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/rfc479.txt | |
parent | ea76e11061bda059ae9f9ad130a9895cc85607db (diff) |
doc: Add RFC documents
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc479.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc479.txt | 283 |
1 files changed, 283 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc479.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc479.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c42a550 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc479.txt @@ -0,0 +1,283 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group James E. White (JEW) +Request for Comments: 479 SRI-ARC +NIC: 14948 March 8, 1973 + + + Use of FTP by the NIC Journal + + At the Network Mail Meeting (see -- 14317,) the NIC outlined it's + requirements for implementing FTP Journal delivery and submission. + + It had always been our thinking that those two services should rely + upon the File Transfer Protocol's MLFL command for their + implementation. + + Prior to the meeting, we had envisioned that, in the case of + submission, for example, the user would embed what parameters the NIC + required (e.g., an indication that this piece of mail was to be + journalized, a list of NIC idents, etc.) in the USERNAME field of the + MLFL command, in a way that was transparent to his FTP user process, + and that SRI-ARC's FTP server process would parse the 'user name' for + the parameters and internally invoke the Journal System with them and + the text of the mail as arguments. + + Our goal (which this scheme would have satisfied) was to provide + the desired services while confining software changes to our own + system and, in particular, to avoid requiring that user FTP + processes or the File Transfer Protocol itself be modified. + + It was, however, the consensus of those present at the meeting that + it was preferable to modify FTP in such a way that all required + parameters could be explicitly declared, rather than require that + they be hidden within what purported to be simply a user name. + + The intent of this RFC is to list what we (the NIC) believe were the + new FTP commands it was agreed should be defined in support of mail + submission and delivery. Actually, we've done some massaging after + thinking about the issues for awhile, and so this is really a + description of what we'd like to see included in the File Transfer + Protocol (following the lines of thought which developed at the + meeting), along with a short description of how the NIC would use + them. + + Some of the commands currently make sense only if issued TO the NIC's + FTP server process (as opposed to anybody else's) and others only if + issued BY the NIC's FTP user process (as opposed to anybody else's). + This is true because currently only the NIC plans to offer mail + + + + + +White [Page 1] + +RFC 479 Use of FTP by the NIC Journal March 1973 + + + forwarding and recording (i.e., the Journal System) as a service. + However, other hosts may in the future desire to implement a similar + service, at which time these special commands will have wider use. + + Conceptually, all of these commands are sub-commands of a new MAIL + command, but the intent for the moment is not to define their + position within the FTP dialogue nor their syntax, but simply to + describe them conceptually. Details of syntax and use are left to + the FTP Interest Group which meets 16-MAR-73 in Boston (see -- + 14333,). + + The new sub-commands are described below. Bracketed fields are + optional; slash denotes a choice of two or more alternatives. + + (1) TITLE title + + Where 'title' is a character string describing for the human + reader the contents of the mail. + + (2) USER-READABLE-AUTHOR author + + Where 'author' identifies the author of the mail to the human + reader. This may be a nickname, or any other identifier with + which the human sender chooses to sign his mail. + + (3) PROCESS-READABLE-AUTHOR last, first initial (ident) + + Where the author's name (and ident if known) is made available + to the server in a form it can hope to parse (if need be). + + This sub-command is important to the NIC, providing a basis for + locating the author in the NIC's Ident files. + + (4) FOR-ACKNOWLEDGMENT-AUTHOR username hostname + + Where 'username' and 'hostname' define the sender in a way + useful in acknowledging delivery (of forwarded mail). + + The acknowledgment will itself be a piece of mail sent from + the NIC to 'username' at 'hostname'. + + It's important, conceptually, to note the NIC's unique role + here. Normally, acceptance of the mail by the server would + constitute acknowledgment of delivery. But, in the case of + Journal submission, the NIC acts only as a forwarding agent, + and hence delivery of mail by the sender to SRI-ARC isn't + + + + + +White [Page 2] + +RFC 479 Use of FTP by the NIC Journal March 1973 + + + really delivery at all -- only submission. Final delivery + occurs when the NIC transmits a copy of the mail to each of its + addressees; hence the need for this special kind of + acknowledgment. + + Note that this sub-command and the previous two constitute + different renderings of the sender's name. + + (5) ACKNOWLEDGMENT-DETAILS + DEFAULT / (COMPLETION / FAILURE / PERIODIC interval + GIVEUP time + TERSE / VERBOSE) + + The value of the first parameter (ignoring 'DEFAULT' for the + moment) determines the conditions under which acknowledgment + will be made to the sender: + + -- upon completion, whether delivery was successful or timed + out for one or more addressees, + + -- only if delivery failed for one or more addressees, or + + -- periodically until delivery is complete. + + The value of the second parameter determines the time after + which delivery attempts will be discontinued. + + The value of the third parameter determines how detailed -- in + some as yet unspecified sense -- an acknowledgment will be + returned. + + A verbose acknowledgment might, in the case of delivery + failure, include a copy of the text of the message, or, for + mail sent by citation (see item 10 below), a pointer to it. + + If DEFAULT is specified (in which case, FOR-ACKNOWLEDGMENT- + AUTHOR should not be specified, and 'DEFAULT' applies to it, + too), the NIC will extract a set of default values from its + Ident files, provided that a PROCESS-READABLE-AUTHOR subcommand + is present and the sender's NIC Ident can be inferred from it; + otherwise, the NIC will apply a set of (as yet unspecified) + system defaults. + + The NIC's Ident files will be modified to contain, for each + user known to it, the kind of acknowledgment the user + usually wants (i.e., his default) and the username and + hostname that define the destination for such + acknowledgments. These last two pieces of information will + + + +White [Page 3] + +RFC 479 Use of FTP by the NIC Journal March 1973 + + + also be used in delivering mail to the user if he has + requested Network delivery (as opposed to Online (at the + NIC) or hardcopy). + + (6) ADDRESSEES-ARE name1, name2, ... + + This sub-command identifies the recipient(s) of the mail. In + general, 'namei' will be the name by which the recipient is + known locally in the server's system. + + The NIC's server FTP process will permit 'namei' to be any of + the following: + + -- a NIC Ident (designating either an individual or a + group), + + -- username hostname, where 'username' is the name by which + the addressee is known at host 'hostname', or + + -- lastname, firstname initial , which the NIC will attempt + to parse and then locate in its Ident files. + + Note that now the possibility of multiple addressees is + explicitly admitted by the Protocol, but the meaning of 'useri' + (to the server) is left server-dependent. + + (7) MAIL-CLASS + BULK/POSTCARD + SPECIAL-DELIVERY/FIRST-CLASS + + The first parameter makes a statement about the size of the + mail, and the server may choose to use it to decide how and + where to store he mail for the addressee. + + The second parameter makes a statement about the importance of + the mail, and the server may choose to expedite delivery (e.g., + interrupt the user if he's logged in) for SPECIAL-DELIVERY + mail. + + (8) RECORD [identifier] [miscellaneous] + + This is the command to the server to record the mail. + 'Identifier' allows the sender the option of specifying a pre- + assigned identifier if he has one; if this field is not + present, the server assigns one. + + 'Miscellaneous' includes any server-dependent parameters which + the server may require or allow. + + + +White [Page 4] + +RFC 479 Use of FTP by the NIC Journal March 1973 + + + When this command is issued to the NIC, it will be taken as a + command to Journalize the mail, and 'identifier' may be: + + NIC number [RFC number] + + The NIC may allow 'miscellaneous' to contain such information + as comments, keywords, etc. + + (9) PRESERVED-AT hostname AS identifier + + This is not a command but a statement of fact which the FTP + server will presumably relay to the user as it does the + information contained in (for example) the TITLE command. + + The implication is that a copy of this piece of mail has been + preserved at 'hostname' and is retrievable -- on a long-term + basis -- with 'identifier'. 'Identifier' might, in general, be + a pathname. + + When the NIC delivers Journal articles through the Net, it will + include this sub-command, and 'identifier' will be a NIC + number, and 'hostname' of course 'SRI-ARC' or 'NIC'. + + (10) TEXT text + FILE pathname hostname + + One of these two sub-commands is used to actually transmit the + mail: the first transmits the text of the mail, the second a + pointer to it (leaving open to the FTP server (or his user) the + option of retrieving the text of the mail from the specified + host). + + The NIC will transmit mail created within NLS with 'Submit + File' using the FILE command, and mail created with 'Submit + Message' using the TEXT command. For mail entering the SRI- + ARC system via its FTP server process, the NIC will employ the + same command in delivery as was used in submission. + + + + + + [ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ] + [ into the online RFC archives by Hannes Faestermann 12/97 ] + + + + + + + +White [Page 5] + |