision Table + + Here is the current decision table for processing submissions by the + RFC Editor. The processing depends on who submitted it, and the + status they want it to have. + + +==========================================================+ + |**************| S O U R C E | + +==========================================================+ + | Desired | IAB | IESG | IRSG | Other | + | Status | | | | | + +==========================================================+ + | | | | | | + | Standard | Bogus | Publish | Bogus | Bogus | + | or | (2) | (1) | (2) | (2) | + | Draft | | | | | + | Standard | | | | | + +--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ + | | | | | | + | | Refer | Publish | Refer | Refer | + | Proposed | (3) | (1) | (3) | (3) | + | Standard | | | | | + | | | | | | + +--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ + | | | | | | + | | Notify | Publish | Notify | Notify | + | Experimental | (4) | (1) | (4) | (4) | + | Protocol | | | | | + | | | | | | + +--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ + | | | | | | + | Information | Publish | Publish |Discretion|Discretion| + | or Opinion | (1) | (1) | (5) | (5) | + | Paper | | | | | + | | | | | | + +==========================================================+ + + (1) Publish. + + (2) Bogus. Inform the source of the rules. RFCs specifying + Standard, or Draft Standard must come from the IESG, only. + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 10] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + (3) Refer to an Area Director for review by a WG. Expect to see + the document again only after approval by the IESG. + + (4) Notify both the IESG and IRSG. If no concerns are raised in + two weeks then do Discretion (5), else RFC Editor to resolve + the concerns or do Refer (3). + + (5) RFC Editor's discretion. The RFC Editor decides if a review + is needed and if so by whom. RFC Editor decides to publish or + not. + + Of course, in all cases the RFC Editor can request or make minor + changes for style, format, and presentation purposes. + + The IESG has designated the IESG Secretary as its agent for + forwarding documents with IESG approval and for registering concerns + in response to notifications (4) to the RFC Editor. Documents from + Area Directors or Working Group Chairs may be considered in the same + way as documents from "other". + +5.2. The Standards Track Diagram + + There is a part of the STATUS and STATE categorization that is called + the standards track. Actually, only the changes of state are + significant to the progression along the standards track, though the + status assignments may change as well. + + The states illustrated by single line boxes are temporary states, + those illustrated by double line boxes are long term states. A + protocol will normally be expected to remain in a temporary state for + several months (minimum six months for proposed standard, minimum + four months for draft standard). A protocol may be in a long term + state for many years. + + A protocol may enter the standards track only on the recommendation + of the IESG; and may move from one state to another along the track + only on the recommendation of the IESG. That is, it takes action by + the IESG to either start a protocol on the track or to move it along. + + Generally, as the protocol enters the standards track a decision is + made as to the eventual STATUS, requirement level or applicability + (elective, recommended, or required) the protocol will have, although + a somewhat less stringent current status may be assigned, and it then + is placed in the the proposed standard STATE with that status. So + the initial placement of a protocol is into state 1. At any time the + STATUS decision may be revisited. + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 11] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + | + +<----------------------------------------------+ + | ^ + V 0 | 4 + +-----------+ +===========+ + | enter |-->----------------+-------------->|experiment | + +-----------+ | +=====+=====+ + | | + V 1 | + +-----------+ V + | proposed |-------------->+ + +--->+-----+-----+ | + | | | + | V 2 | + +<---+-----+-----+ V + | draft std |-------------->+ + +--->+-----+-----+ | + | | | + | V 3 | + +<---+=====+=====+ V + | standard |-------------->+ + +=====+=====+ | + | + V 5 + +=====+=====+ + | historic | + +===========+ + + The transition from proposed standard (1) to draft standard (2) can + only be by action of the IESG and only after the protocol has been + proposed standard (1) for at least six months. + + The transition from draft standard (2) to standard (3) can only be by + action of the IESG and only after the protocol has been draft + standard (2) for at least four months. + + Occasionally, the decision may be that the protocol is not ready for + standardization and will be assigned to the experimental state (4). + This is off the standards track, and the protocol may be resubmitted + to enter the standards track after further work. There are other + paths into the experimental and historic states that do not involve + IESG action. + + Sometimes one protocol is replaced by another and thus becomes + historic, or it may happen that a protocol on the standards track is + in a sense overtaken by another protocol (or other events) and + becomes historic (state 5). + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 12] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +6. The Protocols + + Subsection 6.1 lists recent RFCs and other changes. Subsections 6.2 + - 6.10 list the standards in groups by protocol state. + +6.1. Recent Changes + +6.1.1. New RFCs: + + 2153 - PPP Vendor Extensions + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2152 - UTF-7 + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2151 - Not yet issued. + + 2150 - Not yet issued. + + 2149 - Multicast Server Architectures for MARS-based ATM + multicasting + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2148 - Not yet issued. + + 2147 - TCP and UDP over IPv6 Jumbograms + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2146 - U.S. Government Internet Domain Names + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2145 - Use and Interpretation of HTTP Version Numbers + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 13] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + 2144 - The CAST-128 Encryption Algorithm + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2143 - Encapsulating IP with the Small Computer System Interface + + An Experimental protocol. + + 2142 - Mailbox Names for Common Services, Roles and Functions + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2141 - URN Syntax + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2140 - TCP Control Block Interdependence + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2139 - RADIUS Accounting + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2138 - Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS) + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2137 - Secure Domain Name System Dynamic Update + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2136 - Dynamic Updates in the Domain Name System (DNS UPDATE) + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2135 - Internet Society By-Laws + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2134 - Articles of Incorporation of Internet Society + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 14] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + 2133 - Basic Socket Interface Extensions for IPv6 + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2132 - DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions + + A Draft Standard protocol. + + 2131 - Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol + + A Draft Standard protocol. + + 2130 - The Report of the IAB Character Set Workshop held 29 + February - 1 March, 1996 + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2129 - Toshiba's Flow Attribute Notification Protocol (FANP) + Specification + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2128 - Dial Control Management Information Base using SMIv2 + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2127 - ISDN Management Information Base using SMIv2 + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2126 - ISO Transport Service on top of TCP (ITOT) + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2125 - The PPP Bandwidth Allocation Protocol (BAP), The PPP + Bandwidth Allocation Control Protocol (BACP) + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2124 - Cabletron's Light-weight Flow Admission Protocol + Specification + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 15] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + 2123 - Traffic Flow Measurement: Experiences with NeTraMet + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2122 - VEMMI URL Specification + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2121 - Issues affecting MARS Cluster Size + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2120 - Managing the X.500 Root Naming Context + + An Experimental protocol. + + 2119 - Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Level + + This is a Best Current Practices document and does not + specify any level of standard. + + 2118 - Microsoft Point-To-Point Compression (MPPC) Protocol + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2117 - Not yet issued. + + 2116 - X.500 Implementations Catalog-96 + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2115 - Not yet issued. + + 2114 - Data Link Switching Client Access Protocol + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2113 - IP Router Alert Option + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 16] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + 2112 - The MIME Multipart/Related Content-type + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2111 - Content-ID and Message-ID Uniform Resource Locators + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2110 - MIME E-mail Encapsulation of Aggregate Documents, such as + HTML (MHTML) + + A Proposed Standard protocol. + + 2100 - The Naming of Hosts + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2099 - Request for Comments Summary - RFC Numbers 2000-2099 + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + + 2094 - Not yet issued. + + 2093 - Not yet issued. + + 2076 - Common Internet Message Headers + + This is an information document and does not specify any + level of standard. + +6.1.2. Other Changes: + + The following are changes to protocols listed in the previous + edition. + + 1542 - Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol + + Elevated to Draft Standard. + + 1534 - Interoperation Between DHCP and BOOTP + + Elevated to Draft Standard. + + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 17] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +6.2. Standard Protocols + +Protocol Name Status RFC STD * +======== ===================================== ======== ==== === = +-------- Internet Official Protocol Standards Req 2200 1 +-------- Assigned Numbers Req 1700 2 +-------- Host Requirements - Communications Req 1122 3 +-------- Host Requirements - Applications Req 1123 3 +IP Internet Protocol Req 791 5 + as amended by:-------- +-------- IP Subnet Extension Req 950 5 +-------- IP Broadcast Datagrams Req 919 5 +-------- IP Broadcast Datagrams with Subnets Req 922 5 +ICMP Internet Control Message Protocol Req 792 5 +IGMP Internet Group Multicast Protocol Rec 1112 5 +UDP User Datagram Protocol Rec 768 6 +TCP Transmission Control Protocol Rec 793 7 +TELNET Telnet Protocol Rec 854,855 8 +FTP File Transfer Protocol Rec 959 9 +SMTP Simple Mail Transfer Protocol Rec 821 10 +SMTP-SIZE SMTP Service Ext for Message Size Rec 1870 10 +SMTP-EXT SMTP Service Extensions Rec 1869 10 +MAIL Format of Electronic Mail Messages Rec 822 11 +CONTENT Content Type Header Field Rec 1049 11 +NTPV2 Network Time Protocol (Version 2) Rec 1119 12 +DOMAIN Domain Name System Rec 1034,1035 13 +DNS-MX Mail Routing and the Domain System Rec 974 14 +SNMP Simple Network Management Protocol Rec 1157 15 +SMI Structure of Management Information Rec 1155 16 +Concise-MIB Concise MIB Definitions Rec 1212 16 +MIB-II Management Information Base-II Rec 1213 17 +NETBIOS NetBIOS Service Protocols Ele 1001,1002 19 +ECHO Echo Protocol Rec 862 20 +DISCARD Discard Protocol Ele 863 21 +CHARGEN Character Generator Protocol Ele 864 22 +QUOTE Quote of the Day Protocol Ele 865 23 +USERS Active Users Protocol Ele 866 24 +DAYTIME Daytime Protocol Ele 867 25 +TIME Time Server Protocol Ele 868 26 +TFTP Trivial File Transfer Protocol Ele 1350 33 +TP-TCP ISO Transport Service on top of the TCP Ele 1006 35 +ETHER-MIB Ethernet MIB Ele 1643 50 +PPP Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) Ele 1661 51 +PPP-HDLC PPP in HDLC Framing Ele 1662 51 +IP-SMDS IP Datagrams over the SMDS Service Ele 1209 52 +POP3 Post Office Protocol, Version 3 Ele 1939 53 + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 18] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the +previous edition of this document.] + +Applicability Statements: + + IGMP -- The Internet Architecture Board intends to move towards + general adoption of IP multicasting, as a more efficient solution + than broadcasting for many applications. The host interface has been + standardized in RFC-1112; however, multicast-routing gateways are in + the experimental stage and are not widely available. An Internet + host should support all of RFC-1112, except for the IGMP protocol + itself which is optional; see RFC-1122 for more details. Even + without IGMP, implementation of RFC-1112 will provide an important + advance: IP-layer access to local network multicast addressing. It + is expected that IGMP will become recommended for all hosts and + gateways at some future date. + + SMI, MIB-II SNMP -- The Internet Architecture Board recommends that + all IP and TCP implementations be network manageable. At the current + time, this implies implementation of the Internet MIB-II (RFC-1213), + and at least the recommended management protocol SNMP (RFC-1157). + + RIP -- The Routing Information Protocol (RIP) is widely implemented + and used in the Internet. However, both implementors and users + should be aware that RIP has some serious technical limitations as a + routing protocol. The IETF is currently devpeloping several + candidates for a new standard "open" routing protocol with better + properties than RIP. The IAB urges the Internet community to track + these developments, and to implement the new protocol when it is + standardized; improved Internet service will result for many users. + + TP-TCP -- As OSI protocols become more widely implemented and used, + there will be an increasing need to support interoperation with the + TCP/IP protocols. The Internet Engineering Task Force is formulating + strategies for interoperation. RFC-1006 provides one interoperation + mode, in which TCP/IP is used to emulate TP0 in order to support OSI + applications. Hosts that wish to run OSI connection-oriented + applications in this mode should use the procedure described in RFC- + 1006. In the future, the IAB expects that a major portion of the + Internet will support both TCP/IP and OSI (inter-)network protocols + in parallel, and it will then be possible to run OSI applications + across the Internet using full OSI protocol "stacks". + + + + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 19] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +6.3. Network-Specific Standard Protocols + +All Network-Specific Standards have Elective status. + +Protocol Name State RFC STD * +======== ===================================== ===== ===== === = +IP-ATM Classical IP and ARP over ATM Prop 1577 +IP-FR Multiprotocol over Frame Relay Draft 1490 +ATM-ENCAP Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM Prop 1483 +IP-TR-MC IP Multicast over Token-Ring LANs Prop 1469 +IP-FDDI Transmission of IP and ARP over FDDI Net Std 1390 36 +IP-X.25 X.25 and ISDN in the Packet Mode Draft 1356 +ARP Address Resolution Protocol Std 826 37 +RARP A Reverse Address Resolution Protocol Std 903 38 +IP-ARPA Internet Protocol on ARPANET Std BBN1822 39 +IP-WB Internet Protocol on Wideband Network Std 907 40 +IP-E Internet Protocol on Ethernet Networks Std 894 41 +IP-EE Internet Protocol on Exp. Ethernet Nets Std 895 42 +IP-IEEE Internet Protocol on IEEE 802 Std 1042 43 +IP-DC Internet Protocol on DC Networks Std 891 44 +IP-HC Internet Protocol on Hyperchannel Std 1044 45 +IP-ARC Transmitting IP Traffic over ARCNET Nets Std 1201 46 +IP-SLIP Transmission of IP over Serial Lines Std 1055 47 +IP-NETBIOS Transmission of IP over NETBIOS Std 1088 48 +IP-IPX Transmission of 802.2 over IPX Networks Std 1132 49 +IP-HIPPI IP over HIPPI Draft 2067 + +[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the +previous edition of this document.] + +Applicability Statements: + + It is expected that a system will support one or more physical + networks and for each physical network supported the appropriate + protocols from the above list must be supported. That is, it is + elective to support any particular type of physical network, and for + the physical networks actually supported it is required that they be + supported exactly according to the protocols in the above list. See + also the Host and Gateway Requirements RFCs for more specific + information on network-specific ("link layer") protocols. + + + + + + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 20] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +6.4. Draft Standard Protocols + +Protocol Name Status RFC +======== ===================================== ============== ===== +BOOTP DHCP Options and BOOTP Extensions Recommended 2132* +DHCP Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Elective 2131* +------- Clarifications and Extensions BOOTP Elective 1542* +DHCP-BOOTP Interoperation Between DHCP and BOOTP Elective 1534* +MIME-CONF MIME Conformance Criteria Elective 2049 +MIME-MSG MIME Msg Header Ext for Non-ASCII Elective 2047 +MIME-MEDIA MIME Media Types Elective 2046 +MIME Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions Elective 2045 +PPP-CHAP PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication Elective 1994 +PPP-MP PPP Multilink Protocol Elective 1990 +PPP-LINK PPP Link Quality Monitoring Elective 1989 +COEX-MIB Coexistence between SNMPV1 & SNMPV2 Elective 1908 +SNMPv2-MIB MIB for SNMPv2 Elective 1907 +TRANS-MIB Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 Elective 1906 +OPS-MIB Protocol Operations for SNMPv2 Elective 1905 +CONF-MIB Conformance Statements for SNMPv2 Elective 1904 +CONV-MIB Textual Conventions for SNMPv2 Elective 1903 +SMIV2 SMI for SNMPv2 Elective 1902 +CON-MD5 Content-MD5 Header Field Elective 1864 +OSPF-MIB OSPF Version 2 MIB Elective 1850 +STR-REP String Representation ... Elective 1779 +X.500syn X.500 String Representation ... Elective 1778 +X.500lite X.500 Lightweight ... Elective 1777 +BGP-4-APP Application of BGP-4 Elective 1772 +BGP-4 Border Gateway Protocol 4 Elective 1771 +PPP-DNCP PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol Elective 1762 +RMON-MIB Remote Network Monitoring MIB Elective 1757 +802.5-MIB IEEE 802.5 Token Ring MIB Elective 1748 +BGP-4-MIB BGP-4 MIB Elective 1657 +RIP2-MIB RIP Version 2 MIB Extension Elective 1724 +RIP2 RIP Version 2-Carrying Additional Info. Elective 1723 +RIP2-APP RIP Version 2 Protocol App. Statement Elective 1722 +SIP-MIB SIP Interface Type MIB Elective 1694 +------- Def Man Objs Parallel-printer-like Elective 1660 +------- Def Man Objs RS-232-like Elective 1659 +------- Def Man Objs Character Stream Elective 1658 +SMTP-8BIT SMTP Service Ext or 8bit-MIMEtransport Elective 1652 +OSI-NSAP Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation Elective 1629 +OSPF2 Open Shortest Path First Routing V2 Elective 1583 +ISO-TS-ECHO Echo for ISO-8473 Elective 1575 +DECNET-MIB DECNET MIB Elective 1559 +BRIDGE-MIB BRIDGE-MIB Elective 1493 +NTPV3 Network Time Protocol (Version 3) Elective 1305 +IP-MTU Path MTU Discovery Elective 1191 + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 21] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +FINGER Finger Protocol Elective 1288 +NICNAME WhoIs Protocol Elective 954 + +[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the +previous edition of this document.] + +Applicability Statements: + + PPP -- Point to Point Protocol is a method of sending IP over serial + lines, which are a type of physical network. It is anticipated that + PPP will be advanced to the network-specifics standard protocol state + in the future. + +6.5. Proposed Standard Protocols + +Protocol Name Status RFC +======== ===================================== ============== ===== +IPv6-Jumbo TCP and UDP over IPv6 Jumbograms Elective 2147* +MAIL-SERV Mailbox Names for Common Services Elective 2142* +URN-SYNTAX URN Syntax Elective 2141* +RADIUS Remote Authentication Dial In Service Elective 2138* +SDNSDU Secure Domain Name System Dynamic Update Elective 2137* +DNS-UPDATE Dynamic Updates in the DNS Elective 2136* +DC-MIB Dial Control MIB using SMIv2 Elective 2128* +ISDN-MIB ISDN MIB using SMIv2 Elective 2127* +ITOT ISO Transport Service on top of TCP Elective 2126* +BAP-BACP PPP-BAP, PPP-BACP Elective 2125* +VEMMI-URL VEMMI URL Specification Elective 2122* +ROUT-ALERT IP Router Alert Option Elective 2113* +MIME-RELAT MIME Multipart/Related Content-type Elective 2112* +CIDMID-URL Content-ID and Message-ID URLs Elective 2111* +MHTML MIME E-mail Encapsulation Elective 2110* +HTTP-STATE HTTP State Management Mechanism Elective 2109 +802.3-MIB 802.3 Repeater MIB using SMIv2 Elective 2108 +PPP-NBFCP PPP NetBIOS Frames Control Protocol Elective 2097 +TABLE-MIB IP Forwarding Table MIB Elective 2096 +IMAPPOPAU IMAP/POP AUTHorize Extension Elective 2095 +RIP-TRIG Trigger RIP Elective 2091 +IMAP4-LIT IMAP4 non-synchronizing literals Elective 2088 +IMAP4-QUO IMAP4 QUOTA extension Elective 2087 +IMAP4-ACL IMAP4 ACL Extension Elective 2086 +HMAC-MD5 HMAC-MD5 IP Auth. with Replay Prevention Elective 2085 +RIP2-MD5 RIP-2 MD5 Authentication Elective 2082 +RIPNG-IPV6 RIPng for IPv6 Elective 2080 +URI-ATT URI Attribute Type and Object Class Elective 2079 +GSSAP Generic Security Service Application Elective 2078 +MIME-MODEL Model Primary MIME Types Elective 2077 +RMON-MIB Remote Network Monitoring MIB Elective 2074 + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 22] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +IPV6-UNI IPv6 Provider-Based Unicast Address Elective 2073 +HTML-INT HTML Internationalization Elective 2070 +DAA Digest Access Authentication Elective 2069 +HTTP-1.1 Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1 Elective 2068 +DNS-SEC Domain Name System Security Extensions Elective 2065 +IMAPV4 Internet Message Access Protocol v4rev1 Elective 2060 +URLZ39.50 Uniform Resource Locators for Z39.50 Elective 2056 +SNANAU-APP SNANAU APPC MIB using SMIv2 Elective 2051 +PPP-SNACP PPP SNA Control Protocol Elective 2043 +RTP-MPEG RTP Payload Format for MPEG1/MPEG2 Elective 2038 +ENTITY-MIB Entity MIB using SMIv2 Elective 2037 +RTP-JPEG RTP Payload Format for JPEG-compressed Elective 2035 +SMTP-ENH SMTP Enhanced Error Codes Elective 2034 +RTP-H.261 RTP Payload Format for H.261 Elective 2032 +RTP-CELLB RTP Payload Format of Sun's CellB Elective 2029 +SPKM Simple Public-Key GSS-API Mechanism Elective 2025 +DLSW-MIB DLSw MIB using SMIv2 Elective 2024 +IPV6-PPP IP Version 6 over PPP Elective 2023 +MULTI-UNI Multicast over UNI 3.0/3.1 based ATM Elective 2022 +RMON-MIB RMON MIB using SMIv2 Elective 2021 +802.12-MIB IEEE 802.12 Interface MIB Elective 2020 +IPV6-FDDI Transmission of IPv6 Packets Over FDDI Elective 2019 +TCP-ACK TCP Selective Acknowledgement Options Elective 2018 +URL-ACC URL Access-Type Elective 2017 +MIME-PGP MIME Security with PGP Elective 2015 +MIB-UDP SNMPv2 MIB for UDP Elective 2013 +MIB-TCP SNMPv2 MIB for TCP Elective 2012 +MIB-IP SNMPv2 MIB for IP Elective 2011 +MOBILEIPMIBMobile IP MIB Definition using SMIv2 Elective 2006 +MOBILEIPAPPApplicability Statement for IP Mobility Elective 2005 +MINI-IP Minimal Encapsulation within IP Elective 2004 +IPENCAPIP IP Encapsulation within IP Elective 2003 +MOBILEIPSUPIP Mobility Support Elective 2002 +TCPSLOWSRT TCP Slow Start, Congestion Avoidance... Elective 2001 +BGP-COMM BGP Communities Attribute Elective 1997 +DNS-NOTIFY Mech. for Notification of Zone Changes Elective 1996 +DNS-IZT Incremental Zone Transfer in DNS Elective 1995 +SMTP-ETRN SMTP Service Extension ETRN Elective 1985 +SNA Serial Number Arithmetic Elective 1982 +MTU-IPV6 Path MTU Discovery for IP version 6 Elective 1981 +PPP-FRAME PPP in Frame Relay Elective 1973 +IPV6-ETHER Transmission IPv6 Packets Over Ethernet Elective 1972 +IPV6-AUTO IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguation Elective 1971 +IPV6-ND Neighbor Discovery for IP Version 6 Elective 1970 +PPP-ECP PPP Encryption Control Protocol Elective 1968 +GSSAPI-KER Kerberos Version 5 GSS-API Mechanism Elective 1964 +PPP-CCP PPP Compression Control Protocol Elective 1962 +GSSAPI-SOC GSS-API Auth for SOCKS Version 5 Elective 1961 + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 23] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +LDAP-STR String Rep. of LDAP Search Filters Elective 1960 +LDAP-URL LDAP URL Format Elective 1959 +ONE-PASS One-Time Password System Elective 1938 +TRANS-IPV6 Transition Mechanisms IPv6 Hosts/Routers Elective 1933 +AUTH-SOCKS Username Authentication for SOCKS V5 Elective 1929 +SOCKSV5 SOCKS Protocol Version 5 Elective 1928 +WHOIS++M How to Interact with a Whois++ Mesh Elective 1914 +WHOIS++A Architecture of Whois++ Index Service Elective 1913 +DSN Delivery Status Notifications Elective 1894 +EMS-CODE Enhanced Mail System Status Codes Elective 1893 +MIME-RPT Multipart/Report Elective 1892 +SMTP-DSN SMTP Delivery Status Notifications Elective 1891 +RTP-AV RTP Audio/Video Profile Elective 1890 +RTP Transport Protocol for Real-Time Apps Elective 1889 +DNS-IPV6 DNS Extensions to support IPv6 Elective 1886 +ICMPv6 ICMPv6 for IPv6 Elective 1885 +IPV6-Addr IPv6 Addressing Architecture Elective 1884 +IPV6 IPv6 Specification Elective 1883 +HTML Hypertext Markup Language - 2.0 Elective 1866 +SMTP-Pipe SMTP Serv. Ext. for Command Pipelining Elective 1854 +MIME-Sec MIME Object Security Services Elective 1848 +MIME-Encyp MIME: Signed and Encrypted Elective 1847 +WHOIS++ Architecture of the WHOIS++ service Elective 1835 +-------- Binding Protocols for ONC RPC Version 2 Elective 1833 +XDR External Data Representation Standard Elective 1832 +RPC Remote Procedure Call Protocol V. 2 Elective 1831 +-------- ESP DES-CBC Transform Ele/Req 1829 +-------- IP Authentication using Keyed MD5 Ele/Req 1828 +ESP IP Encapsulating Security Payload Ele/Req 1827 +IPV6-AH IP Authentication Header Ele/Req 1826 +-------- Security Architecture for IP Ele/Req 1825 +RREQ Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers Elective 1812 +URL Relative Uniform Resource Locators Elective 1808 +CLDAP Connection-less LDAP Elective 1798 +OSPF-DC Ext. OSPF to Support Demand Circuits Elective 1793 +TMUX Transport Multiplexing Protocol Elective 1692 +TFTP-Opt TFTP Options Elective 1784 +TFTP-Blk TFTP Blocksize Option Elective 1783 +TFTP-Ext TFTP Option Extension Elective 1782 +OSI-Dir OSI User Friendly Naming ... Elective 1781 +MIME-EDI MIME Encapsulation of EDI Objects Elective 1767 +Lang-Tag Tags for Identification of Languages Elective 1766 +XNSCP PPP XNS IDP Control Protocol Elective 1764 +BVCP PPP Banyan Vines Control Protocol Elective 1763 +Print-MIB Printer MIB Elective 1759 +ATM-SIG ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM Elective 1755 +IPNG Recommendation for IP Next Generation Elective 1752 +802.5-SSR 802.5 SSR MIB using SMIv2 Elective 1749 + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 24] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +SDLCSMIv2 SNADLC SDLC MIB using SMIv2 Elective 1747 +BGP4/IDRP BGP4/IDRP for IP/OSPF Interaction Elective 1745 +AT-MIB Appletalk MIB Elective 1742 +MacMIME MIME Encapsulation of Macintosh files Elective 1740 +URL Uniform Resource Locators Elective 1738 +POP3-AUTH POP3 AUTHentication command Elective 1734 +IMAP4-AUTH IMAP4 Authentication Mechanisms Elective 1731 +RDBMS-MIB RDMS MIB - using SMIv2 Elective 1697 +MODEM-MIB Modem MIB - using SMIv2 Elective 1696 +ATM-MIB ATM Management Version 8.0 using SMIv2 Elective 1695 +SNANAU-MIB SNA NAUs MIB using SMIv2 Elective 1666 +PPP-TRANS PPP Reliable Transmission Elective 1663 +-------- Postmaster Convention X.400 Operations Elective 1648 +TN3270-En TN3270 Enhancements Elective 1647 +PPP-BCP PPP Bridging Control Protocol Elective 1638 +UPS-MIB UPS Management Information Base Elective 1628 +AAL5-MTU Default IP MTU for use over ATM AAL5 Elective 1626 +PPP-SONET PPP over SONET/SDH Elective 1619 +PPP-ISDN PPP over ISDN Elective 1618 +DNS-R-MIB DNS Resolver MIB Extensions Elective 1612 +DNS-S-MIB DNS Server MIB Extensions Elective 1611 +FR-MIB Frame Relay Service MIB Elective 1604 +PPP-X25 PPP in X.25 Elective 1598 +OSPF-NSSA The OSPF NSSA Option Elective 1587 +OSPF-Multi Multicast Extensions to OSPF Elective 1584 +SONET-MIB MIB SONET/SDH Interface Type Elective 1595 +RIP-DC Extensions to RIP to Support Demand Cir. Elective 1582 +-------- Evolution of the Interfaces Group of MIB-II Elective 1573 +PPP-LCP PPP LCP Extensions Elective 1570 +X500-MIB X.500 Directory Monitoring MIB Elective 1567 +MAIL-MIB Mail Monitoring MIB Elective 1566 +NSM-MIB Network Services Monitoring MIB Elective 1565 +CIPX Compressing IPX Headers Over WAM Media Elective 1553 +IPXCP PPP Internetworking Packet Exchange Control Elective 1552 +SRB-MIB Source Routing Bridge MIB Elective 1525 +CIDR-STRA CIDR Address Assignment... Elective 1519 +CIDR-ARCH CIDR Architecture... Elective 1518 +CIDR-APP CIDR Applicability Statement Elective 1517 +-------- 802.3 MAU MIB Elective 1515 +HOST-MIB Host Resources MIB Elective 1514 +-------- Token Ring Extensions to RMON MIB Elective 1513 +FDDI-MIB FDDI Management Information Base Elective 1512 +KERBEROS Kerberos Network Authentication Ser (V5) Elective 1510 +GSSAPI Generic Security Service API: C-bindings Elective 1509 +DASS Distributed Authentication Security... Elective 1507 +-------- X.400 Use of Extended Character Sets Elective 1502 +HARPOON Rules for Downgrading Messages... Elective 1496 +Mapping MHS/RFC-822 Message Body Mapping Elective 1495 + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 25] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +Equiv X.400/MIME Body Equivalences Elective 1494 +IDPR Inter-Domain Policy Routing Protocol Elective 1479 +IDPR-ARCH Architecture for IDPR Elective 1478 +PPP/Bridge MIB Bridge PPP MIB Elective 1474 +PPP/IP MIB IP Network Control Protocol of PPP MIB Elective 1473 +PPP/SEC MIB Security Protocols of PPP MIB Elective 1472 +PPP/LCP MIB Link Control Protocol of PPP MIB Elective 1471 +X25-MIB Multiprotocol Interconnect on X.25 MIB Elective 1461 +SNMPv2 Introduction to SNMPv2 Elective 1441 +PEM-KEY PEM - Key Certification Elective 1424 +PEM-ALG PEM - Algorithms, Modes, and Identifiers Elective 1423 +PEM-CKM PEM - Certificate-Based Key Management Elective 1422 +PEM-ENC PEM - Message Encryption and Auth Elective 1421 +SNMP-IPX SNMP over IPX Elective 1420 +SNMP-AT SNMP over AppleTalk Elective 1419 +SNMP-OSI SNMP over OSI Elective 1418 +FTP-FTAM FTP-FTAM Gateway Specification Elective 1415 +IDENT-MIB Identification MIB Elective 1414 +IDENT Identification Protocol Elective 1413 +DS3/E3-MIB DS3/E3 Interface Type Elective 1407 +DS1/E1-MIB DS1/E1 Interface Type Elective 1406 +BGP-OSPF BGP OSPF Interaction Elective 1403 +-------- Route Advertisement In BGP2 And BGP3 Elective 1397 +SNMP-X.25 SNMP MIB Extension for X.25 Packet Layer Elective 1382 +SNMP-LAPB SNMP MIB Extension for X.25 LAPB Elective 1381 +PPP-ATCP PPP AppleTalk Control Protocol Elective 1378 +PPP-OSINLCP PPP OSI Network Layer Control Protocol Elective 1377 +SNMP-PARTY-MIB Administration of SNMP Elective 1353 +SNMP-SEC SNMP Security Protocols Elective 1352 +SNMP-ADMIN SNMP Administrative Model Elective 1351 +TOS Type of Service in the Internet Elective 1349 +PPP-IPCP PPP Control Protocol Elective 1332 +------- X.400 1988 to 1984 downgrading Elective 1328 +------- Mapping between X.400(1988) Elective 1327 +TCP-EXT TCP Extensions for High Performance Elective 1323 +FRAME-MIB Management Information Base for Frame Elective 1315 +NETFAX File Format for the Exchange of Images Elective 1314 +IARP Inverse Address Resolution Protocol Elective 1293 +FDDI-MIB FDDI-MIB Elective 1285 +------- Encoding Network Addresses Elective 1277 +------- Replication and Distributed Operations Elective 1276 +------- COSINE and Internet X.500 Schema Elective 1274 +BGP-MIB Border Gateway Protocol MIB (Version 3) Elective 1269 +ICMP-ROUT ICMP Router Discovery Messages Elective 1256 +OSI-UDP OSI TS on UDP Elective 1240 +STD-MIBs Reassignment of Exp MIBs to Std MIBs Elective 1239 +IPX-IP Tunneling IPX Traffic through IP Nets Elective 1234 +IS-IS OSI IS-IS for TCP/IP Dual Environments Elective 1195 + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 26] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +IP-CMPRS Compressing TCP/IP Headers Elective 1144 +NNTP Network News Transfer Protocol Elective 977 + +[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the +previous edition of this document.] + +[Note: Ele/Req indicates elective for use with IPv4 and required for use +with IPv6.] + +Applicability Statements: + + OSPF - RFC 1370 is an applicability statement for OSPF. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 27] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +6.6. Telnet Options + +For convenience, all the Telnet Options are collected here with both +their state and status. + +Protocol Name Number State Status RFC STD +======== ===================================== ===== ====== ==== === +TOPT-BIN Binary Transmission 0 Std Rec 856 27 +TOPT-ECHO Echo 1 Std Rec 857 28 +TOPT-RECN Reconnection 2 Prop Ele ... +TOPT-SUPP Suppress Go Ahead 3 Std Rec 858 29 +TOPT-APRX Approx Message Size Negotiation 4 Prop Ele ... +TOPT-STAT Status 5 Std Rec 859 30 +TOPT-TIM Timing Mark 6 Std Rec 860 31 +TOPT-REM Remote Controlled Trans and Echo 7 Prop Ele 726 +TOPT-OLW Output Line Width 8 Prop Ele ... +TOPT-OPS Output Page Size 9 Prop Ele ... +TOPT-OCRD Output Carriage-Return Disposition 10 Prop Ele 652 +TOPT-OHT Output Horizontal Tabstops 11 Prop Ele 653 +TOPT-OHTD Output Horizontal Tab Disposition 12 Prop Ele 654 +TOPT-OFD Output Formfeed Disposition 13 Prop Ele 655 +TOPT-OVT Output Vertical Tabstops 14 Prop Ele 656 +TOPT-OVTD Output Vertical Tab Disposition 15 Prop Ele 657 +TOPT-OLD Output Linefeed Disposition 16 Prop Ele 658 +TOPT-EXT Extended ASCII 17 Prop Ele 698 +TOPT-LOGO Logout 18 Prop Ele 727 +TOPT-BYTE Byte Macro 19 Prop Ele 735 +TOPT-DATA Data Entry Terminal 20 Prop Ele 1043 +TOPT-SUP SUPDUP 21 Prop Ele 736 +TOPT-SUPO SUPDUP Output 22 Prop Ele 749 +TOPT-SNDL Send Location 23 Prop Ele 779 +TOPT-TERM Terminal Type 24 Prop Ele 1091 +TOPT-EOR End of Record 25 Prop Ele 885 +TOPT-TACACS TACACS User Identification 26 Prop Ele 927 +TOPT-OM Output Marking 27 Prop Ele 933 +TOPT-TLN Terminal Location Number 28 Prop Ele 946 +TOPT-3270 Telnet 3270 Regime 29 Prop Ele 1041 +TOPT-X.3 X.3 PAD 30 Prop Ele 1053 +TOPT-NAWS Negotiate About Window Size 31 Prop Ele 1073 +TOPT-TS Terminal Speed 32 Prop Ele 1079 +TOPT-RFC Remote Flow Control 33 Prop Ele 1372 +TOPT-LINE Linemode 34 Draft Ele 1184 +TOPT-XDL X Display Location 35 Prop Ele 1096 +TOPT-ENVIR Telnet Environment Option 36 Hist Not 1408 +TOPT-AUTH Telnet Authentication Option 37 Exp Ele 1416 +TOPT-ENVIR Telnet Environment Option 39 Prop Ele 1572 +TOPT-TN3270E TN3270 Enhancements 40 Prop Ele 1647 +TOPT-AUTH Telnet XAUTH 41 Exp + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 28] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +TOPT-CHARSET Telnet CHARSET 42 Exp 2066 +TOPT-EXTOP Extended-Options-List 255 Std Rec 861 32 + +[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the +previous edition of this document.] + +6.7. Experimental Protocols + +All Experimental protocols have the Limited Use status. + +Protocol Name RFC +======== ===================================== ===== +IP-SCSI Encapsulating IP with the SCSI 2143* +X.500-NAME Managing the X.500 Root Naming Context 2120* +TFTP-MULTI TFTP Multicast Option 2090 +IP-Echo IP Echo Host Service 2075 +METER-MIB Traffic Flow Measurement Meter MIB 2064 +TFM-ARCH Traffic Flow Measurement Architecture 2063 +DNS-SRV Location of Services in the DNS 2052 +URAS Uniform Resource Agents 2016 +GPS-AR GPS-Based Addressing and Routing 2009 +ETFTP Enhanced Trivial File Transfer Protocol 1986 +BGP-RR BGP Route Reflection 1966 +BGP-ASC Autonomous System Confederations for BGP 1965 +SMKD Scalable Multicast Key Distribution 1949 +HTML-TBL HTML Tables 1942 +MIME-VP Voice Profile for Internet Mail 1911 +SNMPV2SM User-based Security Model for SNMPv2 1910 +SNMPV2AI SNMPv2 Administrative Infrastructure 1909 +SNMPV2CB Introduction to Community-based SNMPv2 1901 +------- IPv6 Testing Address Allocation 1897 +DNS-LOC Location Information in the DNS 1876 +SGML-MT SGML Media Types 1874 +CONT-MT Access Type Content-ID 1873 +UNARP ARP Extension - UNARP 1868 +------- Form-based File Upload in HTML 1867 +------- BGP/IDRP Route Server Alternative 1863 +------- IP Authentication using Keyed SHA 1852 +ESP3DES ESP Triple DES Transform 1851 +------- SMTP 521 Reply Code 1846 +------- SMTP Serv. Ext. for Checkpoint/Restart 1845 +------- X.500 Mapping X.400 and RFC 822 Addresses 1838 +------- Tables and Subtrees in the X.500 Directory 1837 +------- O/R Address hierarchy in X.500 1836 +------- SMTP Serv. Ext. Large and Binary MIME Msgs. 1830 +ST2 Stream Protocol Version 2 1819 +------- Content-Disposition Header 1806 +------- Schema Publishing in X.500 Directory 1804 + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 29] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +------- X.400-MHS use X.500 to support X.400-MHS Routing 1801 +------- Class A Subnet Experiment 1797 +TCP/IPXMIB TCP/IPX Connection Mib Specification 1792 +------- TCP And UDP Over IPX Networks With Fixed Path MTU 1791 +ICMP-DM ICMP Domain Name Messages 1788 +CLNP-MULT Host Group Extensions for CLNP Multicasting 1768 +OSPF-OVFL OSPF Database Overflow 1765 +RWP Remote Write ProtocolL - Version 1.0 1756 +NARP NBMA Address Resolution Protocol 1735 +DNS-DEBUG Tools for DNS debugging 1713 +DNS-ENCODE DNS Encoding of Geographical Location 1712 +TCP-POS An Extension to TCP: Partial Order Service 1693 +------- DNS to Distribute RFC1327 Mail Address Mapping Tables 1664 +T/TCP TCP Extensions for Transactions 1644 +MIME-UNI Using Unicode with MIME 1641 +FOOBAR FTP Operation Over Big Address Records 1639 +X500-CHART Charting Networks in the X.500 Directory 1609 +X500-DIR Representing IP Information in the X.500 Directory 1608 +SNMP-DPI SNMP Distributed Protocol Interface 1592 +CLNP-TUBA Use of ISO CLNP in TUBA Environments 1561 +REM-PRINT TPC.INT Subdomain Remote Printing - Technical 1528 +EHF-MAIL Encoding Header Field for Internet Messages 1505 +RAP Internet Route Access Protocol 1476 +TP/IX TP/IX: The Next Internet 1475 +X400 Routing Coordination for X.400 Services 1465 +DNS Storing Arbitrary Attributes in DNS 1464 +IRCP Internet Relay Chat Protocol 1459 +TOS-LS Link Security TOS 1455 +SIFT/UFT Sender-Initiated/Unsolicited File Transfer 1440 +DIR-ARP Directed ARP 1433 +TEL-SPX Telnet Authentication: SPX 1412 +TEL-KER Telnet Authentication: Kerberos V4 1411 +MAP-MAIL X.400 Mapping and Mail-11 1405 +TRACE-IP Traceroute Using an IP Option 1393 +DNS-IP Experiment in DNS Based IP Routing 1383 +RMCP Remote Mail Checking Protocol 1339 +TCP-HIPER TCP Extensions for High Performance 1323 +MSP2 Message Send Protocol 2 1312 +DSLCP Dynamically Switched Link Control 1307 +-------- X.500 and Domains 1279 +IN-ENCAP Internet Encapsulation Protocol 1241 +CLNS-MIB CLNS-MIB 1238 +CFDP Coherent File Distribution Protocol 1235 +IP-AX.25 IP Encapsulation of AX.25 Frames 1226 +ALERTS Managing Asynchronously Generated Alerts 1224 +MPP Message Posting Protocol 1204 +SNMP-BULK Bulk Table Retrieval with the SNMP 1187 +DNS-RR New DNS RR Definitions 1183 + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 30] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +IMAP2 Interactive Mail Access Protocol 1176 +NTP-OSI NTP over OSI Remote Operations 1165 +DMF-MAIL Digest Message Format for Mail 1153 +RDP Reliable Data Protocol 908,1151 +TCP-ACO TCP Alternate Checksum Option 1146 +IP-DVMRP IP Distance Vector Multicast Routing 1075 +VMTP Versatile Message Transaction Protocol 1045 +COOKIE-JAR Authentication Scheme 1004 +NETBLT Bulk Data Transfer Protocol 998 +IRTP Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol 938 +LDP Loader Debugger Protocol 909 +RLP Resource Location Protocol 887 +NVP-II Network Voice Protocol ISI-memo +PVP Packet Video Protocol ISI-memo + +[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the +previous edition of this document.] + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 31] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +6.8. Informational Protocols + +Information protocols have no status. + +Protocol Name RFC +======= ==================================== ===== +PPP-EXT PPP Vendor Extensions 2153* +UTF-7 UTF-7 2152* +CAST-128 CAST-128 Encryption Algorithm 2144* +DLSCAP Data Link Switching Client Access Protocol 2114* +PNG Portable Network Graphics Version 1.0 2083 +RC5 RC5, RC5-CBC, RC5-CBC-Pad, and RC5-CTS Algorithms 2040 +SNTP Simple Network Time Protocol v4 for IPv4, IPv6 and OSI 2030 +PGP-MEF PGP Message Exchange Formats 1991 +PPP-DEFL PPP Deflate Protocol 1979 +PPP-PRED PPP Predictor Compression Protocol 1978 +PPP-BSD PPP BSD Compression Protocol 1977 +PPP-DCE PPP for Data Compression in DCE 1976 +PPP-MAG PPP Magnalink Variable Resource Compression 1975 +PPP-STAC PPP Stac LZS Compression Protocol 1974 +GZIP GZIP File Format Specification Version 4.3 1952 +DEFLATE DEFLATE Compressed Data Format Specification V. 1.3 1951 +ZLIB ZLIB Compressed Data Format Specification V. 3.3 1950 +HTTP-1.0 Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.0 1945 +-------- text/enriched MIME Content-type 1896 +-------- Application/CALS-1840 Content-type 1895 +-------- PPP IPCP Extensions for Name Server Addresses 1877 +SNPP Simple Network Paging Protocol - Version 2 1861 +-------- ISO Transport Class 2 Non-use Explicit Flow Control 1859 + over TCP RFC1006 extension +-------- IP in IP Tunneling 1853 +-------- PPP Network Control Protocol for LAN Extension 1841 +TESS The Exponential Security System 1824 +NFSV3 NFS Version 3 Protocol Specification 1813 +-------- A Format for Bibliographic Records 1807 +------- Data Link Switching: Switch-to-Switch Protocol 1795 +BGP-4 Experience with the BGP-4 Protocol 1773 +SDMD IPv4 Option for Sender Directed MD Delivery 1770 +SNOOP Snoop Version 2 Packet Capture File Format 1761 +BINHEX MIME Content Type for BinHex Encoded Files 1741 +RWHOIS Referral Whois Protocol 1714 +DNS-NSAP DNS NSAP Resource Records 1706 +RADIO-PAGE TPC.INT Subdomain: Radio Paging -- Technical Procedures 1703 +GRE-IPv4 Generic Routing Encapsulation over IPv4 1702 +GRE Generic Routing Encapsulatio 1701 +ADSNA-IP Advanced SNA/IP: A Simple SNA Transport Protocol 1538 +TACACS Terminal Access Control Protocol 1492 +MD4 MD4 Message Digest Algorithm 1320 + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 32] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +SUN-NFS Network File System Protocol 1094 +SUN-RPC Remote Procedure Call Protocol Version 2 1057 +GOPHER The Internet Gopher Protocol 1436 +LISTSERV Listserv Distribute Protocol 1429 +------- Replication Requirements 1275 +PCMAIL Pcmail Transport Protocol 1056 +MTP Multicast Transport Protocol 1301 +BSD Login BSD Login 1282 +DIXIE DIXIE Protocol Specification 1249 +IP-X.121 IP to X.121 Address Mapping for DDN 1236 +OSI-HYPER OSI and LLC1 on HYPERchannel 1223 +HAP2 Host Access Protocol 1221 +SUBNETASGN On the Assignment of Subnet Numbers 1219 +SNMP-TRAPS Defining Traps for use with SNMP 1215 +DAS Directory Assistance Service 1202 +LPDP Line Printer Daemon Protocol 1179 + +[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the +previous edition of this document.] + +6.9. Historic Protocols + +All Historic protocols have Not Recommended status. + +Protocol Name RFC STD +======== ===================================== ===== === +IPSO DoD Security Options for IP Elective 1108 +SNMPv2 Manager-to-Manager MIB Elective 1451 +SNMPv2 Party MIB for SNMPv2 Elective 1447 +SNMPv2 Security Protocols for SNMPv2 Elective 1446 +SNMPv2 Administrative Model for SNMPv2 Elective 1445 +RIP Routing Information Protocol Ele 1058 34 +-------- Mapping full 822 to Restricted 822 1137 +BGP3 Border Gateway Protocol 3 (BGP-3) 1267,1268 +-------- Gateway Requirements Req 1009 4 +EGP Exterior Gateway Protocol Rec 904 18 +SNMP-MUX SNMP MUX Protocol and MIB 1227 +OIM-MIB-II OSI Internet Management: MIB-II 1214 +IMAP3 Interactive Mail Access Protocol Version 3 1203 +SUN-RPC Remote Procedure Call Protocol Version 1 1050 +802.4-MIP IEEE 802.4 Token Bus MIB 1230 +CMOT Common Management Information Services 1189 +-------- Mail Privacy: Procedures 1113 +-------- Mail Privacy: Key Management 1114 +-------- Mail Privacy: Algorithms 1115 +NFILE A File Access Protocol 1037 +HOSTNAME HOSTNAME Protocol 953 +SFTP Simple File Transfer Protocol 913 + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 33] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +SUPDUP SUPDUP Protocol 734 +BGP Border Gateway Protocol 1163,1164 +MIB-I MIB-I 1156 +SGMP Simple Gateway Monitoring Protocol 1028 +HEMS High Level Entity Management Protocol 1021 +STATSRV Statistics Server 996 +POP2 Post Office Protocol, Version 2 937 +RATP Reliable Asynchronous Transfer Protocol 916 +HFEP Host - Front End Protocol 929 +THINWIRE Thinwire Protocol 914 +HMP Host Monitoring Protocol 869 +GGP Gateway Gateway Protocol 823 +RTELNET Remote Telnet Service 818 +CLOCK DCNET Time Server Protocol 778 +MPM Internet Message Protocol 759 +NETRJS Remote Job Service 740 +NETED Network Standard Text Editor 569 +RJE Remote Job Entry 407 +XNET Cross Net Debugger IEN-158 +NAMESERVER Host Name Server Protocol IEN-116 +MUX Multiplexing Protocol IEN-90 +GRAPHICS Graphics Protocol NIC-24308 + +[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the +previous edition of this document.] + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 34] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +6.10. Obsolete Protocols + +Some of the protocols listed in this memo are described in RFCs that are +obsoleted by newer RFCs. "Obsolete" or "obsoleted" is not an official +state or status of protocols. This subsection is for information only. + +While it may seem to be obviously wrong to have an obsoleted RFC in the +list of standards, there may be cases when an older standard is in the +process of being replaced. This process may take a year or two. + +Many obsoleted protocols are of little interest and are dropped from +this memo altogether. Some obsoleted protocols have received enough +recognition that it seems appropriate to list them under their current +status and with the following reference to their current replacement. + +RFC RFC Status Title * +==== ==== ========= =================================== = +1305 obsoletes 1119 Stan/Rec Network Time Protocol version 2 + +Thanks to Lynn Wheeler for compiling the information in this +subsection. + +[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the +previous edition of this document.] + +7. Contacts + +7.1. IAB, IETF, and IRTF Contacts + + 7.1.1. Internet Architecture Board (IAB) Contact + + Please send your comments about this list of protocols and especially + about the Draft Standard Protocols to the Internet Architecture Board + care of Abel Winerib, IAB Executive Director. + + Contacts: + + Abel Winerib + Executive Director of the IAB + Intel, JF2-64 + 2111 NE 25th Avenue + Hillsboro, OR 97124 + + 1-503-696-8972 + + AWeinrib@ibeam.jf.intel.com + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 35] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + Brian E. Carpenter + Chair of the IAB + IBM United Kingdon Laboratories + Hursley Park + Winchester + Hampshire SO21 2JN + + +44 1962 816833 + + brian@hursley.ibm.com + + + 7.1.2. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Contact + + Contacts: + + Fred Baker + Chair of the IETF + cisco Systems, Inc. + 519 Lado Drive + Santa Barbara, CA 93111 + + 1-805-681-0115 + + fred@cisco.com + + Steve Coya + IESG Secretary + Corporation for National Research Initiatives + 1895 Preston White Drive, Suite 100 + Reston, VA 22091 + + 1-703-620-8990 + + scoya@IETF.ORG + + Steve Coya + Executive Director of the IETF + Corporation for National Research Initiatives + 1895 Preston White Drive, Suite 100 + Reston, VA 22091 + + 1-703-620-8990 + + scoya@IETF.ORG + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 36] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + 7.1.3. Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) Contact + + Contact: + + Abel Winerib + Chair of the IRTF + Intel, JF2-64 + 2111 NE 25th Avenue + Hillsboro, OR 97124 + + 1-503-696-8972 + + AWeinrib@ibeam.jf.intel.com + + +7.2. Internet Assigned Numbers Authority Contact + + Contact: + + Joyce K. Reynolds + Internet Assigned Numbers Authority + USC/Information Sciences Institute + 4676 Admiralty Way + Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6695 + + 1-310-822-1511 + + IANA@IANA.ORG + + The protocol standards are managed by the Internet Assigned Numbers + Authority. + + Please refer to the document "Assigned Numbers" (RFC-1700) for + further information about the status of protocol documents. There + are two documents that summarize the requirements for host and + gateways in the Internet, "Host Requirements" (RFC-1122 and RFC-1123) + and "Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers" (RFC-1812). + + How to obtain the most recent edition of this "Internet Official + Protocol Standards" memo: + + The file "in-notes/std/std1.txt" may be copied via FTP from the + FTP.ISI.EDU computer using the FTP username "anonymous" and FTP + password "guest". + + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 37] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + +7.3. Request for Comments Editor Contact + + Contact: + + Jon Postel + RFC Editor + USC/Information Sciences Institute + 4676 Admiralty Way + Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6695 + + 1-310-822-1511 + + RFC-Editor@ISI.EDU + + Documents may be submitted via electronic mail to the RFC Editor for + consideration for publication as RFC. If you are not familiar with + the format or style requirements please request the "Instructions for + RFC Authors". In general, the style of any recent RFC may be used as + a guide. + +7.4. The Network Information Center and + Requests for Comments Distribution Contact + + RFC's may be obtained from DS.INTERNIC.NET via FTP, WAIS, and + electronic mail. Through FTP, RFC's are stored as rfc/rfcnnnn.txt + or rfc/rfcnnnn.ps where 'nnnn' is the RFC number. Login as + "anonymous" and provide your e-mail address as the password. + Through WAIS, you may use either your local WAIS client or telnet + to DS.INTERNIC.NET and login as "wais" (no password required) to + access a WAIS client. Help information and a tutorial for using + WAIS are available online. The WAIS database to search is "rfcs". + + Directory and Database Services also provides a mail server + interface. Send a mail message to mailserv@ds.internic.net and + include any of the following commands in the message body: + + document-by-name rfcnnnn where 'nnnn' is the RFC number + The text version is sent. + + file /ftp/rfc/rfcnnnn.yyy where 'nnnn' is the RFC number. + and 'yyy' is 'txt' or 'ps'. + + help to get information on how to use + the mailserver. + + The InterNIC directory and database services collection of + resource listings, internet documents such as RFCs, FYIs, STDs, + and Internet Drafts, and publicly accessible databases are also + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 38] + +RFC 2200 Internet Standards June 1997 + + + now available via Gopher. All our collections are WAIS indexed + and can be searched from the Gopher menu. + + To access the InterNIC Gopher Servers, please connect to + "internic.net" port 70. + + Contact: admin@ds.internic.net + +7.5. Sources for Requests for Comments + + Details on many sources of RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by + sending an EMAIL message to "rfc-info@ISI.EDU" with the message body + "help: ways_to_get_rfcs". For example: + + To: rfc-info@ISI.EDU + Subject: getting rfcs + + help: ways_to_get_rfcs + +8. Security Considerations + + Security issues are not addressed in this memo. + +9. Author's Address + + Jon Postel + USC/Information Sciences Institute + 4676 Admiralty Way + Marina del Rey, CA 90292 + + Phone: 310-822-1511 + Fax: 310-823-6714 + + Email: Postel@ISI.EDU + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 39] + |