From 4bfd864f10b68b71482b35c818559068ef8d5797 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Thomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 20:54:24 +0100
Subject: doc: Add RFC documents

---
 doc/rfc/rfc328.txt | 112 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 112 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 doc/rfc/rfc328.txt

(limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc328.txt')

diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc328.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc328.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f4ba9f4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc328.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,112 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group                                 Jon Postel
+Request for Comments: 328                             Computer Science
+                                                      UCLA-NMC
+NIC 9635                                              29 April 72
+Categories: Telnet
+References: RFC 328
+
+                   Suggested Telnet Protocol Changes
+
+    I hereby propose the following changes to the Telnet protocol.  If
+no substantial negative response is received by 15 May 72 it will be
+assumed that these changes are desired and should be incorporated in
+any "Official Telnet Protocol".
+
+    First I suggest that we drop the idea of a "minimum"
+implementation and require a standard implementation which includes all
+aspects of the protocol.
+
+    Second I suggest that we eliminate the DATA TYPE signals.
+
+    Third I suggest that we do away with HIDE YOUR INPUT signal.
+
+Arguments:
+
+    Standard Implementation:
+         The idea of an accepted implementation which does not include
+         whole protocol is an admission that the parts of the
+         protocol left out are either not useful or not expected to be
+         used, and that other mechanisms will be constructed to provide
+         those functions.  Thus there should be no minimum
+         implementation, but only the standard implementation which
+         includes the whole protocol.
+
+    Data Types:
+         The DATA TYPE signals are supposed to allow the communicating
+         processes to switch from ASCII to some other code set.  However,
+         the other code sets suggested do not allow for the Telnet
+         signals, and thus once the switch is made the Telnet
+         protocol is no longer applicable.  There is no way to specify
+         how to get back to ASCII or Telnet thus the
+         conversation is "out of control".
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+                                                                [Page 1]
+
+    Hide Your Input:
+         The HIDE YOUR INPUT signal is supposed to tell the user Telnet
+         process to do whatever it can to hide the user's
+         subsequent input.  One problem with this is determining
+         how much input is to be hidden.  It is very difficult to find a
+         method of hiding input which works for all combinations of
+         systems and terminals, but the HIDE YOUR INPUT signal dosen't
+         help in any real way.
+
+
+       [ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ]
+       [ into the online RFC archives by BBN Corp. under the   ]
+       [ direction of Alex McKenzie.                   12/96   ]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+                                                                [Page 2]
+
-- 
cgit v1.2.3