summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc53.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorThomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> 2024-11-27 20:54:24 +0100
committerThomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> 2024-11-27 20:54:24 +0100
commit4bfd864f10b68b71482b35c818559068ef8d5797 (patch)
treee3989f47a7994642eb325063d46e8f08ffa681dc /doc/rfc/rfc53.txt
parentea76e11061bda059ae9f9ad130a9895cc85607db (diff)
doc: Add RFC documents
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc53.txt')
-rw-r--r--doc/rfc/rfc53.txt59
1 files changed, 59 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc53.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc53.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3acc1b3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc53.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group S. Crocker
+Request for Comments #53 UCLA
+ 9 June 70
+
+
+ An Official Protocol Mechanism
+
+
+During the Spring Joint Computer Conference in Atlantic City, Larry
+Roberts, Barry Wessler, Cordell Green, Jon Postel and I discussed rules
+for establishing and modifying an official Host-Host protocol.
+
+The following decisions were made:
+
+ 1. A new set of documents will be created. This set of
+ documents will specify the official Host-Host protocol. When
+ it becomes appropriate, these documents will be maintained at
+ the Network Information Center on SRI's computer.
+
+ 2. I will distribute proposals for the initial version of the
+ official protocol and all subsequent changes as NWG/RFC's.
+ These proposals will be formulated from suggestions made by
+ any interested parties.
+
+ 3. After a proposal for a change in the official protocol
+ has been issued as an NWG/RFC, networkers are requested to
+ respond with approval, criticism, etc. A cutoff date will be
+ included with each protocol.
+
+ 4. After the cutoff date, one of two situations will prevail.
+ Either the proposal will have been substantially accepted by
+ the network community, or substantial criticism will have been
+ generated. In the latter case, the process stops and no
+ change occurs to the official protocol.
+
+ 5. If the proposal has been substantially accepted, the
+ proposal, together with its minor revisions will be forwarded
+ to the ARPA office. Barry Wessler or his successor will then
+ either approve or disapprove the whole proposal. His decision
+ will be returned to me by letter.
+
+ 6. After the ARPA office approves the proposal, I will send
+ out the new protocol (as mentioned in item 1 above).
+
+The first version of an official protocol will be proferred this month.
+
+ [ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ]
+[ into the online RFC archives by Kathy de Graaf 2/98 ]
+
+
+
+ [Page 1]
+