261:, 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.
404:. 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
249:(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.
164:, 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.
747:
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 Some of these RFCs would not be published at all today; an early RFC was often just that: a simple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
441:
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
252:
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
663:
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
129:
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
492:
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.
327:
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.
568:
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.
285:. 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
684:. 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
359:
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
531:
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.
256:
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
79:, 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.
218:
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
297:
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
226:(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.
756:
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.
1378:
241:
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
759:
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
508:
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:
719:
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
442:
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
368:
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
320:
without support from an external institution. Standards-track RFCs are published with approval from the IETF, and are usually produced by experts participating in
1192:
691:
The BCP series also covers technical recommendations for how to practice Internet standards; for instance, the recommendation to use source filtering to make
52:
describing methods, behaviors, research, or innovations applicable to the working of the Internet and Internet-connected systems. It is submitted either for
1911:
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.
2065:
1700:... each RFC has a status…: Informational, Experimental, or Standards Track (Proposed Standard, Draft Standard, Internet Standard), or Historic.
572:
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
313:
91:
727:) itself is obsoleted by various newer RFCs, but SMTP itself is still "current technology", so it is not in "Historic" status. However, since
273:
text format. In August 2019, the format was changed so that new documents can be viewed optimally in devices with varying display sizes.
412:
RFCs generally contain relevant information or experiments for the Internet at large not in conflict with IETF work. compare RFC
126:
1382:
324:, which first publish an Internet Draft. This approach facilitates initial rounds of peer review before documents mature into RFCs.
640:
1036:
114:(IAB), and – to some extent – the global community of computer network researchers in general.
1065:
146:
838:
The Request for Comments (RFC) Series is the archival series dedicated to documenting Internet technical specifications, ...
1520:
497:
685:
558:
242:
63:. However, many RFCs are informational or experimental in nature and are not standards. The RFC system was invented by
763:
is referenced on many RFCs prior to RFC4714 as the copyright owner, but it transferred its rights to the IETF Trust.
347:) as a meta-language, and simple text-based formatting, in order to keep the RFCs consistent and easy to understand.
219:
1200:
107:
41:
676:
subseries collects administrative documents and other texts which are considered as official rules and not only
1525:
340:
223:
20:
2060:
149:(UCLA), and published on April 7, 1969. Although written by Steve Crocker, the RFC had emerged from an early
36:) is a publication in a series from the principal technical development and standards-setting bodies for the
167:
Many of the subsequent RFCs of the 1970s also came from UCLA, because UCLA is one of the first of what were
731:
has entirely superseded earlier BGP versions, the RFCs describing those earlier versions, such as RFC
688:(IANA) registries it is less clear; most of these documents are BCPs, but some are on the standards track.
389:
246:
172:
1894:
1568:
393:
176:
168:
111:
1866:
1004:
541:
1898:
2047:(HTML) With the text of each RFC, also mentions what other RFCs this one "updates" or is "updated by".
701:
Network Ingress Filtering: Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Address Spoofing
424:. The Editorial Stream is used to effect editorial policy changes across the RFC series (see RFC
137:
In December 1969, researchers began distributing new RFCs via the newly operational ARPANET. RFC
777:
728:
331:
Most RFCs use a common set of terms such as "MUST" and "NOT RECOMMENDED" (as defined by RFC
87:
76:
772:
673:
1145:
192:
8:
270:
1923:
1171:
1013:
644:
321:
245:. The IAB can publish its own documents. A research stream of documents comes from the
45:
1660:
1176:
1061:
923:
631:
refers to a certain RFC or set of RFCs, but which RFC or RFCs may change over time).
231:
184:
180:
60:
1524: prior to 1 November 2008 and incorporated under the "relicensing" terms of the
1956:
1781:
1748:
1682:
1611:
1572:
1487:
1350:
1309:
1271:
1233:
1161:
1118:
1041:
945:
886:
820:
760:
450:
187:
and the source of early RFCs. The ARC became the first network information center (
562:
309:
1983:
1969:
1946:
1794:
1775:
1761:
1738:
1713:
1695:
1672:
1624:
1601:
1585:
1562:
1539:
1500:
1481:
1363:
1340:
1322:
1299:
1284:
1261:
1246:
1223:
958:
935:
899:
876:
833:
810:
732:
696:
648:
621:
617:
613:
609:
605:
597:
593:
589:
475:
454:
425:
421:
417:
413:
373:
369:
365:
361:
344:
336:
332:
298:
258:
212:
1082:
720:
467:
376:(a new part of BCP 9) reduced the standards track to two maturity levels.
317:
131:
72:
2034:
1417:
474:
of the form https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5000, shown for RFC
2054:
1834:
1668:
1438:
1131:
1108:
979:
931:
592:
was an Internet Standard—STD 1—and in May 2008 it was replaced with RFC
282:
161:
154:
150:
142:
138:
64:
56:
or to convey new concepts, information, or, occasionally, engineering humor.
782:
1808:
1638:
1515:
2028:
1777:
Retirement of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" Summary Document
1166:
1149:
486:
53:
470:
is the RFC Datatracker. Almost any published RFC can be retrieved via a
102:
The inception of the RFC format occurred in 1969 as part of the seminal
1838:
1664:
1603:
IESG Procedures for Handling of Independent and IRTF Stream Submissions
1455:
927:
850:
692:
608:
became an Internet Standard, and as of May 2008 STD 1 is RFC
485:
text and is published in that form, but may also be available in other
227:
204:
49:
584:
at a given time, but later the same standard may be updated to be RFC
2023:
1961:
1786:
1753:
1687:
1616:
1577:
1492:
1355:
1314:
1276:
1238:
1123:
950:
891:
825:
458:
122:
118:
44:(IETF). An RFC is authored by individuals or groups of engineers and
2018:
188:
37:
2013:
1396:
878:
A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on Avian Carriers
103:
68:
211:. On his death in 1998, his obituary was published as RFC
208:
134:
documents, the precursor step before being approved as an RFC.
106:
project. Today, it is the official publication channel for the
82:
Outside of the Internet community, other documents also called
2044:
1737:
Housley, Russell; Crocker, Dave; Burger, Eric (October 2011).
704:
67:
in 1969 to help record unofficial notes on the development of
1083:"Meet the man who invented the instructions for the Internet"
482:
195:
to distribute the RFCs along with other network information.
16:
Publication of the development and standards for the Internet
2039:
1888:
1952:
1844:
1744:
1725:
RFCs are an archival series of documents; they can't change
1678:
1607:
1346:
1305:
1267:
1229:
941:
882:
816:
724:
405:
385:
356:
59:
The IETF adopts some of the proposals published as RFCs as
1812:
2008:
1199:. Vol. 13, no. 1. Cisco Systems. Archived from
471:
234:
continued to be part of the team until October 13, 2006.
1418:"Alexis Rossi appointed as RFC Series Consulting Editor"
71:. RFCs have since become official documents of Internet
1058:
Where Wizards Stay Up Late: The Origins of the Internet
627:(Best Current Practices work in a similar fashion; BCP
748:
anything else for which the RFC series is used today.
269:
Requests for Comments were originally produced in non-
1397:"The RFC Series Editor and the Series Reorganization"
1193:"RFC Editor in Transition: Past, Present, and Future"
1736:
1659:
1144:
922:
183:, is another of the four first of what were ARPANET
1740:
Reducing the Standards Track to Two Maturity Levels
1600:Alvestrand, Harald; Housley, Russ (December 2009).
546:Standards track documents are further divided into
1945:Bradner, Scott; Contreras, Jorge (November 2008).
312:process of formal standards organizations such as
153:discussion between Steve Crocker, Steve Carr, and
1599:
1150:"The Network Information Center and its Archives"
639:An informational RFC can be nearly anything from
316:(ISO). Internet technology experts may submit an
2052:
1944:
1867:"IESG Statement on Designating RFCs as Historic"
1339:Daigle, Leslie; Kolkman, Olaf (December 2009).
1297:
314:International Organization for Standardization
230:took over the role of RFC project lead, while
92:National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
1948:Rights Contributors Provide to the IETF Trust
1560:
1514:This article is based on material taken from
1445:
1338:
1190:
355:The RFC series contains three sub-series for
1639:"Are all RFCs Internet standards documents?"
1483:IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures
1450:
1448:
1376:
652:
308:The RFC production process differs from the
276:
1840:The Internet Standards Process – Revision 3
1593:
1554:
1410:
1060:. A Touchstone book. Simon & Schuster.
542:Internet Standard § Internet Standards
1890:IETF Standards Written by ISC Contributors
1809:"7.5. Informational and Experimental RFCs"
1711:
1561:Klensin, John; Thaler, David (July 2007).
1334:
1332:
1298:Kolkman, Olaf; Halpern, Joel (June 2012).
1055:
303:The Internet Standards Process, Revision 3
1960:
1785:
1752:
1686:
1615:
1576:
1564:Independent Submissions to the RFC Editor
1491:
1354:
1313:
1275:
1237:
1175:
1165:
1122:
999:
997:
949:
890:
824:
804:
802:
800:
798:
643:to widely recognized essential RFCs like
141:, titled "Host Software", was written by
1532:
874:
808:
667:
264:
1833:
1730:
1329:
1259:
1106:
588:instead. For example, in 2007 RFC
500:(ISSN) of the RFC series is 2070-1721.
408:for conflicts with IETF work. IRTF and
2066:Computer-related introductions in 1969
2053:
1342:RFC Streams, Headers, and Boilerplates
1221:
994:
980:"RFC's, Internet Request For Comments"
795:
651:). Some informational RFCs formed the
198:
1056:Hafner, Katie; Lyon, Matthew (1996).
147:University of California, Los Angeles
2035:Official Internet Protocol Standards
1521:Free On-line Dictionary of Computing
1379:"RFC Editor Transition Announcement"
1080:
918:
916:
612:. as of December 2013 RFC
498:International Standard Serial Number
466:The official source for RFCs on the
1009:, The New York Times, 6 April 2009"
686:Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
647:Structure and Delegation (RFC
559:Internet Engineering Steering Group
243:Internet Engineering Steering Group
13:
1901:from the original on April 5, 2022
1712:Nottingham, Mark (July 31, 2018).
1154:Annals of the History of Computing
557:Only the IETF, represented by the
535:
281:The RFC Editor assigns each RFC a
14:
2077:
2002:
1037:"Notice and Request for Comments"
913:
875:Waitzman, David (April 1, 1990).
868:
735:, have been designated historic.
448:
431:
220:University of Southern California
1377:Glenn Kowack (January 7, 2010).
1107:Crocker, Steve (April 7, 1969).
634:
481:Every RFC is submitted as plain
384:There are five streams of RFCs:
364:(FYI 1). In 2011, RFC
1976:
1938:
1916:
1881:
1859:
1827:
1801:
1768:
1705:
1653:
1631:
1507:
1474:
1431:
1389:
1370:
1291:
1253:
1215:
1184:
1138:
1100:
658:
457:, which defines the text/plain
438:
372:(BCP 9). In 2011 RFC
108:Internet Engineering Task Force
42:Internet Engineering Task Force
19:For the Knowledge process, see
2024:RFC Frequently Asked Questions
1074:
1049:
1029:
1007:How the Internet Got Its Rules
972:
843:
224:Information Sciences Institute
117:The authors of the first RFCs
21:Knowledge:Requests for comment
1:
1260:Kolkman, Olaf (August 2009).
1225:The RFC Series and RFC Editor
1197:The Internet Protocol Journal
809:St Andre, Peter (June 2022).
788:
350:
1301:RFC Editor Model (Version 2)
1263:RFC Editor Model (Version 1)
1222:Daigle, Leslie (July 2007).
1191:Leslie Daigle (March 2010).
812:RFC Editor Model (Version 3)
751:
247:Internet Research Task Force
173:Augmentation Research Center
169:Interface Message Processors
7:
1895:Internet Systems Consortium
1081:Metz, Cade (May 18, 2012).
766:
710:
177:Stanford Research Institute
112:Internet Architecture Board
86:have been published, as in
10:
2084:
1674:Not All RFCs are Standards
1462:. RFC Editor. May 25, 2008
937:Not All RFCs are Standards
738:
680:, but which do not affect
539:
379:
341:augmented Backus–Naur form
121:their work and circulated
97:
18:
1540:"Independent Submissions"
695:more difficult (RFC
503:
461:, is itself a plain text.
277:Production and versioning
778:Internet Experiment Note
664:popular and works well.
624:to no longer use STD 1.
616:is replaced by RFC
191:), which was managed by
77:communications protocols
1528:, version 1.3 or later.
1439:"RFC Format Change FAQ"
1148:(July–September 2010).
171:(IMPs) on ARPANET. The
88:U.S. Federal government
40:, most prominently the
1897:, September 10, 2021,
398:independent submission
203:From 1969 until 1998,
1869:. IETF. July 20, 2014
1203:on September 20, 2010
1005:"Stephen D. Crocker,
773:Best current practice
674:Best Current Practice
668:Best Current Practice
518:Best Current Practice
265:New publishing format
84:requests for comments
2061:Request for Comments
1714:"How to Read an RFC"
1516:Request+for+Comments
1167:10.1109/MAHC.2010.54
1146:Elizabeth J. Feinler
982:. Livinginternet.com
620:, updating RFC
561:(IESG), can approve
193:Elizabeth J. Feinler
30:Request for Comments
1045:. January 16, 2018.
463:
322:IETF Working Groups
199:RFC Editor function
46:computer scientists
1984:"Reproducing RFCs"
1924:"Reproducing RFCs"
1661:Huitema, Christian
1014:The New York Times
924:Huitema, Christian
682:over the wire data
645:Domain Name System
207:served as the RFC
90:work, such as the
61:Internet Standards
1835:Bradner, Scott O.
1385:on June 29, 2011.
1067:978-0-684-81201-4
552:Internet Standard
548:Proposed Standard
464:
462:
447:
410:independent
343:(ABNF) (RFC
232:Joyce K. Reynolds
181:Douglas Engelbart
48:in the form of a
2073:
1996:
1995:
1993:
1991:
1980:
1974:
1973:
1964:
1962:10.17487/RFC5378
1942:
1936:
1935:
1933:
1931:
1920:
1914:
1913:
1908:
1906:
1885:
1879:
1878:
1876:
1874:
1863:
1857:
1856:
1854:
1852:
1837:(October 1996).
1831:
1825:
1824:
1823:
1821:
1805:
1799:
1798:
1789:
1787:10.17487/RFC7100
1772:
1766:
1765:
1756:
1754:10.17487/RFC6410
1734:
1728:
1727:
1722:
1720:
1709:
1703:
1702:
1690:
1688:10.17487/RFC1796
1657:
1651:
1650:
1648:
1646:
1635:
1629:
1628:
1619:
1617:10.17487/RFC5742
1597:
1591:
1589:
1580:
1578:10.17487/RFC4846
1558:
1552:
1551:
1549:
1547:
1536:
1530:
1529:
1511:
1505:
1504:
1495:
1493:10.17487/RFC2418
1478:
1472:
1471:
1469:
1467:
1452:
1443:
1442:
1435:
1429:
1428:
1426:
1424:
1414:
1408:
1407:
1405:
1403:
1393:
1387:
1386:
1381:. Archived from
1374:
1368:
1367:
1358:
1356:10.17487/RFC5741
1336:
1327:
1326:
1317:
1315:10.17487/RFC6635
1295:
1289:
1288:
1279:
1277:10.17487/RFC5620
1257:
1251:
1250:
1241:
1239:10.17487/RFC4844
1219:
1213:
1212:
1210:
1208:
1188:
1182:
1181:
1179:
1169:
1142:
1136:
1135:
1126:
1124:10.17487/RFC0001
1113:
1104:
1098:
1097:
1095:
1093:
1078:
1072:
1071:
1053:
1047:
1046:
1042:Federal Register
1033:
1027:
1026:
1024:
1022:
1001:
992:
991:
989:
987:
976:
970:
969:
967:
965:
953:
951:10.17487/RFC1796
920:
911:
910:
908:
906:
894:
892:10.17487/RFC1149
872:
866:
865:
863:
861:
847:
841:
840:
828:
826:10.17487/RFC9280
806:
761:Internet Society
654:
449:
436:
435:
2083:
2082:
2076:
2075:
2074:
2072:
2071:
2070:
2051:
2050:
2040:IETF's RFC page
2005:
2000:
1999:
1989:
1987:
1982:
1981:
1977:
1943:
1939:
1929:
1927:
1922:
1921:
1917:
1904:
1902:
1887:
1886:
1882:
1872:
1870:
1865:
1864:
1860:
1850:
1848:
1832:
1828:
1819:
1817:
1814:The Tao of IETF
1807:
1806:
1802:
1774:
1773:
1769:
1735:
1731:
1718:
1716:
1710:
1706:
1658:
1654:
1644:
1642:
1637:
1636:
1632:
1598:
1594:
1559:
1555:
1545:
1543:
1538:
1537:
1533:
1513:
1512:
1508:
1480:
1479:
1475:
1465:
1463:
1454:
1453:
1446:
1437:
1436:
1432:
1422:
1420:
1416:
1415:
1411:
1401:
1399:
1395:
1394:
1390:
1375:
1371:
1337:
1330:
1296:
1292:
1258:
1254:
1220:
1216:
1206:
1204:
1189:
1185:
1143:
1139:
1111:
1105:
1101:
1091:
1089:
1079:
1075:
1068:
1054:
1050:
1035:
1034:
1030:
1020:
1018:
1017:. April 7, 2009
1003:
1002:
995:
985:
983:
978:
977:
973:
963:
961:
921:
914:
904:
902:
873:
869:
859:
857:
849:
848:
844:
807:
796:
791:
769:
754:
741:
713:
670:
661:
637:
563:standards-track
544:
538:
536:Standards Track
522:Standards Track
506:
444:
443:
434:
382:
353:
310:standardization
279:
267:
201:
100:
24:
17:
12:
11:
5:
2081:
2080:
2069:
2068:
2063:
2049:
2048:
2042:
2037:
2032:
2026:
2021:
2016:
2011:
2004:
2003:External links
2001:
1998:
1997:
1975:
1937:
1915:
1880:
1858:
1826:
1800:
1767:
1729:
1704:
1671:(April 1995).
1669:Crocker, Steve
1652:
1630:
1592:
1553:
1531:
1506:
1473:
1444:
1430:
1409:
1388:
1369:
1328:
1290:
1252:
1214:
1183:
1137:
1099:
1073:
1066:
1048:
1028:
993:
971:
934:(April 1995).
932:Crocker, Steve
912:
867:
842:
793:
792:
790:
787:
786:
785:
780:
775:
768:
765:
753:
750:
740:
737:
712:
709:
669:
666:
660:
657:
636:
633:
596:, so RFC
576:, may be RFCs
540:Main article:
537:
534:
505:
502:
468:World Wide Web
446:
445:
440:
439:
433:
432:Obtaining RFCs
430:
381:
378:
352:
349:
318:Internet Draft
278:
275:
266:
263:
237:In July 2007,
200:
197:
179:, directed by
132:Internet Draft
99:
96:
73:specifications
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2079:
2078:
2067:
2064:
2062:
2059:
2058:
2056:
2046:
2043:
2041:
2038:
2036:
2033:
2030:
2027:
2025:
2022:
2020:
2017:
2015:
2012:
2010:
2007:
2006:
1985:
1979:
1971:
1968:
1963:
1958:
1954:
1950:
1949:
1941:
1925:
1919:
1912:
1900:
1896:
1892:
1891:
1884:
1868:
1862:
1846:
1842:
1841:
1836:
1830:
1816:
1815:
1810:
1804:
1796:
1793:
1788:
1783:
1779:
1778:
1771:
1763:
1760:
1755:
1750:
1746:
1742:
1741:
1733:
1726:
1719:September 18,
1715:
1708:
1701:
1697:
1694:
1689:
1684:
1680:
1676:
1675:
1670:
1666:
1662:
1656:
1640:
1634:
1626:
1623:
1618:
1613:
1609:
1605:
1604:
1596:
1587:
1584:
1579:
1574:
1570:
1566:
1565:
1557:
1541:
1535:
1527:
1523:
1522:
1517:
1510:
1502:
1499:
1494:
1489:
1485:
1484:
1477:
1461:
1459:
1451:
1449:
1440:
1434:
1419:
1413:
1398:
1392:
1384:
1380:
1373:
1365:
1362:
1357:
1352:
1348:
1344:
1343:
1335:
1333:
1324:
1321:
1316:
1311:
1307:
1303:
1302:
1294:
1286:
1283:
1278:
1273:
1269:
1265:
1264:
1256:
1248:
1245:
1240:
1235:
1231:
1227:
1226:
1218:
1202:
1198:
1194:
1187:
1178:
1173:
1168:
1163:
1159:
1155:
1151:
1147:
1141:
1133:
1130:
1125:
1120:
1116:
1115:
1103:
1088:
1084:
1077:
1069:
1063:
1059:
1052:
1044:
1043:
1038:
1032:
1016:
1015:
1010:
1008:
1000:
998:
981:
975:
960:
957:
952:
947:
943:
939:
938:
933:
929:
925:
919:
917:
901:
898:
893:
888:
884:
880:
879:
871:
856:
852:
846:
839:
835:
832:
827:
822:
818:
814:
813:
805:
803:
801:
799:
794:
784:
781:
779:
776:
774:
771:
770:
764:
762:
757:
749:
746:
736:
734:
730:
729:BGP version 4
726:
722:
718:
708:
706:
702:
698:
694:
689:
687:
683:
679:
678:informational
675:
665:
656:
650:
646:
642:
641:April 1 jokes
635:Informational
632:
630:
625:
623:
619:
615:
611:
607:
603:
599:
595:
591:
587:
583:
579:
575:
570:
566:
564:
560:
555:
553:
549:
543:
533:
529:
527:
523:
519:
515:
511:
510:Informational
501:
499:
496:The official
494:
490:
488:
484:
479:
477:
473:
469:
460:
456:
452:
437:
429:
427:
423:
419:
415:
411:
407:
403:
399:
395:
391:
387:
377:
375:
371:
367:
363:
358:
348:
346:
342:
338:
334:
329:
325:
323:
319:
315:
311:
306:
304:
300:
296:
292:
288:
284:
283:serial number
274:
272:
262:
260:
254:
250:
248:
244:
240:
235:
233:
229:
225:
221:
216:
214:
210:
206:
196:
194:
190:
186:
182:
178:
174:
170:
165:
163:
158:
156:
155:Jeff Rulifson
152:
151:working group
148:
144:
143:Steve Crocker
140:
135:
133:
128:
124:
120:
115:
113:
109:
105:
95:
93:
89:
85:
80:
78:
74:
70:
66:
65:Steve Crocker
62:
57:
55:
51:
47:
43:
39:
35:
31:
26:
22:
2014:RFC Database
1988:. Retrieved
1986:. IETF Trust
1978:
1966:
1947:
1940:
1928:. Retrieved
1926:. IETF Trust
1918:
1910:
1903:, retrieved
1889:
1883:
1871:. Retrieved
1861:
1849:. Retrieved
1839:
1829:
1820:November 26,
1818:, retrieved
1813:
1803:
1791:
1776:
1770:
1758:
1739:
1732:
1724:
1717:. Retrieved
1707:
1699:
1692:
1673:
1655:
1643:. Retrieved
1641:. RFC Editor
1633:
1621:
1602:
1595:
1582:
1563:
1556:
1544:. Retrieved
1542:. RFC Editor
1534:
1519:
1509:
1497:
1482:
1476:
1464:. Retrieved
1457:
1433:
1421:. Retrieved
1412:
1400:. Retrieved
1391:
1383:the original
1372:
1360:
1341:
1319:
1300:
1293:
1281:
1262:
1255:
1243:
1224:
1217:
1205:. Retrieved
1201:the original
1196:
1186:
1160:(3): 83–89.
1157:
1153:
1140:
1128:
1109:
1102:
1092:December 18,
1090:. Retrieved
1086:
1076:
1057:
1051:
1040:
1031:
1019:. Retrieved
1012:
1006:
984:. Retrieved
974:
962:. Retrieved
955:
936:
903:. Retrieved
896:
877:
870:
858:. Retrieved
854:
845:
837:
830:
811:
783:List of RFCs
758:
755:
744:
742:
716:
714:
700:
690:
681:
677:
671:
662:
659:Experimental
655:sub-series.
638:
628:
626:
601:
585:
581:
577:
573:
571:
567:
556:
551:
547:
545:
530:
525:
521:
517:
514:Experimental
513:
509:
507:
495:
491:
480:
465:
409:
401:
397:
383:
354:
330:
326:
307:
302:
295:obsoleted by
294:
290:
286:
280:
268:
255:
251:
238:
236:
217:
202:
166:
160:In RFC
159:
136:
116:
110:(IETF), the
101:
83:
81:
58:
33:
29:
27:
25:
1851:October 25,
1665:Postel, Jon
928:Postel, Jon
860:November 5,
693:DoS attacks
604:, RFC
600:changed to
554:documents.
123:hard copies
54:peer review
2055:Categories
2019:RFC Errata
2009:RFC Editor
1990:August 13,
1930:August 12,
1546:January 5,
1423:August 19,
1207:August 17,
789:References
351:Sub-series
287:deprecated
271:reflowable
228:Bob Braden
205:Jon Postel
125:among the
50:memorandum
2045:RFC Index
2029:RFC Index
1905:April 11,
1873:April 14,
1645:March 16,
1458:RFC Index
1177:206443021
905:March 29,
752:Copyright
459:MIME type
402:Editorial
360:RFC
257:RFC
253:created.
175:(ARC) at
119:typewrote
1899:archived
1402:April 5,
1021:April 3,
986:April 3,
767:See also
717:historic
711:Historic
602:Historic
526:Historic
291:obsolete
189:InterNIC
38:Internet
1847:. BCP 9
1518:at the
1466:May 26,
964:May 15,
745:unknown
743:Status
739:Unknown
487:formats
380:Streams
239:streams
145:of the
104:ARPANET
98:History
69:ARPANET
2031:(text)
1174:
1112:
1064:
851:"RFCs"
705:BCP 38
703:") is
565:RFCs.
504:Status
453:
400:, and
222:(USC)
209:editor
1172:S2CID
1087:Wired
524:, or
483:ASCII
293:, or
185:nodes
1992:2021
1970:5378
1953:IETF
1932:2021
1907:2022
1875:2016
1853:2017
1845:IETF
1822:2017
1795:7100
1762:6410
1745:IETF
1721:2023
1696:1796
1679:IETF
1647:2018
1625:5742
1608:IETF
1590:>
1586:4846
1548:2018
1526:GFDL
1501:2418
1468:2008
1425:2023
1404:2013
1364:5741
1347:IETF
1323:6635
1306:IETF
1285:5620
1268:IETF
1247:4844
1230:IETF
1209:2011
1094:2018
1062:ISBN
1023:2012
988:2012
966:2018
959:1796
942:IETF
907:2017
900:1149
883:IETF
862:2023
855:IETF
834:9280
817:IETF
733:1267
725:SMTP
697:2827
672:The
649:1591
622:2026
618:7100
614:5000
610:5000
606:5000
598:3700
594:5000
590:3700
580:and
550:and
476:5000
455:2046
426:9280
422:5744
420:and
418:5742
414:4846
406:IESG
390:IRTF
386:IETF
374:6410
370:2026
366:6360
362:1150
357:IETF
345:5234
337:8174
335:and
333:2119
299:2026
259:9280
213:2468
127:ARPA
1967:RFC
1957:doi
1792:RFC
1782:doi
1759:RFC
1749:doi
1693:RFC
1683:doi
1622:RFC
1612:doi
1583:RFC
1573:doi
1569:IAB
1498:RFC
1488:doi
1361:RFC
1351:doi
1320:RFC
1310:doi
1282:RFC
1272:doi
1244:RFC
1234:doi
1162:doi
1129:RFC
1119:doi
1110:RFC
956:RFC
946:doi
897:RFC
887:doi
831:RFC
821:doi
721:821
699:: "
653:FYI
472:URL
451:RFC
428:).
394:IAB
339:),
305:).
34:RFC
2057::
1965:.
1955:.
1951:.
1909:,
1893:,
1843:.
1811:,
1790:.
1780:.
1757:.
1747:.
1743:.
1723:.
1698:.
1691:.
1681:.
1677:.
1667:;
1663:;
1620:.
1610:.
1606:.
1581:.
1571:.
1567:.
1496:.
1486:.
1447:^
1359:.
1349:.
1345:.
1331:^
1318:.
1308:.
1304:.
1280:.
1270:.
1266:.
1242:.
1232:.
1228:.
1195:.
1170:.
1158:32
1156:.
1152:.
1127:.
1117:.
1085:.
1039:.
1011:.
996:^
954:.
944:.
940:.
930:;
926:;
915:^
895:.
885:.
881:.
853:.
836:.
829:.
819:.
815:.
797:^
715:A
707:.
528:.
520:,
516:,
512:,
489:.
478:.
416:,
396:,
392:,
388:,
289:,
215:.
157:.
94:.
75:,
28:A
1994:.
1972:.
1959::
1934:.
1877:.
1855:.
1797:.
1784::
1764:.
1751::
1685::
1649:.
1627:.
1614::
1588:.
1575::
1550:.
1503:.
1490::
1470:.
1460:"
1456:"
1441:.
1427:.
1406:.
1366:.
1353::
1325:.
1312::
1287:.
1274::
1249:.
1236::
1211:.
1180:.
1164::
1134:.
1132:1
1121::
1114:1
1096:.
1070:.
1025:.
990:.
968:.
948::
909:.
889::
864:.
823::
723:(
629:n
586:z
582:y
578:x
574:n
301:(
162:3
139:1
32:(
23:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.