272:, published in June 2022. Generally, the new model is intended to clarify responsibilities and processes for defining and implementing policies related to the RFC series and the RFC Editor function. Changes in the new model included establishing the position of the RFC Consulting Editor, the RFC Series Working Group (RSWG), and the RFC Series Approval Board (RSAB). It also established a new Editorial Stream for the RFC Series and concluded the RSOC. The role of the RSE was changed to the RFC Series Consulting Editor (RSCE). In September 2022, Alexis Rossi was appointed to that position.
415:. Only the IETF creates BCPs and RFCs on the standards track. The IAB publishes informational documents relating to policy or architecture. The IRTF publishes the results of research, either as informational documents or as experiments. Independent submissions are published at the discretion of the Independent Submissions Editor. Non-IETF documents are reviewed by the
260:(IRTF), and an independent stream from other outside sources. A new model was proposed in 2008, refined, and published in August 2009, splitting the task into several roles, including the RFC Series Advisory Group (RSAG). The model was updated in 2012. The streams were also refined in December 2009, with standards defined for their style.
175:, which first defined the RFC series, Crocker started attributing the RFC series to the Network Working Group. Rather than being a formal committee, it was a loose association of researchers interested in the ARPANET project. In effect, it included anyone who wanted to join the meetings and discussions about the project.
758:
is used for some very old RFCs, where it is unclear which status the document would get if it were published today. Some of these RFCs would not be published at all today; an early RFC was often just that: a simple
Request for Comments, not intended to specify a protocol, administrative procedure, or
452:
RFC 2046 Media Types
November 1996 A. Collected Grammar .................................... 43 1. Introduction The first document in this set, RFC 2045, defines a number of header fields, including Content-Type. The Content-Type field is used to specify the nature of the data in the
263:
In
January 2010, the RFC Editor function was moved to a contractor, Association Management Solutions, with Glenn Kowack serving as interim series editor. In late 2011, Heather Flanagan was hired as the permanent RFC Series Editor (RSE). Also at that time, an RFC Series Oversight Committee (RSOC) was
674:
An experimental RFC can be an IETF document or an individual submission to the RFC Editor. A draft is designated experimental if it is unclear the proposal will work as intended or unclear if the proposal will be widely adopted. An experimental RFC may be promoted to standards track if it becomes
140:
researchers. Unlike the modern RFCs, many of the early RFCs were actual
Requests for Comments and were titled as such to avoid sounding too declarative and to encourage discussion. The RFC leaves questions open and is written in a less formal style. This less formal style is now typical of
503:
For easy access to the metadata of an RFC, including abstract, keywords, author(s), publication date, errata, status, and especially later updates, the RFC Editor site offers a search form with many features. A redirection sets some efficient parameters, example: rfc:5000.
338:
The RFC tradition of pragmatic, experience-driven, after-the-fact standards authorship accomplished by individuals or small working groups can have important advantages over the more formal, committee-driven process typical of ISO and national standards bodies.
579:
If an RFC becomes an
Internet Standard (STD), it is assigned an STD number but retains its RFC number. The definitive list of Internet Standards is the Official Internet Protocol Standards. Previously STD 1 used to maintain a snapshot of the list.
296:. Once assigned a number and published, an RFC is never rescinded or modified; if the document requires amendments, the authors publish a revised document. Therefore, some RFCs supersede others; the superseded RFCs are said to be
695:. The border between standards track and BCP is often unclear. If a document only affects the Internet Standards Process, like BCP 9, or IETF administration, it is clearly a BCP. If it only defines rules and regulations for
370:
RFCs: BCP, FYI, and STD. Best
Current Practice (BCP) is a sub-series of mandatory IETF RFCs not on standards track. For Your Information (FYI) is a sub-series of informational RFCs promoted by the IETF as specified in
542:
Once submitted, accepted, and published, an RFC cannot be changed. Errata may be submitted, which are published separately. More significant changes require a new submission which will receive a new serial number.
267:
In 2020, the IAB convened the RFC Editor Future
Development program to discuss potential changes to the RFC Editor model. The results of the program were included the RFC Editor Model (Version 3) as defined in
90:, procedures, and events. According to Crocker, the documents "shape the Internet's inner workings and have played a significant role in its success," but are not widely known outside the community.
229:
Following the expiration of the original ARPANET contract with the U.S. federal government, the
Internet Society, acting on behalf of the IETF, contracted with the Networking Division of the
308:
the superseding RFC. Together, the serialized RFCs compose a continuous historical record of the evolution of
Internet standards and practices. The RFC process is documented in RFC
237:(ISI) to assume the editorship and publishing responsibilities under the direction of the IAB. Sandy Ginoza joined USC/ISI in 1999 to work on RFC editing, and Alice Hagens in 2005.
767:
The general rule is that original authors (or their employers, if their employment conditions so stipulate) retain copyright unless they make an explicit transfer of their rights.
1389:
252:
of RFCs were defined, so that the editing duties could be divided. IETF documents came from IETF working groups or submissions sponsored by an IETF area director from the
770:
An independent body, the IETF Trust, holds the copyright for some RFCs and for all others it is granted a license by the authors that allows it to reproduce RFCs. The
519:
Not all RFCs are standards. Each RFC is assigned a designation with regard to status within the
Internet standardization process. This status is one of the following:
730:
RFC is one that the technology defined by the RFC is no longer recommended for use, which differs from "Obsoletes" header in a replacement RFC. For example, RFC
453:
body of a MIME entity, by giving media type and subtype identifiers, and by providing auxiliary information that may be required for certain media types. After the
379:
obsoleted FYI 1 and concluded this sub-series. Standard (STD) used to be the third and highest maturity level of the IETF standards track specified in RFC
2076:
331:
without support from an external institution. Standards-track RFCs are published with approval from the IETF, and are usually produced by experts participating in
324:
102:
1203:
702:
The BCP series also covers technical recommendations for how to practice Internet standards; for instance, the recommendation to use source filtering to make
63:
describing methods, behaviors, research, or innovations applicable to the working of the Internet and Internet-connected systems. It is submitted either for
137:
651:
1922:
Many of the early RFC documents have status "unknown" because they come from the long-gone era when an RFC really was just a request for comments.
1711:... each RFC has a status…: Informational, Experimental, or Standards Track (Proposed Standard, Draft Standard, Internet Standard), or Historic.
583:
When an Internet Standard is updated, its STD number stays the same, now referring to a new RFC or set of RFCs. A given Internet Standard, STD
738:) itself is obsoleted by various newer RFCs, but SMTP itself is still "current technology", so it is not in "Historic" status. However, since
1076:
157:
1531:
508:
284:
text format. In August 2019, the format was changed so that new documents can be viewed optimally in devices with varying display sizes.
696:
569:
253:
423:
RFCs generally contain relevant information or experiments for the Internet at large not in conflict with IETF work. compare RFC
1393:
335:, which first publish an Internet Draft. This approach facilitates initial rounds of peer review before documents mature into RFCs.
230:
31:
1047:
125:(IAB), and – to some extent – the global community of computer network researchers in general.
118:
52:
351:
1536:
234:
849:
The Request for Comments (RFC) Series is the archival series dedicated to documenting Internet technical specifications, ...
2071:
400:
257:
183:
74:. However, many RFCs are informational or experimental in nature and are not standards. The RFC system was invented by
1905:
1579:
404:
187:
179:
122:
774:
is referenced on many RFCs prior to RFC4714 as the copyright owner, but it transferred its rights to the IETF Trust.
358:) as a meta-language, and simple text-based formatting, in order to keep the RFCs consistent and easy to understand.
1211:
687:
subseries collects administrative documents and other texts which are considered as official rules and not only
788:
160:(UCLA), and published on April 7, 1969. Although written by Steve Crocker, the RFC had emerged from an early
47:) is a publication in a series from the principal technical development and standards-setting bodies for the
739:
178:
Many of the subsequent RFCs of the 1970s also came from UCLA, because UCLA is one of the first of what were
98:
87:
742:
has entirely superseded earlier BGP versions, the RFCs describing those earlier versions, such as RFC
699:(IANA) registries it is less clear; most of these documents are BCPs, but some are on the standards track.
1877:
1015:
783:
684:
1909:
2058:(HTML) With the text of each RFC, also mentions what other RFCs this one "updates" or is "updated by".
712:
Network Ingress Filtering: Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Address Spoofing
435:. The Editorial Stream is used to effect editorial policy changes across the RFC series (see RFC
148:
In December 1969, researchers began distributing new RFCs via the newly operational ARPANET. RFC
1156:
203:
281:
1182:
1024:
655:
342:
Most RFCs use a common set of terms such as "MUST" and "NOT RECOMMENDED" (as defined by RFC
332:
56:
1671:
1072:
934:
552:
242:
195:
191:
71:
1967:
1792:
1759:
1693:
1622:
1583:
1498:
1361:
1320:
1282:
1244:
1172:
1129:
1052:
956:
897:
831:
771:
461:
573:
320:
1934:
478:
328:
256:. The IAB can publish its own documents. A research stream of documents comes from the
142:
83:
2065:
1845:
1679:
1187:
942:
642:
refers to a certain RFC or set of RFCs, but which RFC or RFCs may change over time).
293:
165:
161:
153:
75:
1535: prior to 1 November 2008 and incorporated under the "relicensing" terms of the
17:
793:
198:
and the source of early RFCs. The ARC became the first network information center (
1994:
1980:
1957:
1805:
1786:
1772:
1749:
1724:
1706:
1683:
1635:
1612:
1596:
1573:
1550:
1511:
1492:
1374:
1351:
1333:
1310:
1295:
1272:
1257:
1234:
969:
946:
910:
887:
844:
821:
743:
707:
659:
632:
628:
624:
620:
616:
608:
604:
600:
497:
486:
465:
436:
432:
428:
424:
384:
380:
376:
372:
355:
347:
343:
309:
269:
223:
64:
1093:
731:
387:(a new part of BCP 9) reduced the standards track to two maturity levels.
2045:
1675:
1428:
938:
703:
485:
of the form https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5000, shown for RFC
238:
215:
60:
1449:
1142:
1119:
990:
603:
was an Internet Standard—STD 1—and in May 2008 it was replaced with RFC
172:
149:
67:
or to convey new concepts, information, or, occasionally, engineering humor.
469:
133:
129:
1819:
1649:
1526:
2039:
1788:
Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document
1177:
1160:
199:
48:
481:
is the RFC Datatracker. Almost any published RFC can be retrieved via a
113:
The inception of the RFC format occurred in 1969 as part of the seminal
1849:
1614:
IESG Procedures for Handling of Independent and IRTF Stream Submissions
1466:
861:
619:
became an Internet Standard, and as of May 2008 STD 1 is RFC
496:
text and is published in that form, but may also be available in other
114:
79:
595:
at a given time, but later the same standard may be updated to be RFC
2034:
1972:
1797:
1764:
1698:
1627:
1588:
1503:
1366:
1325:
1287:
1249:
1134:
961:
902:
836:
219:
55:(IETF). An RFC is authored by individuals or groups of engineers and
2029:
2024:
1407:
493:
889:
A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on Avian Carriers
1963:
1855:
1755:
1689:
1618:
1357:
1316:
1278:
1240:
952:
893:
827:
735:
416:
396:
367:
222:. On his death in 1998, his obituary was published as RFC
145:
documents, the precursor step before being approved as an RFC.
117:
project. Today, it is the official publication channel for the
93:
Outside of the Internet community, other documents also called
2055:
1748:
Housley, Russell; Crocker, Dave; Burger, Eric (October 2011).
715:
482:
78:
in 1969 to help record unofficial notes on the development of
1094:"Meet the man who invented the instructions for the Internet"
206:
to distribute the RFCs along with other network information.
27:
Publication of the development and standards for the Internet
2050:
1899:
1736:
RFCs are an archival series of documents; they can't change
70:
The IETF adopts some of the proposals published as RFCs as
1823:
2019:
1210:. Vol. 13, no. 1. Cisco Systems. Archived from
245:
continued to be part of the team until October 13, 2006.
1429:"Alexis Rossi appointed as RFC Series Consulting Editor"
82:. RFCs have since become official documents of Internet
1069:
Where Wizards Stay Up Late: The Origins of the Internet
638:(Best Current Practices work in a similar fashion; BCP
759:
anything else for which the RFC series is used today.
280:
Requests for Comments were originally produced in non-
1408:"The RFC Series Editor and the Series Reorganization"
1204:"RFC Editor in Transition: Past, Present, and Future"
194:, is another of the four first of what were ARPANET
1751:
Reducing the Standards Track to Two Maturity Levels
1611:Alvestrand, Harald; Housley, Russ (December 2009).
557:Standards track documents are further divided into
1956:Bradner, Scott; Contreras, Jorge (November 2008).
323:process of formal standards organizations such as
164:discussion between Steve Crocker, Steve Carr, and
1161:"The Network Information Center and its Archives"
650:An informational RFC can be nearly anything from
327:(ISO). Internet technology experts may submit an
1878:"IESG Statement on Designating RFCs as Historic"
1350:Daigle, Leslie; Kolkman, Olaf (December 2009).
325:International Organization for Standardization
241:took over the role of RFC project lead, while
103:National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
1959:Rights Contributors Provide to the IETF Trust
1525:This article is based on material taken from
366:The RFC series contains three sub-series for
8:
1650:"Are all RFCs Internet standards documents?"
1494:IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures
1461:
1459:
663:
319:The RFC production process differs from the
1851:The Internet Standards Process – Revision 3
1071:. A Touchstone book. Simon & Schuster.
553:Internet Standard § Internet Standards
1901:IETF Standards Written by ISC Contributors
1820:"7.5. Informational and Experimental RFCs"
1572:Klensin, John; Thaler, David (July 2007).
1345:
1343:
1309:Kolkman, Olaf; Halpern, Joel (June 2012).
446:
314:The Internet Standards Process, Revision 3
1971:
1796:
1763:
1697:
1626:
1587:
1575:Independent Submissions to the RFC Editor
1502:
1365:
1324:
1286:
1248:
1186:
1176:
1133:
1010:
1008:
960:
901:
835:
815:
813:
811:
809:
654:to widely recognized essential RFCs like
152:, titled "Host Software", was written by
805:
599:instead. For example, in 2007 RFC
511:(ISSN) of the RFC series is 2070-1721.
419:for conflicts with IETF work. IRTF and
2077:Computer-related introductions in 1969
1353:RFC Streams, Headers, and Boilerplates
991:"RFC's, Internet Request For Comments"
662:). Some informational RFCs formed the
1067:Hafner, Katie; Lyon, Matthew (1996).
158:University of California, Los Angeles
30:For the Knowledge (XXG) process, see
7:
2046:Official Internet Protocol Standards
1532:Free On-line Dictionary of Computing
1390:"RFC Editor Transition Announcement"
929:
927:
623:. as of December 2013 RFC
509:International Standard Serial Number
477:The official source for RFCs on the
32:Knowledge (XXG):Requests for comment
1020:, The New York Times, 6 April 2009"
697:Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
658:Structure and Delegation (RFC
570:Internet Engineering Steering Group
254:Internet Engineering Steering Group
1912:from the original on April 5, 2022
1723:Nottingham, Mark (July 31, 2018).
1165:Annals of the History of Computing
568:Only the IETF, represented by the
292:The RFC Editor assigns each RFC a
25:
1048:"Notice and Request for Comments"
886:Waitzman, David (April 1, 1990).
746:, have been designated historic.
459:
231:University of Southern California
1388:Glenn Kowack (January 7, 2010).
1118:Crocker, Steve (April 7, 1969).
492:Every RFC is submitted as plain
395:There are five streams of RFCs:
375:(FYI 1). In 2011, RFC
468:, which defines the text/plain
449:
383:(BCP 9). In 2011 RFC
119:Internet Engineering Task Force
53:Internet Engineering Task Force
2035:RFC Frequently Asked Questions
1018:How the Internet Got Its Rules
235:Information Sciences Institute
128:The authors of the first RFCs
1:
1271:Kolkman, Olaf (August 2009).
1236:The RFC Series and RFC Editor
1208:The Internet Protocol Journal
820:St Andre, Peter (June 2022).
1312:RFC Editor Model (Version 2)
1274:RFC Editor Model (Version 1)
1233:Daigle, Leslie (July 2007).
1202:Leslie Daigle (March 2010).
823:RFC Editor Model (Version 3)
258:Internet Research Task Force
184:Augmentation Research Center
180:Interface Message Processors
1906:Internet Systems Consortium
1092:Metz, Cade (May 18, 2012).
188:Stanford Research Institute
123:Internet Architecture Board
97:have been published, as in
2093:
1685:Not All RFCs are Standards
1473:. RFC Editor. May 25, 2008
948:Not All RFCs are Standards
691:, but which do not affect
550:
352:augmented Backus–Naur form
132:their work and circulated
29:
1551:"Independent Submissions"
706:more difficult (RFC
472:, is itself a plain text.
288:Production and versioning
789:Internet Experiment Note
675:popular and works well.
635:to no longer use STD 1.
627:is replaced by RFC
202:), which was managed by
88:communications protocols
1539:, version 1.3 or later.
1450:"RFC Format Change FAQ"
1159:(July–September 2010).
182:(IMPs) on ARPANET. The
99:U.S. Federal government
51:, most prominently the
1908:, September 10, 2021,
409:independent submission
214:From 1969 until 1998,
1880:. IETF. July 20, 2014
1214:on September 20, 2010
1016:"Stephen D. Crocker,
784:Best current practice
685:Best Current Practice
679:Best Current Practice
529:Best Current Practice
276:New publishing format
95:requests for comments
2072:Request for Comments
1725:"How to Read an RFC"
1527:Request+for+Comments
1178:10.1109/MAHC.2010.54
1157:Elizabeth J. Feinler
993:. Livinginternet.com
631:, updating RFC
572:(IESG), can approve
204:Elizabeth J. Feinler
41:Request for Comments
18:Requests for comment
1056:. January 16, 2018.
474:
333:IETF Working Groups
210:RFC Editor function
57:computer scientists
1995:"Reproducing RFCs"
1935:"Reproducing RFCs"
1672:Huitema, Christian
1025:The New York Times
935:Huitema, Christian
693:over the wire data
656:Domain Name System
218:served as the RFC
101:work, such as the
72:Internet Standards
1846:Bradner, Scott O.
1396:on June 29, 2011.
1078:978-0-684-81201-4
563:Internet Standard
559:Proposed Standard
475:
473:
458:
421:independent
354:(ABNF) (RFC
243:Joyce K. Reynolds
192:Douglas Engelbart
59:in the form of a
16:(Redirected from
2084:
2007:
2006:
2004:
2002:
1991:
1985:
1984:
1975:
1973:10.17487/RFC5378
1953:
1947:
1946:
1944:
1942:
1931:
1925:
1924:
1919:
1917:
1896:
1890:
1889:
1887:
1885:
1874:
1868:
1867:
1865:
1863:
1848:(October 1996).
1842:
1836:
1835:
1834:
1832:
1816:
1810:
1809:
1800:
1798:10.17487/RFC7100
1783:
1777:
1776:
1767:
1765:10.17487/RFC6410
1745:
1739:
1738:
1733:
1731:
1720:
1714:
1713:
1701:
1699:10.17487/RFC1796
1668:
1662:
1661:
1659:
1657:
1646:
1640:
1639:
1630:
1628:10.17487/RFC5742
1608:
1602:
1600:
1591:
1589:10.17487/RFC4846
1569:
1563:
1562:
1560:
1558:
1547:
1541:
1540:
1522:
1516:
1515:
1506:
1504:10.17487/RFC2418
1489:
1483:
1482:
1480:
1478:
1463:
1454:
1453:
1446:
1440:
1439:
1437:
1435:
1425:
1419:
1418:
1416:
1414:
1404:
1398:
1397:
1392:. Archived from
1385:
1379:
1378:
1369:
1367:10.17487/RFC5741
1347:
1338:
1337:
1328:
1326:10.17487/RFC6635
1306:
1300:
1299:
1290:
1288:10.17487/RFC5620
1268:
1262:
1261:
1252:
1250:10.17487/RFC4844
1230:
1224:
1223:
1221:
1219:
1199:
1193:
1192:
1190:
1180:
1153:
1147:
1146:
1137:
1135:10.17487/RFC0001
1124:
1115:
1109:
1108:
1106:
1104:
1089:
1083:
1082:
1064:
1058:
1057:
1053:Federal Register
1044:
1038:
1037:
1035:
1033:
1012:
1003:
1002:
1000:
998:
987:
981:
980:
978:
976:
964:
962:10.17487/RFC1796
931:
922:
921:
919:
917:
905:
903:10.17487/RFC1149
883:
877:
876:
874:
872:
858:
852:
851:
839:
837:10.17487/RFC9280
817:
772:Internet Society
665:
460:
447:
21:
2092:
2091:
2087:
2086:
2085:
2083:
2082:
2081:
2062:
2061:
2051:IETF's RFC page
2016:
2011:
2010:
2000:
1998:
1993:
1992:
1988:
1955:
1954:
1950:
1940:
1938:
1933:
1932:
1928:
1915:
1913:
1898:
1897:
1893:
1883:
1881:
1876:
1875:
1871:
1861:
1859:
1844:
1843:
1839:
1830:
1828:
1825:The Tao of IETF
1818:
1817:
1813:
1785:
1784:
1780:
1747:
1746:
1742:
1729:
1727:
1722:
1721:
1717:
1670:
1669:
1665:
1655:
1653:
1648:
1647:
1643:
1610:
1609:
1605:
1571:
1570:
1566:
1556:
1554:
1549:
1548:
1544:
1524:
1523:
1519:
1491:
1490:
1486:
1476:
1474:
1465:
1464:
1457:
1448:
1447:
1443:
1433:
1431:
1427:
1426:
1422:
1412:
1410:
1406:
1405:
1401:
1387:
1386:
1382:
1349:
1348:
1341:
1308:
1307:
1303:
1270:
1269:
1265:
1232:
1231:
1227:
1217:
1215:
1201:
1200:
1196:
1155:
1154:
1150:
1122:
1117:
1116:
1112:
1102:
1100:
1091:
1090:
1086:
1079:
1066:
1065:
1061:
1046:
1045:
1041:
1031:
1029:
1028:. April 7, 2009
1014:
1013:
1006:
996:
994:
989:
988:
984:
974:
972:
933:
932:
925:
915:
913:
885:
884:
880:
870:
868:
860:
859:
855:
819:
818:
807:
802:
780:
765:
752:
724:
681:
672:
648:
574:standards-track
555:
549:
547:Standards Track
533:Standards Track
517:
455:
454:
445:
393:
364:
321:standardization
290:
278:
212:
111:
35:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
2090:
2088:
2080:
2079:
2074:
2064:
2063:
2060:
2059:
2053:
2048:
2043:
2037:
2032:
2027:
2022:
2015:
2014:External links
2012:
2009:
2008:
1986:
1948:
1926:
1891:
1869:
1837:
1811:
1778:
1740:
1715:
1682:(April 1995).
1680:Crocker, Steve
1663:
1641:
1603:
1564:
1542:
1517:
1484:
1455:
1441:
1420:
1399:
1380:
1339:
1301:
1263:
1225:
1194:
1148:
1110:
1084:
1077:
1059:
1039:
1004:
982:
945:(April 1995).
943:Crocker, Steve
923:
878:
853:
804:
803:
801:
798:
797:
796:
791:
786:
779:
776:
764:
761:
751:
748:
723:
720:
680:
677:
671:
668:
647:
644:
607:, so RFC
587:, may be RFCs
551:Main article:
548:
545:
516:
513:
479:World Wide Web
457:
456:
451:
450:
444:
443:Obtaining RFCs
441:
392:
389:
363:
360:
329:Internet Draft
289:
286:
277:
274:
248:In July 2007,
211:
208:
190:, directed by
143:Internet Draft
110:
107:
84:specifications
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2089:
2078:
2075:
2073:
2070:
2069:
2067:
2057:
2054:
2052:
2049:
2047:
2044:
2041:
2038:
2036:
2033:
2031:
2028:
2026:
2023:
2021:
2018:
2017:
2013:
1996:
1990:
1987:
1982:
1979:
1974:
1969:
1965:
1961:
1960:
1952:
1949:
1936:
1930:
1927:
1923:
1911:
1907:
1903:
1902:
1895:
1892:
1879:
1873:
1870:
1857:
1853:
1852:
1847:
1841:
1838:
1827:
1826:
1821:
1815:
1812:
1807:
1804:
1799:
1794:
1790:
1789:
1782:
1779:
1774:
1771:
1766:
1761:
1757:
1753:
1752:
1744:
1741:
1737:
1730:September 18,
1726:
1719:
1716:
1712:
1708:
1705:
1700:
1695:
1691:
1687:
1686:
1681:
1677:
1673:
1667:
1664:
1651:
1645:
1642:
1637:
1634:
1629:
1624:
1620:
1616:
1615:
1607:
1604:
1598:
1595:
1590:
1585:
1581:
1577:
1576:
1568:
1565:
1552:
1546:
1543:
1538:
1534:
1533:
1528:
1521:
1518:
1513:
1510:
1505:
1500:
1496:
1495:
1488:
1485:
1472:
1470:
1462:
1460:
1456:
1451:
1445:
1442:
1430:
1424:
1421:
1409:
1403:
1400:
1395:
1391:
1384:
1381:
1376:
1373:
1368:
1363:
1359:
1355:
1354:
1346:
1344:
1340:
1335:
1332:
1327:
1322:
1318:
1314:
1313:
1305:
1302:
1297:
1294:
1289:
1284:
1280:
1276:
1275:
1267:
1264:
1259:
1256:
1251:
1246:
1242:
1238:
1237:
1229:
1226:
1213:
1209:
1205:
1198:
1195:
1189:
1184:
1179:
1174:
1170:
1166:
1162:
1158:
1152:
1149:
1144:
1141:
1136:
1131:
1127:
1126:
1114:
1111:
1099:
1095:
1088:
1085:
1080:
1074:
1070:
1063:
1060:
1055:
1054:
1049:
1043:
1040:
1027:
1026:
1021:
1019:
1011:
1009:
1005:
992:
986:
983:
971:
968:
963:
958:
954:
950:
949:
944:
940:
936:
930:
928:
924:
912:
909:
904:
899:
895:
891:
890:
882:
879:
867:
863:
857:
854:
850:
846:
843:
838:
833:
829:
825:
824:
816:
814:
812:
810:
806:
799:
795:
792:
790:
787:
785:
782:
781:
777:
775:
773:
768:
762:
760:
757:
749:
747:
745:
741:
740:BGP version 4
737:
733:
729:
721:
719:
717:
713:
709:
705:
700:
698:
694:
690:
689:informational
686:
678:
676:
669:
667:
661:
657:
653:
652:April 1 jokes
646:Informational
645:
643:
641:
636:
634:
630:
626:
622:
618:
614:
610:
606:
602:
598:
594:
590:
586:
581:
577:
575:
571:
566:
564:
560:
554:
546:
544:
540:
538:
534:
530:
526:
522:
521:Informational
514:
512:
510:
507:The official
505:
501:
499:
495:
490:
488:
484:
480:
471:
467:
463:
448:
442:
440:
438:
434:
430:
426:
422:
418:
414:
410:
406:
402:
398:
390:
388:
386:
382:
378:
374:
369:
361:
359:
357:
353:
349:
345:
340:
336:
334:
330:
326:
322:
317:
315:
311:
307:
303:
299:
295:
294:serial number
287:
285:
283:
275:
273:
271:
265:
261:
259:
255:
251:
246:
244:
240:
236:
232:
227:
225:
221:
217:
209:
207:
205:
201:
197:
193:
189:
185:
181:
176:
174:
169:
167:
166:Jeff Rulifson
163:
162:working group
159:
155:
154:Steve Crocker
151:
146:
144:
139:
135:
131:
126:
124:
120:
116:
108:
106:
104:
100:
96:
91:
89:
85:
81:
77:
76:Steve Crocker
73:
68:
66:
62:
58:
54:
50:
46:
42:
37:
33:
19:
2025:RFC Database
1999:. Retrieved
1997:. IETF Trust
1989:
1977:
1958:
1951:
1939:. Retrieved
1937:. IETF Trust
1929:
1921:
1914:, retrieved
1900:
1894:
1882:. Retrieved
1872:
1860:. Retrieved
1850:
1840:
1831:November 26,
1829:, retrieved
1824:
1814:
1802:
1787:
1781:
1769:
1750:
1743:
1735:
1728:. Retrieved
1718:
1710:
1703:
1684:
1666:
1654:. Retrieved
1652:. RFC Editor
1644:
1632:
1613:
1606:
1593:
1574:
1567:
1555:. Retrieved
1553:. RFC Editor
1545:
1530:
1520:
1508:
1493:
1487:
1475:. Retrieved
1468:
1444:
1432:. Retrieved
1423:
1411:. Retrieved
1402:
1394:the original
1383:
1371:
1352:
1330:
1311:
1304:
1292:
1273:
1266:
1254:
1235:
1228:
1216:. Retrieved
1212:the original
1207:
1197:
1171:(3): 83–89.
1168:
1164:
1151:
1139:
1120:
1113:
1103:December 18,
1101:. Retrieved
1097:
1087:
1068:
1062:
1051:
1042:
1030:. Retrieved
1023:
1017:
995:. Retrieved
985:
973:. Retrieved
966:
947:
914:. Retrieved
907:
888:
881:
869:. Retrieved
865:
856:
848:
841:
822:
794:List of RFCs
769:
766:
755:
753:
727:
725:
711:
701:
692:
688:
682:
673:
670:Experimental
666:sub-series.
649:
639:
637:
612:
596:
592:
588:
584:
582:
578:
567:
562:
558:
556:
541:
536:
532:
528:
525:Experimental
524:
520:
518:
506:
502:
491:
476:
420:
412:
408:
394:
365:
341:
337:
318:
313:
306:obsoleted by
305:
301:
297:
291:
279:
266:
262:
249:
247:
228:
213:
177:
171:In RFC
170:
147:
127:
121:(IETF), the
112:
94:
92:
69:
44:
40:
38:
36:
1862:October 25,
1676:Postel, Jon
939:Postel, Jon
871:November 5,
704:DoS attacks
615:, RFC
611:changed to
565:documents.
134:hard copies
65:peer review
2066:Categories
2030:RFC Errata
2020:RFC Editor
2001:August 13,
1941:August 12,
1557:January 5,
1434:August 19,
1218:August 17,
800:References
362:Sub-series
298:deprecated
282:reflowable
239:Bob Braden
216:Jon Postel
136:among the
61:memorandum
2056:RFC Index
2040:RFC Index
1916:April 11,
1884:April 14,
1656:March 16,
1469:RFC Index
1188:206443021
916:March 29,
763:Copyright
470:MIME type
413:Editorial
371:RFC
268:RFC
264:created.
186:(ARC) at
130:typewrote
1910:archived
1413:April 5,
1032:April 3,
997:April 3,
778:See also
728:historic
722:Historic
613:Historic
537:Historic
302:obsolete
200:InterNIC
49:Internet
1858:. BCP 9
1529:at the
1477:May 26,
975:May 15,
756:unknown
754:Status
750:Unknown
498:formats
391:Streams
250:streams
156:of the
115:ARPANET
109:History
80:ARPANET
2042:(text)
1185:
1123:
1075:
862:"RFCs"
716:BCP 38
714:") is
576:RFCs.
515:Status
464:
411:, and
233:(USC)
220:editor
1183:S2CID
1098:Wired
535:, or
494:ASCII
304:, or
196:nodes
2003:2021
1981:5378
1964:IETF
1943:2021
1918:2022
1886:2016
1864:2017
1856:IETF
1833:2017
1806:7100
1773:6410
1756:IETF
1732:2023
1707:1796
1690:IETF
1658:2018
1636:5742
1619:IETF
1601:>
1597:4846
1559:2018
1537:GFDL
1512:2418
1479:2008
1436:2023
1415:2013
1375:5741
1358:IETF
1334:6635
1317:IETF
1296:5620
1279:IETF
1258:4844
1241:IETF
1220:2011
1105:2018
1073:ISBN
1034:2012
999:2012
977:2018
970:1796
953:IETF
918:2017
911:1149
894:IETF
873:2023
866:IETF
845:9280
828:IETF
744:1267
736:SMTP
708:2827
683:The
660:1591
633:2026
629:7100
625:5000
621:5000
617:5000
609:3700
605:5000
601:3700
591:and
561:and
487:5000
466:2046
437:9280
433:5744
431:and
429:5742
425:4846
417:IESG
401:IRTF
397:IETF
385:6410
381:2026
377:6360
373:1150
368:IETF
356:5234
348:8174
346:and
344:2119
310:2026
270:9280
224:2468
138:ARPA
1978:RFC
1968:doi
1803:RFC
1793:doi
1770:RFC
1760:doi
1704:RFC
1694:doi
1633:RFC
1623:doi
1594:RFC
1584:doi
1580:IAB
1509:RFC
1499:doi
1372:RFC
1362:doi
1331:RFC
1321:doi
1293:RFC
1283:doi
1255:RFC
1245:doi
1173:doi
1140:RFC
1130:doi
1121:RFC
967:RFC
957:doi
908:RFC
898:doi
842:RFC
832:doi
732:821
710:: "
664:FYI
483:URL
462:RFC
439:).
405:IAB
350:),
316:).
45:RFC
2068::
1976:.
1966:.
1962:.
1920:,
1904:,
1854:.
1822:,
1801:.
1791:.
1768:.
1758:.
1754:.
1734:.
1709:.
1702:.
1692:.
1688:.
1678:;
1674:;
1631:.
1621:.
1617:.
1592:.
1582:.
1578:.
1507:.
1497:.
1458:^
1370:.
1360:.
1356:.
1342:^
1329:.
1319:.
1315:.
1291:.
1281:.
1277:.
1253:.
1243:.
1239:.
1206:.
1181:.
1169:32
1167:.
1163:.
1138:.
1128:.
1096:.
1050:.
1022:.
1007:^
965:.
955:.
951:.
941:;
937:;
926:^
906:.
896:.
892:.
864:.
847:.
840:.
830:.
826:.
808:^
726:A
718:.
539:.
531:,
527:,
523:,
500:.
489:.
427:,
407:,
403:,
399:,
300:,
226:.
168:.
105:.
86:,
39:A
2005:.
1983:.
1970::
1945:.
1888:.
1866:.
1808:.
1795::
1775:.
1762::
1696::
1660:.
1638:.
1625::
1599:.
1586::
1561:.
1514:.
1501::
1481:.
1471:"
1467:"
1452:.
1438:.
1417:.
1377:.
1364::
1336:.
1323::
1298:.
1285::
1260:.
1247::
1222:.
1191:.
1175::
1145:.
1143:1
1132::
1125:1
1107:.
1081:.
1036:.
1001:.
979:.
959::
920:.
900::
875:.
834::
734:(
640:n
597:z
593:y
589:x
585:n
312:(
173:3
150:1
43:(
34:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.