RFC 1720
Internet Official Protocol Standards
INTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS 🎀
okay bestie, let's start with the basics 💅 this one is RFC 1720 from the Network Working Group. It was written by the Internet Architecture Board with J. Postel as the Editor, and it's dated November 1994 ✨
- Category: Standards Track 🔥
- STD: 1 👑
- Obsoletes: RFCs 1610, 1600, 1540, 1500, 1410, 1360, 1280, 1250, 1100, 1083, 1130, 1140, 1200 💀
Status of this Memo
this memo describes where the Internet's protocols stand in terms of standardization, as determined by the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) 🧚 it is an Internet Standard and distribution is unlimited, so share it with everyone 🌈
Table of Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1. The Standardization Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. The Request for Comments Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Other Reference Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. Assigned Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. Gateway Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. Host Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.4. The MIL-STD Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Explanation of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Definitions of Protocol State (Maturity Level) . . . . . . 8
4.1.1. Standard Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1.2. Draft Standard Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1.3. Proposed Standard Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1.4. Experimental Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1.5. Informational Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1.6. Historic Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2. Definitions of Protocol Status (Requirement Level) . . . 9
4.2.1. Required Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.2. Recommended Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.3. Elective Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.4. Limited Use Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2.5. Not Recommended Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. The Standards Track . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1. The RFC Processing Decision Table . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2. The Standards Track Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6. The Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.1. Recent Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.1.1. New RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.1.2. Other Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.2. Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.3. Network-Specific Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . 26
6.4. Draft Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
6.5. Proposed Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.6. Telnet Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
6.7. Experimental Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
6.8. Informational Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
6.9. Historic Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
6.10 Obsolete Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7. Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
7.1. IAB, IETF, and IRTF Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
7.1.1. Internet Architecture Board (IAB) Contact . . . . . . 37
7.1.2. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Contact . . . . 38
7.1.3. Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) Contact . . . . . 39
7.2. Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Contact . . . 39
7.3. Request for Comments Editor Contact . . . . . . . . . . 40
7.4. Network Information Center Contact . . . . . . . . . . . 40
7.5. Sources for Requests for Comments . . . . . . . . . . . 41
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
9. Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41Introduction
so here's the game plan 🎀 first we chat about the standardization process and the RFC document series, then we explain the terms. Sections 6.2 - 6.10 are where the lists of protocols live, one for each stage of standardization. The pointers to references and contacts come last 💖
this memo is meant to be issued about every quarter, so make sure the copy you're reading is current 🍓 you can grab current copies from the Network Information Center (INTERNIC) or from the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) (the contact info is at the end of this memo).
Do not use this edition after 1-Mar-95. 💀
see Section 6.1 for a rundown of recent changes ✨ in the official lists in Sections 6.2 - 6.10, an asterisk (*) next to a protocol means it's new to this document, has moved from one protocol level to another, or differs from the previous edition 🦋
1. The Standardization Process ✨
the Internet Architecture Board keeps this list of documents that define standards for the Internet protocol suite 👑 for the charter of the IAB, check out RFC-1601. for the role and organization of the IAB and its subsidiary groups, the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the Internet Research Task Force (IRTF), see RFC-1160. each of these groups has a steering group, called the IESG and IRSG, respectively 🧚 the IETF develops these standards to coordinate the evolution of the Internet protocols, and that coordination has become a huge deal as the Internet protocols are increasingly in general commercial use 😭 the definitive description of the Internet standards process is in RFC-1602.
most of the Internet protocol development and standardization happens in the working groups of the IETF 💅
protocols that are going to become Internet standards move through a series of states or maturity levels (proposed standard, draft standard, and standard), with more scrutiny and testing at each step 🌈 when a protocol finishes this process, it gets a STD number (see RFC-1311). at each step, the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) of the IETF must make a recommendation for advancing the protocol 🔥
to give the Internet community time to think about and react to standardization proposals, there's a minimum delay of 6 months before a proposed standard can be advanced to a draft standard, and 4 months before a draft standard can be promoted to standard ⏳
it's general practice that no proposed standard gets promoted to draft standard without at least two independent implementations (plus the IESG's recommendation) 🫶 promotion from draft standard to standard generally needs operational experience and demonstrated interoperability of two or more implementations (plus the IESG's recommendation) ✨
if there's uncertainty about the right decision for a protocol, a special review committee may be appointed. it would be made up of experts from the IETF, IRTF, and the IAB, with the purpose of recommending an explicit action 🕵️
getting a protocol to proposed standard is a big deal because it marks the protocol as a candidate for eventual standardization (it puts the protocol "on the standards track") 🛤️ advancing to draft standard is a major step that warns the community that, unless major objections are raised or flaws are discovered, the protocol is likely to be advanced to standard in six months 👀
some protocols have been superseded by better ones or are otherwise unused. those are still documented in this memo, labeled "historic" 🦕
because it's useful to document early protocol research and development, some RFCs describe protocols that are still experimental 🧪 those are designated "experimental" in this memo. they show up in this report as a convenience to the community, not as evidence of their standardization 💜
other protocols, like the ones developed by other standards organizations or by particular vendors, may be interesting or may be recommended for use in the Internet. their specifications may be published as RFCs for the community's convenience, and they're labeled "informational" in this memo 📚
on top of the IETF working groups, protocol development and experimentation can also come out of the research groups of the Internet Research Task Force, or from other individuals who are into Internet protocol development. documenting that experimental work in the RFC series is encouraged 🙌 but none of it counts as being on the track for standardization until the IESG has recommended advancing the protocol to the proposed standard state 🚦
a few protocols have achieved widespread implementation without IESG approval. for example, some vendor protocols have become super important to the Internet community even though the IESG never recommended them 😤 still, the IAB strongly recommends using the standards process for the evolution of the protocol suite, to maximize interoperability and to prevent incompatible protocol requirements from showing up 🫠 the terms "standard", "draft standard", and "proposed standard" are reserved, in any RFC or other publication of Internet protocols, for only those protocols the IESG has approved 🔒
on top of a state (like "Proposed Standard"), a protocol also gets a status, or requirement level, in this document 🎯 the possible requirement levels are "Required", "Recommended", "Elective", "Limited Use", and "Not Recommended", and they're defined in Section 4.2. when a protocol is on the standards track (that is, in the proposed standard, draft standard, or standard state, see Section 5), the status shown in Section 6 is the current one 💖
few protocols are required to be implemented in every system, because there's such a huge variety of possible systems: gateways, routers, terminal servers, workstations, and multi-user hosts 🌸 the requirement level in this document is only a one word label, and that might not be enough to describe a protocol's implementation requirements in every situation 🙈 for some protocols, this document includes an extra status paragraph (an applicability statement). and more detailed status info may live in separate requirements documents (see Section 3) 📝
2. The Request for Comments Documents ✨
okay bestie, so RFCs (Request for Comments documents) are basically the working notes of the "Network Working Group," which is the Internet research and development community 🤓 A doc in this series can be about pretty much anything related to computer communication, from a meeting report all the way up to the spec for a full standard. it's giving range 💅
Notice:
All standards are published as RFCs, but not all RFCs specify standards.
Anyone can submit a document for publication as an RFC 🙌 Submissions have to be sent by electronic mail to the RFC Editor (check the contact info at the end of this memo, and see RFC 1543 💌).
RFCs aren't refereed publications, ngl, but they do get technical review from the task forces, individual technical experts, or the RFC Editor, depending on the situation 🧐
The series is huge: informational docs of general interest, plus specs for standard Internet protocols 🌈 If a submission is meant to document a proposed standard, draft standard, or standard protocol, the RFC Editor only publishes it with the approval of the IESG 👑 For experimental work, the RFC Editor tells the IESG before publishing. That gives the relevant IETF working group or IRTF research group a chance to review it, and any comments get passed along to the author. See Section 5.1 for more detail 🔍
Once a document gets an RFC number and is published, that RFC is never revised or re-issued with the same number. So there's never a question about having the most recent version of a particular RFC 💜 But a protocol (like File Transfer Protocol (FTP)) can get improved and re-documented many times across several different RFCs 🔄 So it's important to check that you have the most recent RFC for a particular protocol. This "Internet Official Protocol Standards" memo is the reference for figuring out the correct RFC for the current spec of each protocol 📚
You can get RFCs from the INTERNIC and a bunch of other sites. For more on getting them, see Sections 7.4 and 7.5 🎀
3. Other Reference Documents 📖
Three other reference docs are worth checking if you want the current status of protocol specs and standardization: the Assigned Numbers, the Gateway Requirements, and the Host Requirements. These get revised at different times, so if they ever disagree, the most recent one prevails 🕰️
Also, be aware of the MIL-STD publications on IP, TCP, Telnet, FTP, and SMTP. They're described in Section 3.4 🫶
3.1. Assigned Numbers 🔢
The "Assigned Numbers" doc lists the assigned values of the parameters used in the various protocols. Think IP protocol codes, TCP port numbers, Telnet Option Codes, ARP hardware types, and Terminal Type names 💻 Assigned Numbers was most recently issued as RFC-1700.
3.2. Gateway Requirements 🚪
This doc reviews the specs that apply to gateways and gives guidance and clarification for any ambiguities. Gateway Requirements is RFC-1009. A working group of the IETF is actively preparing a revision 🛠️
3.3. Host Requirements 🖥️
This pair of docs reviews and updates the specs that apply to hosts, and it gives guidance and clarification for any ambiguities. Host Requirements was issued as RFC-1122 and RFC-1123 ✨
3.4. The MIL-STD Documents 🎖️
The Internet community specs for IP (RFC-791) and TCP (RFC-793), and the DoD MIL-STD specs, are meant to describe exactly the same protocols. Any difference in the protocols specified by these sets of docs should be reported to DISA and to the IESG 🚩 The RFCs and the MIL-STDs for IP and TCP differ in style and level of detail, so it's strongly advised to use the two sets together, along with RFC-1122 and RFC-1123 🤝
The Internet and DoD MIL-STD specs for FTP, SMTP, and Telnet are basically the same docs (RFCs 765, 821, 854). The MIL-STD versions have been edited slightly. Note that the current Internet spec for FTP is RFC-959 (as modified by RFC-1123) 📝
Note that these MIL-STDs are now somewhat out of date. The Gateway Requirements (RFC-1009) and Host Requirements (RFC-1122, RFC-1123) take precedence over both earlier RFCs and the MIL-STDs 👑
Internet Protocol (IP) MIL-STD-1777
Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) MIL-STD-1778
File Transfer Protocol (FTP) MIL-STD-1780
Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) MIL-STD-1781
Telnet Protocol and Options (TELNET) MIL-STD-1782These documents are available from the Naval Publications and Forms Center. You can request them by telephone, telegraph, or mail. However, it's preferred that private industry use form DD1425, if possible 📮
Naval Publications and Forms Center, Code 3015
5801 Tabor Ave
Philadelphia, PA 19120
Phone: 1-215-697-3321 (order tape)
1-215-697-4834 (conversation)4. Explanation of Terms 🧠
There are two independent categorizations of protocols, bestie 💖 The first is the "maturity level" or STATE of standardization, which is one of "standard", "draft standard", "proposed standard", "experimental", "informational" or "historic". The second is the "requirement level" or STATUS of the protocol, which is one of "required", "recommended", "elective", "limited use", or "not recommended".
The status or requirement level is hard to fit into a one-word label 🫠 So treat these status labels as just an indication, and check out a further description or applicability statement too.
When a protocol advances to proposed standard or draft standard, it gets labeled with a current status 🏷️
At any given time, a protocol sits in one cell of the matrix below. Protocols cluster in about the following proportions (shown by the relative number of Xs). A new protocol is most likely to start in the (proposed standard, elective) cell, or the (experimental, not recommended) cell 🌱
S T A T U S
Req Rec Ele Lim Not
+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
Std | X | XXX | XXX | | |
S +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
Draft | X | X | XXX | | |
T +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
Prop | | X | XXX | | |
A +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
Info | | | | | |
T +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
Expr | | | | XXX | |
E +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
Hist | | | | | XXX |
+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+What is a "system"? 🤖
Some protocols are particular to hosts, some to gateways, and a few are used in both. The definitions below refer to a "system", which is a host or a gateway (or both). It should be clear from the context of the particular protocol which types of systems are meant 🔎
4.1. Definitions of Protocol State 🌸
Every protocol listed in this doc is assigned to a "maturity level" or STATE of standardization: "standard", "draft standard", "proposed standard", "experimental", or "historic".
4.1.1. Standard Protocol 👑
The IESG has established this as an official standard protocol for the Internet. These get STD numbers (see RFC-1311). They're split into two groups: (1) IP protocol and above, which are protocols that apply to the whole Internet; and (2) network-specific protocols, generally specs for how to do IP on particular types of networks.
4.1.2. Draft Standard Protocol 🧪
The IESG is actively considering this protocol as a possible Standard Protocol. Substantial and widespread testing and comment are wanted. Comments and test results should be submitted to the IESG. Changes might be made to a Draft Standard Protocol before it becomes a Standard Protocol.
4.1.3. Proposed Standard Protocol 💡
These are protocol proposals that may be considered by the IESG for standardization in the future. Implementation and testing by several groups is desirable. Revision of the protocol specification is likely.
4.1.4. Experimental Protocol 🔬
A system should not implement an experimental protocol unless it is participating in the experiment and has coordinated its use of the protocol with the developer of the protocol ⚠️
Typically, experimental protocols are developed as part of an ongoing research project that isn't tied to an operational service offering. They may be proposed as a service protocol at a later stage, and so become proposed standard, draft standard, and then standard protocols. But labeling a protocol as experimental can sometimes mean it's mature, but not meant for operational use.
4.1.5. Informational Protocol 📚
Protocols developed by other standards organizations or vendors, or that are otherwise outside the purview of the IESG, may be published as RFCs for the convenience of the Internet community as informational protocols.
4.1.6. Historic Protocol 🕰️
These are protocols that are unlikely ever to become Internet standards, either because they've been superseded by later developments or due to lack of interest.
4.2. Definitions of Protocol Status 🎯
This doc lists a "requirement level" or STATUS for each protocol. The status is one of "required", "recommended", "elective", "limited use", or "not recommended".
4.2.1. Required Protocol 💯
A system must implement the required protocols.
4.2.2. Recommended Protocol 🌟
A system should implement the recommended protocols.
4.2.3. Elective Protocol 🎀
A system may or may not implement an elective protocol. The general notion is that if you are going to do something like this, you must do exactly this. There may be several elective protocols in a general area. For example, there are several electronic mail protocols, and several routing protocols 📬
4.2.4. Limited Use Protocol 🔒
These protocols are for use in limited circumstances. This may be because of their experimental state, specialized nature, limited functionality, or historic state.
4.2.5. Not Recommended Protocol 🚫
These protocols are not recommended for general use. This may be because of their limited functionality, specialized nature, or experimental or historic state.
5. The Standards Track 🛤️
This section gets into more detail on the procedures the RFC Editor and the IESG use when they decide how to label and publish protocols as standards 🎀
5.1. The RFC Processing Decision Table ✨
okay bestie, here's the current decision table the RFC Editor uses to process submissions 💅 It depends on two things: who submitted it, and what status they want it to have 🎀
+==========================================================+
|**************| S O U R C E |
+==========================================================+
| Desired | IAB | IESG | IRSG | Other |
| Status | | | | |
+==========================================================+
| | | | | |
| Standard | Bogus | Publish | Bogus | Bogus |
| or | (2) | (1) | (2) | (2) |
| Draft | | | | |
| Standard | | | | |
+--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| | | | | |
| | Refer | Publish | Refer | Refer |
| Proposed | (3) | (1) | (3) | (3) |
| Standard | | | | |
| | | | | |
+--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| | | | | |
| | Notify | Publish | Notify | Notify |
| Experimental | (4) | (1) | (4) | (4) |
| Protocol | | | | |
| | | | | |
+--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+
| | | | | |
| Information | Publish | Publish |Discretion|Discretion|
| or Opinion | (1) | (1) | (5) | (5) |
| Paper | | | | |
| | | | | |
+==========================================================+(1) Publish. Easy peasy, it goes out 🚀
(2) Bogus. Let the source know about the rules 🙅♀️ RFCs specifying Standard, or Draft Standard must come from the IESG, only. That's the vibe check 🫶
(3) Refer it to an Area Director for review by a WG. Then expect to see the document again only after approval by the IESG 🔁
(4) Notify both the IESG and IRSG 📣 If no concerns are raised in two weeks then do Discretion (5). Otherwise, the RFC Editor needs to resolve the concerns or do Refer (3). Tea spilled, handle it 🍵
(5) RFC Editor's discretion. The RFC Editor decides if a review is needed and, if so, by whom 👑 The RFC Editor also decides whether to publish or not. Their call, no notes 💅
Of course, in all cases the RFC Editor can request or make minor changes for style, format, and presentation purposes ✨ Just little polish, not a glow-up overhaul 🌸
The IESG has picked the IESG Secretary as its agent for two things: forwarding documents with IESG approval, and registering concerns in response to notifications (4) to the RFC Editor 📬 Documents from Area Directors or Working Group Chairs may be considered in the same way as documents from "other" 🧚
5.2. The Standards Track Diagram ✨
okay so there's a part of the STATUS and STATE categorization called the standards track 🛤️ Real talk though, only the changes of state actually matter for moving along the standards track. The status assignments can change too, just not as the main event 🦋
The states drawn with single line boxes are temporary states, and the ones drawn with double line boxes are long term states 📦 A protocol will normally be expected to stay in a temporary state for several months (minimum six months for proposed standard, minimum four months for draft standard) ⏳ Meanwhile a protocol may be in a long term state for many years, so it's giving settled in its era 🏡
A protocol may enter the standards track only on the recommendation of the IESG 🙌 It may also move from one state to another along the track only on the recommendation of the IESG. So basically, the IESG has to act to either start a protocol on the track or move it along 🫶
Generally, when a protocol enters the standards track, a decision gets made about its eventual STATUS, and its requirement level or applicability (elective, recommended, or required) 🎯 A somewhat less stringent current status might be assigned at first, and then it's placed in the proposed standard STATE with that status ✨ So the very first placement of a protocol is into state 1 🥇 At any time the STATUS decision may be revisited, because plans change, bestie 🔄
|
+<----------------------------------------------+
| ^
V 0 | 4
+-----------+ +===========+
| enter |-->----------------+-------------->|experiment |
+-----------+ | +=====+=====+
| |
V 1 |
+-----------+ V
| proposed |-------------->+
+--->+-----+-----+ |
| | |
| V 2 |
+<---+-----+-----+ V
| draft std |-------------->+
+--->+-----+-----+ |
| | |
| V 3 |
+<---+=====+=====+ V
| standard |-------------->+
+=====+=====+ |
|
V 5
+=====+=====+
| historic |
+===========+The move from proposed standard (1) to draft standard (2) can only happen by action of the IESG, and only after the protocol has been proposed standard (1) for at least six months 🗓️
The move from draft standard (2) to standard (3) can only happen by action of the IESG, and only after the protocol has been draft standard (2) for at least four months 🎀
Occasionally, the call is that the protocol isn't ready for standardization yet, so it gets assigned to the experimental state (4) 🧪 This is off the standards track, but the protocol can be resubmitted to enter the standards track again after more work 💪 There are other paths into the experimental and historic states that don't involve IESG action, so not every exit is a drama 🌈
Sometimes one protocol gets replaced by another, and it becomes historic 🕰️ Or a protocol on the standards track gets kind of overtaken by another protocol (or other events) and becomes historic too (state 5) 😭 Rip, but it happens 🥀
6. The Protocols ✨
Subsection 6.1 lists recent RFCs and other changes 📰 Subsections 6.2 - 6.10 list the standards in groups by protocol state 🗂️ Let's get into it 💜
6.1. Recent Changes 🌸
6.1.1. New RFCs ✨
- 1725 - Post Office Protocol - Version 3 📬 A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1724 - RIP Version 2 MIB Extension 📊 A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1723 - RIP Version 2 - Carrying Additional Information 🧳 A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1722 - RIP Version 2 Protocol Applicability Statement 🎀 A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1721 - RIP Version 2 Protocol Analysis 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1720 - Internet Official Protocol Standards 👑 this memo, aka the RFC you're literally reading rn 🫶
- 1719 - Not yet issued. 🙈
- 1718 - The Tao of IETF - A Guide for New Attendees of the Internet Engineering Task Force 🧚 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1717 - The PPP Multilink Protocol (MP) 🦋 A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1716 - Towards Requirements for IP Routers 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1715 - The H Ratio for Address Assignment Efficiency 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1714 - Referral Whois Protocol (RWhois) 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1713 - Tools for DNS debugging 🛠️ info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1712 - DNS Encoding of Geographical Location 🌈 An Experimental protocol.
- 1711 - Classifications in E-mail Routing 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1710 - Simple Internet Protocol Plus White Paper 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1709 - K-12 Internetworking Guidelines 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1708 - NTP PICS PROFORMA - For the Network Time Protocol Version 3 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1707 - CATNIP: Common Architecture for the Internet 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1706 - DNS NSAP Resource Records 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1705 - Six Virtual Inches to the Left: The Problem with IPng 💅 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1704 - On Internet Authentication 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1703 - Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain: Radio Paging -- Technical Procedures 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1702 - Generic Routing Encapsulation over IPv4 networks 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1701 - Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE) 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1700 - Assigned Numbers 🔢 a status report on the parameters (i.e., numbers and keywords) used in protocols in the Internet community
- 1699 - Not yet issued. 🙈
- 1698 - Octet Sequences for Upper-Layer OSI to Support Basic Communications Applications 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1697 - Relational Database Management System (RDBMS) Management Information Base (MIB) using SMIv2 🗄️ A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1696 - Modem Management Information Base (MIB) using SMIv2 📟 A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1695 - Definitions of Managed Objects for ATM Management Version 8.0 using SMIv2 📡 A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1694 - Definitions of Managed Objects for SMDS Interfaces using SMIv2 📊 A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1693 - An Extension to TCP : Partial Order Service 🧪 An Experimental protocol.
- 1692 - Transport Multiplexing Protocol (TMux) 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1691 - The Document Architecture for the Cornell Digital Library 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1690 - Introducing the Internet Engineering and Planning Group (IEPG) 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1689 - A Status Report on Networked Information Retrieval: Tools and Groups 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1688 - IPng Mobility Considerations 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1687 - A Large Corporate User's View of IPng 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1686 - IPng Requirements: A Cable Television Industry Viewpoint 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1685 - Writing X.400 O/R Names 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1684 - Introduction to White Pages Services based on X.500 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1683 - Multiprotocol Interoperability In IPng 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1682 - IPng BSD Host Implementation Analysis 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1681 - On Many Addresses per Host 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1680 - IPng Support for ATM Services 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1679 - HPN Working Group Input to the IPng Requirements Solicitation 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1678 - IPng Requirements of Large Corporate Networks 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1677 - Tactical Radio Frequency Communication Requirments for IPng 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1676 - INFN Requirements for an IPng 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1675 - Security Concerns for IPng 🔐 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1674 - Electric Power Research Institute Comments on IPng 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1673 - Electric Power Research Institute Comments on IPng 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1672 - Accounting Requirements for IPng 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1671 - IPng White Paper on Transition and Other Considerations 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1670 - Input to IPng Engineering Considerations 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1669 - Market Viability as a IPng Criteria 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1668 - Unified Routing Requirements for IPng 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1667 - Modeling and Simulation Requirements for IPng 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1666 - Definitions of Managed Objects for SNA NAUs using SMIv2 🏦 A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1665 - Definitions of Managed Objects for SNA NAUs using SMIv2 🏦 A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1664 - Using the Internet DNS to Distribute RFC1327 Mail Address Mapping Tables 🧪 An Experimental protocol.
- 1663 - PPP Reliable Transmission 🦋 A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1662 - The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) 👑 A Standard protocol.
- 1661 - The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) 👑 A Standard protocol.
- 1660 - Definitions of Managed Objects for Parallel-printer-like Hardware Devices using SMIv2 🖨️ A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1659 - Definitions of Managed Objects for RS-232-like Hardware Devices using SMIv2 🔌 A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1658 - Definitions of Managed Objects for Character Stream Devices using SMIv2 ⌨️ A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1657 - Definitions of Managed Objects for the Fourth Version of the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP-4) using SMIv2 🌐 A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1656 - BGP-4 Protocol Document Roadmap and Implementation Experience 🗺️ info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1655 - Application of the Border Gateway Protocol in the Internet 🌐 A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1654 - A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4) 🌐 A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1653 - SMTP Service Extension for Message Size Declaration 📨 A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1652 - SMTP Service Extension for 8bit-MIMEtransport 📨 A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1651 - SMTP Service Extensions 📨 A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1650 - Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types using SMIv2 🧷 A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1649 - Operational Requirements for X.400 Management Domains in the GO-MHS Community 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1648 - Postmaster Convention for X.400 Operations 📮 A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1647 - TN3270 Enhancements 🖥️ A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1646 - TN3270 Extensions for LUname and Printer Selection 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1645 - Simple Network Paging Protocol - Version 2 🧠 info doc, does not specify any level of standard
- 1644 - T/TCP -- TCP Extensions for Transactions Functional Specification 🧪 An Experimental protocol.
- 1643 - Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Type 👑 A Standard protocol.
- 1642 - UTF-7 - A Mail-Safe Transformation Format of Unicode 🌈 An Experimental protocol.
- 1641 - Using Unicode with MIME 🌈 An Experimental protocol.
6.1.2. Other Changes:
okay so these are the changes to protocols that were on the list last edition 👀
- 904 - Exterior Gateway Protocol
- Moved to Historic. 🪦
6.2. Standard Protocols ✨
bestie this is the big list of standard protocols and their status tags, so here's the full table 💅
Protocol Name Status RFC STD *
======== ===================================== ======== ==== === =
-------- Internet Official Protocol Standards Req 1720 1
-------- Assigned Numbers Req 1700 2
-------- Host Requirements - Communications Req 1122 3
-------- Host Requirements - Applications Req 1123 3
-------- Gateway Requirements Req 1009 4
IP Internet Protocol Req 791 5
as amended by:--------
-------- IP Subnet Extension Req 950 5
-------- IP Broadcast Datagrams Req 919 5
-------- IP Broadcast Datagrams with Subnets Req 922 5
ICMP Internet Control Message Protocol Req 792 5
IGMP Internet Group Multicast Protocol Rec 1112 5
UDP User Datagram Protocol Rec 768 6
TCP Transmission Control Protocol Rec 793 7
TELNET Telnet Protocol Rec 854,855 8
FTP File Transfer Protocol Rec 959 9
SMTP Simple Mail Transfer Protocol Rec 821 10
MAIL Format of Electronic Mail Messages Rec 822 11
CONTENT Content Type Header Field Rec 1049 11
NTPV2 Network Time Protocol (Version 2) Rec 1119 12
DOMAIN Domain Name System Rec 1034,1035 13
DNS-MX Mail Routing and the Domain System Rec 974 14
SNMP Simple Network Management Protocol Rec 1157 15
SMI Structure of Management Information Rec 1155 16
Concise-MIB Concise MIB Definitions Rec 1212 16
MIB-II Management Information Base-II Rec 1213 17
NETBIOS NetBIOS Service Protocols Ele 1001,1002 19
ECHO Echo Protocol Rec 862 20
DISCARD Discard Protocol Ele 863 21
CHARGEN Character Generator Protocol Ele 864 22
QUOTE Quote of the Day Protocol Ele 865 23
USERS Active Users Protocol Ele 866 24
DAYTIME Daytime Protocol Ele 867 25
TIME Time Server Protocol Ele 868 26
TFTP Trivial File Transfer Protocol Ele 1350 33
RIP Routing Information Protocol Ele 1058 34
TP-TCP ISO Transport Service on top of the TCP Ele 1006 35
ETHER-MIB Ethernet MIB Ele 1643 50*
PPP Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) Ele 1661 51*
PPP-HDLC PPP in HDLC Framing Ele 1662 51*[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the previous edition of this document.]
Applicability Statements:
IGMP time 🌸 The Internet Architecture Board is moving toward general adoption of IP multicasting, since it's a more efficient fit than broadcasting for lots of applications. The host interface is standardized in RFC-1112, but multicast-routing gateways are still in the experimental stage and aren't widely available yet 🥲. An Internet host should support all of RFC-1112, except for the IGMP protocol itself, which is optional (see RFC-1122 for more details). Even without IGMP, implementing RFC-1112 is still a big win: you get IP-layer access to local network multicast addressing ✨. It's expected that IGMP will become recommended for all hosts and gateways at some future date 🔮.
SMI, MIB-II, SNMP, the IAB really wants every IP and TCP implementation to be network manageable 🛠️. Right now that means implementing the Internet MIB-II (RFC-1213) and at least the recommended management protocol, SNMP (RFC-1157).
RIP is widely implemented and used across the Internet, but implementors and users should know that RIP has some serious technical limitations as a routing protocol 🚨. The IETF is developing several candidates for a new standard "open" routing protocol with better properties than RIP. The IAB urges the Internet community to track these developments and implement the new protocol once it's standardized, because users will see improved Internet service as a result 💖.
TP-TCP, as OSI protocols get more widely implemented and used, there will be an increasing need to interoperate with the TCP/IP protocols 🌐. The Internet Engineering Task Force is formulating strategies for that. RFC-1006 provides one interoperation mode, where TCP/IP is used to emulate TP0 so OSI applications can run. Hosts that want to run OSI connection-oriented applications in this mode should use the procedure described in RFC-1006. In the future, the IAB expects that a major portion of the Internet will support both TCP/IP and OSI (inter-)network protocols in parallel, and then it'll be possible to run OSI applications across the Internet using full OSI protocol "stacks" 🧚.
6.3. Network-Specific Standard Protocols 🌈
every Network-Specific Standard has Elective status, no exceptions 🙌
Protocol Name State RFC STD *
======== ===================================== ===== ===== === =
IP-ATM Classical IP and ARP over ATM Prop 1577
IP-FR Multiprotocol over Frame Relay Draft 1490
ATM-ENCAP Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM Prop 1483
IP-TR-MC IP Multicast over Token-Ring LANs Prop 1469
IP-FDDI Transmission of IP and ARP over FDDI Net Std 1390 36
IP-HIPPI IP and ARP on HIPPI Prop 1374
IP-X.25 X.25 and ISDN in the Packet Mode Draft 1356
IP-SMDS IP Datagrams over the SMDS Service Prop 1209
IP-FDDI Internet Protocol on FDDI Networks Draft 1188
ARP Address Resolution Protocol Std 826 37
RARP A Reverse Address Resolution Protocol Std 903 38
IP-ARPA Internet Protocol on ARPANET Std BBN1822 39
IP-WB Internet Protocol on Wideband Network Std 907 40
IP-E Internet Protocol on Ethernet Networks Std 894 41
IP-EE Internet Protocol on Exp. Ethernet Nets Std 895 42
IP-IEEE Internet Protocol on IEEE 802 Std 1042 43
IP-DC Internet Protocol on DC Networks Std 891 44
IP-HC Internet Protocol on Hyperchannel Std 1044 45
IP-ARC Transmitting IP Traffic over ARCNET Nets Std 1201 46
IP-SLIP Transmission of IP over Serial Lines Std 1055 47
IP-NETBIOS Transmission of IP over NETBIOS Std 1088 48
IP-IPX Transmission of 802.2 over IPX Networks Std 1132 49[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the previous edition of this document.]
Applicability Statements:
so a system is expected to support one or more physical networks 🖧, and for each physical network it supports, the appropriate protocols from the list above must be supported. That means it's elective to support any particular type of physical network, but for the physical networks you actually support, it is required that they be supported exactly according to the protocols in the list. See also the Host and Gateway Requirements RFCs for more specific info on network-specific ("link layer") protocols 💜.
6.4. Draft Standard Protocols 🦋
here are the Draft Standard Protocols, all in their own little table 🎀
Protocol Name Status RFC
======== ===================================== ============== =====
POP3 Post Office Protocol, Version 3 Elective 1725*
RIP2-MIB RIP Version 2 MIB Extension Elective 1724*
RIP2 RIP Version 2-Carrying Additional Info. Elective 1723*
RIP2-APP RIP Version 2 Protocol App. Statement Elective 1722*
SIP-MIB SIP Interface Type MIB Elective 1694*
------- Def Man Objs Parallel-printer-like Elective 1660*
------- Def Man Objs RS-232-like Elective 1659*
------- Def Man Objs Character Stream Elective 1658*
SMTP-SIZE SMTP Service Ext for Message Size Elective 1653*
SMTP-8BIT SMTP Service Ext or 8bit-MIMEtransport Elective 1652*
SMTP-EXT SMTP Service Extensions Elective 1651*
OSI-NSAP Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation Elective 1629
OSPF2 Open Shortest Path First Routing V2 Elective 1583
ISO-TS-ECHO Echo for ISO-8473 Elective 1575
DECNET-MIB DECNET MIB Elective 1559
------- Message Header Ext. of Non-ASCII Text Elective 1522
MIME Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions Elective 1521
802.3-MIB IEEE 802.3 Repeater MIB Elective 1516
BRIDGE-MIB BRIDGE-MIB Elective 1493
NTPV3 Network Time Protocol (Version 3) Elective 1305
IP-MTU Path MTU Discovery Elective 1191
FINGER Finger Protocol Elective 1288
BGP3 Border Gateway Protocol 3 (BGP-3) Elective 1267,1268
BOOTP Bootstrap Protocol Recommended 951,1497
NICNAME WhoIs Protocol Elective 954[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the previous edition of this document.]
Applicability Statements:
PPP, Point to Point Protocol is a way of sending IP over serial lines, which are a type of physical network 🔌. It's anticipated that PPP will be advanced to the network-specifics standard protocol state in the future ⭐.
6.5. Proposed Standard Protocols ✨
Okay bestie, the Proposed Standard crew is up next 🦋 here's the full lineup 💅
Protocol Name Status RFC
======== ===================================== ============== =====
PPP-MP PPP Multilink Protocol Elective 1717*
RDBMS-MIB RDMS MIB - using SMIv2 Elective 1697*
MODEM-MIB Modem MIB - using SMIv2 Elective 1696*
ATM-MIB ATM Management Version 8.0 using SMIv2 Elective 1695*
SNANAU-MIB SNA NAUs MIB using SMIv2 Elective 1665*
PPP-TRANS PPP Reliable Transmission Elective 1663*
BGP-4-MIB BGP-4 MIB Elective 1657*
BGP-4-IMP BGP-4 Roadmap and Implementation Elective 1656*
BGP-4-APP Application of BGP-4 Elective 1655*
BGP-4 Border Gateway Protocol 4 Elective 1654*
-------- Postmaster Convention X.400 Operations Elective 1648*
TN3270-En TN3270 Enhancements Elective 1647*
PPP-BCP PPP Bridging Control Protocol Elective 1638
UPS-MIB UPS Management Information Base Elective 1628
AAL5-MTU Default IP MTU for use over ATM AAL5 Elective 1626
PPP-SONET PPP over SONET/SDH Elective 1619
PPP-ISDN PPP over ISDN Elective 1618
DNS-R-MIB DNS Resolver MIB Extensions Elective 1612
DNS-S-MIB DNS Server MIB Extensions Elective 1611
FR-MIB Frame Relay Service MIB Elective 1604
PPP-X25 PPP in X.25 Elective 1598
OSPF-NSSA The OSPF NSSA Option Elective 1587
OSPF-Multi Multicast Extensions to OSPF Elective 1584
SONET-MIB MIB SONET/SDH Interface Type Elective 1595
RIP-DC Extensions to RIP to Support Demand Cir. Elective 1582
-------- Evolution of the Interfaces Group of MIB-II Elective 1573
PPP-LCP PPP LCP Extensions Elective 1570
X500-MIB X.500 Directory Monitoring MIB Elective 1567
MAIL-MIB Mail Monitoring MIB Elective 1566
NSM-MIB Network Services Monitoring MIB Elective 1565
CIPX Compressing IPX Headers Over WAM Media Elective 1553
IPXCP PPP Internetworking Packet Exchange Control Elective 1552
CON-MD5 Content-MD5 Header Field Elective 1544
DHCP-BOOTP Interoperation Between DHCP and BOOTP Elective 1534
DHCP-BOOTP DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions Elective 1533
BOOTP Clarifications and Extensions BOOTP Elective 1532
DHCP Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Elective 1531
SRB-MIB Source Routing Bridge MIB Elective 1525
CIDR-STRA CIDR Address Assignment... Elective 1519
CIDR-ARCH CIDR Architecture... Elective 1518
CIDR-APP CIDR Applicability Statement Elective 1517
-------- 802.3 MAU MIB Elective 1515
HOST-MIB Host Resources MIB Elective 1514
-------- Token Ring Extensions to RMON MIB Elective 1513
FDDI-MIB FDDI Management Information Base Elective 1512
KERBEROS Kerberos Network Authentication Ser (V5) Elective 1510
GSSAPI Generic Security Service API: C-bindings Elective 1509
GSSAPI Generic Security Service Application... Elective 1508
DASS Distributed Authentication Security... Elective 1507
-------- X.400 Use of Extended Character Sets Elective 1502
HARPOON Rules for Downgrading Messages... Elective 1496
Mapping MHS/RFC-822 Message Body Mapping Elective 1495
Equiv X.400/MIME Body Equivalences Elective 1494
X.500syn X.500 String Representation ... Elective 1488
X.500lite X.500 Lightweight ... Elective 1487
STR-REP String Representation ... Elective 1485
OSI-Dir OSI User Friendly Naming ... Elective 1484
IDPR Inter-Domain Policy Routing Protocol Elective 1479
IDPR-ARCH Architecture for IDPR Elective 1478
PPP/Bridge MIB Bridge PPP MIB Elective 1474
PPP/IP MIB IP Network Control Protocol of PPP MIB Elective 1473
PPP/SEC MIB Security Protocols of PPP MIB Elective 1472
PPP/LCP MIB Link Control Protocol of PPP MIB Elective 1471
X25-MIB Multiprotocol Interconnect on X.25 MIB Elective 1461
SNMPv2 Coexistence between SNMPv1 and SNMPv2 Elective 1452
SNMPv2 Manager-to-Manager MIB Elective 1451
SNMPv2 Management Information Base for SNMPv2 Elective 1450
SNMPv2 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 Elective 1449
SNMPv2 Protocol Operations for SNMPv2 Elective 1448
SNMPv2 Party MIB for SNMPv2 Elective 1447
SNMPv2 Security Protocols for SNMPv2 Elective 1446
SNMPv2 Administrative Model for SNMPv2 Elective 1445
SNMPv2 Conformance Statements for SNMPv2 Elective 1444
SNMPv2 Textual Conventions for SNMPv2 Elective 1443
SNMPv2 SMI for SNMPv2 Elective 1442
SNMPv2 Introduction to SNMPv2 Elective 1441
PEM-KEY PEM - Key Certification Elective 1424
PEM-ALG PEM - Algorithms, Modes, and Identifiers Elective 1423
PEM-CKM PEM - Certificate-Based Key Management Elective 1422
PEM-ENC PEM - Message Encryption and Auth Elective 1421
SNMP-IPX SNMP over IPX Elective 1420
SNMP-AT SNMP over AppleTalk Elective 1419
SNMP-OSI SNMP over OSI Elective 1418
FTP-FTAM FTP-FTAM Gateway Specification Elective 1415
IDENT-MIB Identification MIB Elective 1414
IDENT Identification Protocol Elective 1413
DS3/E3-MIB DS3/E3 Interface Type Elective 1407
DS1/E1-MIB DS1/E1 Interface Type Elective 1406
BGP-OSPF BGP OSPF Interaction Elective 1403
-------- Route Advertisement In BGP2 And BGP3 Elective 1397
SNMP-X.25 SNMP MIB Extension for X.25 Packet Layer Elective 1382
SNMP-LAPB SNMP MIB Extension for X.25 LAPB Elective 1381
PPP-ATCP PPP AppleTalk Control Protocol Elective 1378
PPP-OSINLCP PPP OSI Network Layer Control Protocol Elective 1377
PPP-DNCP PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol Elective 1376
TABLE-MIB IP Forwarding Table MIB Elective 1354
SNMP-PARTY-MIB Administration of SNMP Elective 1353
SNMP-SEC SNMP Security Protocols Elective 1352
SNMP-ADMIN SNMP Administrative Model Elective 1351
TOS Type of Service in the Internet Elective 1349
PPP-AUTH PPP Authentication Elective 1334
PPP-LINK PPP Link Quality Monitoring Elective 1333
PPP-IPCP PPP Control Protocol Elective 1332
------- X.400 1988 to 1984 downgrading Elective 1328
------- Mapping between X.400(1988) Elective 1327
TCP-EXT TCP Extensions for High Performance Elective 1323
FRAME-MIB Management Information Base for Frame Elective 1315
NETFAX File Format for the Exchange of Images Elective 1314
IARP Inverse Address Resolution Protocol Elective 1293
FDDI-MIB FDDI-MIB Elective 1285
------- Encoding Network Addresses Elective 1277
------- Replication and Distributed Operations Elective 1276
------- COSINE and Internet X.500 Schema Elective 1274
RMON-MIB Remote Network Monitoring MIB Elective 1271
BGP-MIB Border Gateway Protocol MIB (Version 3) Elective 1269
ICMP-ROUT ICMP Router Discovery Messages Elective 1256
OSPF-MIB OSPF Version 2 MIB Elective 1253
IPSO DoD Security Options for IP Elective 1108
AT-MIB Appletalk MIB Elective 1243
OSI-UDP OSI TS on UDP Elective 1240
STD-MIBs Reassignment of Exp MIBs to Std MIBs Elective 1239
IPX-IP Tunneling IPX Traffic through IP Nets Elective 1234
802.5-MIB IEEE 802.5 Token Ring MIB Elective 1231
GINT-MIB Extensions to the Generic-Interface MIB Elective 1229
PPP-EXT PPP Extensions for Bridging Elective 1220
IS-IS OSI IS-IS for TCP/IP Dual Environments Elective 1195
IP-CMPRS Compressing TCP/IP Headers Elective 1144
NNTP Network News Transfer Protocol Elective 977Quick PSA 🫶: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the previous edition of this document.
Applicability Statements:
OSPF - RFC 1370 is an applicability statement for OSPF 🌸
6.6. Telnet Options 🎀
Okay so, for convenience bestie 💖, all the Telnet Options are collected right here with both RFC
Here's the full Telnet Options lineup so you can check out their state and status 💅✨
Okay so the table below is the whole cast 🎀 Each row has a Protocol code, a Name, a Number, and a State and Status. Some rows have ... where the RFC column would be, so don't panic, that's just how it's written 🙈
Protocol Name Number State Status RFC STD
======== ===================================== ===== ====== ==== ===
TOPT-BIN Binary Transmission 0 Std Rec 856 27
TOPT-ECHO Echo 1 Std Rec 857 28
TOPT-RECN Reconnection 2 Prop Ele ...
TOPT-SUPP Suppress Go Ahead 3 Std Rec 858 29
TOPT-APRX Approx Message Size Negotiation 4 Prop Ele ...
TOPT-STAT Status 5 Std Rec 859 30
TOPT-TIM Timing Mark 6 Std Rec 860 31
TOPT-REM Remote Controlled Trans and Echo 7 Prop Ele 726
TOPT-OLW Output Line Width 8 Prop Ele ...
TOPT-OPS Output Page Size 9 Prop Ele ...
TOPT-OCRD Output Carriage-Return Disposition 10 Prop Ele 652
TOPT-OHT Output Horizontal Tabstops 11 Prop Ele 653
TOPT-OHTD Output Horizontal Tab Disposition 12 Prop Ele 654
TOPT-OFD Output Formfeed Disposition 13 Prop Ele 655
TOPT-OVT Output Vertical Tabstops 14 Prop Ele 656
TOPT-OVTD Output Vertical Tab Disposition 15 Prop Ele 657
TOPT-OLD Output Linefeed Disposition 16 Prop Ele 658
TOPT-EXT Extended ASCII 17 Prop Ele 698
TOPT-LOGO Logout 18 Prop Ele 727
TOPT-BYTE Byte Macro 19 Prop Ele 735
TOPT-DATA Data Entry Terminal 20 Prop Ele 1043
TOPT-SUP SUPDUP 21 Prop Ele 736
TOPT-SUPO SUPDUP Output 22 Prop Ele 749
TOPT-SNDL Send Location 23 Prop Ele 779
TOPT-TERM Terminal Type 24 Prop Ele 1091
TOPT-EOR End of Record 25 Prop Ele 885
TOPT-TACACS TACACS User Identification 26 Prop Ele 927
TOPT-OM Output Marking 27 Prop Ele 933
TOPT-TLN Terminal Location Number 28 Prop Ele 946
TOPT-3270 Telnet 3270 Regime 29 Prop Ele 1041
TOPT-X.3 X.3 PAD 30 Prop Ele 1053
TOPT-NAWS Negotiate About Window Size 31 Prop Ele 1073
TOPT-TS Terminal Speed 32 Prop Ele 1079
TOPT-RFC Remote Flow Control 33 Prop Ele 1372
TOPT-LINE Linemode 34 Draft Ele 1184
TOPT-XDL X Display Location 35 Prop Ele 1096
TOPT-ENVIR Telnet Environment Option 36 Hist Not 1408
TOPT-AUTH Telnet Authentication Option 37 Exp Ele 1416
TOPT-ENVIR Telnet Environment Option 39 Prop Ele 1572
TOPT-EXTOP Extended-Options-List 255 Std Rec 861 32Heads up bestie 🍓 An asterisk (*) at the end of a line means that line changed from the previous edition of this document ✨
6.7. Experimental Protocols
Every Experimental protocol has the Limited Use status 🧪💜
Protocol Name RFC
======== ===================================== =====
DNS-DEBUG Tools for DNS debugging 1713*
DNS-ENCODE DNS Encoding of Geographical Location 1712*
TCP-POS An Extension to TCP: Partial Order Service 1693*
------- DNS to Distribute RFC1327 Mail Address Mapping Tables 1664*
T/TCP TCP Extensions for Transactions 1644*
UTF-7 A Mail-Safe Transformation Format of Unicode 1642*
MIME-UNI Using Unicode with MIME 1641*
FOOBAR FTP Operation Over Big Address Records 1639
X500-CHART Charting Networks in the X.500 Directory 1609
X500-DIR Representing IP Information in the X.500 Directory 1608
SNMP-DPI SNMP Distributed Protocol Interface 1592
CLNP-TUBA Use of ISO CLNP in TUBA Environments 1561
REM-PRINT TPC.INT Subdomain Remote Printing - Technical 1528
EHF-MAIL Encoding Header Field for Internet Messages 1505
REM-PRT An Experiment in Remote Printing 1486
RAP Internet Route Access Protocol 1476
TP/IX TP/IX: The Next Internet 1475
X400 Routing Coordination for X.400 Services 1465
DNS Storing Arbitrary Attributes in DNS 1464
IRCP Internet Relay Chat Protocol 1459
TOS-LS Link Security TOS 1455
SIFT/UFT Sender-Initiated/Unsolicited File Transfer 1440
DIR-ARP Directed ARP 1433
TEL-SPX Telnet Authentication: SPX 1412
TEL-KER Telnet Authentication: Kerberos V4 1411
MAP-MAIL X.400 Mapping and Mail-11 1405
TRACE-IP Traceroute Using an IP Option 1393
DNS-IP Experiment in DNS Based IP Routing 1383
RMCP Remote Mail Checking Protocol 1339
TCP-HIPER TCP Extensions for High Performance 1323
MSP2 Message Send Protocol 2 1312
DSLCP Dynamically Switched Link Control 1307
-------- X.500 and Domains 1279
IN-ENCAP Internet Encapsulation Protocol 1241
CLNS-MIB CLNS-MIB 1238
CFDP Coherent File Distribution Protocol 1235
SNMP-DPI SNMP Distributed Program Interface 1228
IP-AX.25 IP Encapsulation of AX.25 Frames 1226
ALERTS Managing Asynchronously Generated Alerts 1224
MPP Message Posting Protocol 1204
ST-II Stream Protocol 1190
SNMP-BULK Bulk Table Retrieval with the SNMP 1187
DNS-RR New DNS RR Definitions 1183
IMAP2 Interactive Mail Access Protocol 1176
NTP-OSI NTP over OSI Remote Operations 1165
DMF-MAIL Digest Message Format for Mail 1153
RDP Reliable Data Protocol 908,1151
TCP-ACO TCP Alternate Checksum Option 1146
-------- Mapping full 822 to Restricted 822 1137
IP-DVMRP IP Distance Vector Multicast Routing 1075
VMTP Versatile Message Transaction Protocol 1045
COOKIE-JAR Authentication Scheme 1004
NETBLT Bulk Data Transfer Protocol 998
IRTP Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol 938
LDP Loader Debugger Protocol 909
RLP Resource Location Protocol 887
NVP-II Network Voice Protocol ISI-memo
PVP Packet Video Protocol ISI-memoSame deal as before: an asterisk (*) at the end of a line marks a change from the previous edition of this document 🎀
6.8. Informational Protocols
Information protocols don't have a status at all 🌸 They just vibe 🫶
Protocol Name RFC
======= ==================================== =====
RWHOIS Referral Whois Protocol 1714*
DNS-NSAP DNS NSAP Resource Records 1706*
RADIO-PAGE TPC.INT Subdomain: Radio Paging -- Technical Procedures 1703*
GRE-IPv4 Generic Routing Encapsulation over IPv4 1702*
GRE Generic Routing Encapsulatio 1701*
TMUX Transport Multiplexing Protocol 1692*
SNPP Simple Network Paging Protocol - Version 2 1645*
IPXWAN Novell IPX Over Various WAN Media 1634
ADSNA-IP Advanced SNA/IP: A Simple SNA Transport Protocol 1538
AUBR Appletalk Update-Based Routing Protocol... 1504
TACACS Terminal Access Control Protocol 1492
SUN-NFS Network File System Protocol 1094
SUN-RPC Remote Procedure Call Protocol Version 2 1057
GOPHER The Internet Gopher Protocol 1436
------- Data Link Switching: Switch-to-Switch Protocol 1434
LISTSERV Listserv Distribute Protocol 1429
------- Replication Requirements 1275
PCMAIL Pcmail Transport Protocol 1056
MTP Multicast Transport Protocol 1301
BSD Login BSD Login 1282
DIXIE DIXIE Protocol Specification 1249
IP-X.121 IP to X.121 Address Mapping for DDN 1236
OSI-HYPER OSI and LLC1 on HYPERchannel 1223
HAP2 Host Access Protocol 1221
SUBNETASGN On the Assignment of Subnet Numbers 1219
SNMP-TRAPS Defining Traps for use with SNMP 1215
DAS Directory Assistance Service 1202
MD4 MD4 Message Digest Algorithm 1186
LPDP Line Printer Daemon Protocol 1179And once more for the back row 🍓 An asterisk (*) at the end of a line means it changed from the previous edition of this document 💖
6.9. Historic Protocols
All Historic protocols have Not Recommended status 💀 Here's the full list, RFC and STD numbers included:
Protocol Name RFC STD
======== ===================================== ===== ===
EGP Exterior Gateway Protocol Rec 904 18*
SNMP-MUX SNMP MUX Protocol and MIB 1227
OIM-MIB-II OSI Internet Management: MIB-II 1214
IMAP3 Interactive Mail Access Protocol Version 3 1203
SUN-RPC Remote Procedure Call Protocol Version 1 1050
802.4-MIP IEEE 802.4 Token Bus MIB 1230
CMOT Common Management Information Services 1189
-------- Mail Privacy: Procedures 1113
-------- Mail Privacy: Key Management 1114
-------- Mail Privacy: Algorithms 1115
NFILE A File Access Protocol 1037
HOSTNAME HOSTNAME Protocol 953
SFTP Simple File Transfer Protocol 913
SUPDUP SUPDUP Protocol 734
BGP Border Gateway Protocol 1163,1164
MIB-I MIB-I 1156
SGMP Simple Gateway Monitoring Protocol 1028
HEMS High Level Entity Management Protocol 1021
STATSRV Statistics Server 996
POP2 Post Office Protocol, Version 2 937
RATP Reliable Asynchronous Transfer Protocol 916
HFEP Host - Front End Protocol 929
THINWIRE Thinwire Protocol 914
HMP Host Monitoring Protocol 869
GGP Gateway Gateway Protocol 823
RTELNET Remote Telnet Service 818
CLOCK DCNET Time Server Protocol 778
MPM Internet Message Protocol 759
NETRJS Remote Job Service 740
NETED Network Standard Text Editor 569
RJE Remote Job Entry 407
XNET Cross Net Debugger IEN-158
NAMESERVER Host Name Server Protocol IEN-116
MUX Multiplexing Protocol IEN-90
GRAPHICS Graphics Protocol NIC-24308[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the previous edition of this document.]
6.10. Obsolete Protocols
Some protocols in this memo are described in RFCs that have been obsoleted by newer RFCs. "Obsolete" or "obsoleted" is not an official state or status for protocols, so this subsection is just here for info. 🤓
It might seem totally wrong to have an obsoleted RFC on a list of standards, but sometimes an older standard is still being swapped out for a newer one, and that can take a year or two ⏳
For example, the Network Time Protocol (NTP) [RFC 1119] is in its version 2 a full Standard, and in its version 3 is a Draft Standard [RFC 1305]. Once version 3 is a full Standard, version 2 will be made Historic. ✨
Lots of obsoleted protocols are of little interest and get dropped from this memo altogether. Others have gotten enough recognition that it makes sense to list them under their current status, with a reference to their replacement 🌸
RFC RFC Status Title *
==== ==== ========= =================================== =
1305 obsoletes 1119 Std /Rec Network Time Protocol (Version 2)
1533 obsoletes 1497 Draft/Rec Bootstrap Protocol
1331 obsoletes 1171 Draft/Ele Point to Point Protocol
1574 obsoletes 1139 Prop /Ele Echo for ISO-8473
1573 obsoletes 1229 Prop /Ele Extensions to the Generic-IF MIB
1559 obsoletes 1289 Prop /Ele DECNET MIB
1548 obsoletes 1331 Prop /Ele Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP)
1541 obsoletes 1531 Prop /Ele Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
1592 obsoletes 1228 Exper/Lim SNMP Distributed Program Interface
1528 obsoletes 1486 Exper/Lim An Experiment in Remote Printing
1320 obsoletes 1186 Info / MD4 Message Digest Algorithm
1057 obsoletes 1050 Hist /Not Remote Procedure Call Version 1
1421 obsoletes 1113 Hist /Not Mail Privacy: Procedures
1422 obsoletes 1114 Hist /Not Mail Privacy: Key Management
1423 obsoletes 1115 Hist /Not Mail Privacy: Algorithms
1267 obsoletes 1163 Hist /Not Border Gateway Protocol
1268 obsoletes 1164 Hist /Not Border Gateway ProtocolHuge thanks to Lynn Wheeler of Britton Lee for compiling the info in this subsection 🫶
[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the previous edition of this document.]
7. Contacts
7.1. IAB, IETF, and IRTF Contacts
7.1.1. Internet Architecture Board (IAB) Contact
Send your comments about this list of protocols, and especially about the Draft Standard Protocols, to the Internet Architecture Board, care of Abel Winerib, IAB Executive Director 💌
Contacts:
Abel Winerib
Executive Director of the IAB
Intel, JF2-64
2111 NE 25th Avenue
Hillsboro, OR 97124
1-503-696-8972
AWeinrib@ibeam.intel.com
Christian Huitema
Chair of the IAB
INRIA, Sophia-Antipolis
2004 Route des Lucioles
BP 109
F-06561 Valbonne Cedex
France
+33 93 65 77 15
Christian.Huitema@MIRSA.INRIA.FR7.1.2. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Contact
Contacts:
Paul Mockapetris
Chair of the IETF
USC/Information Sciences Institute
4676 Admiralty Way
Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6695
1-310-822-1511
pvm@ISI.EDU
John Stewart
IESG Secretary
Corporation for National Research Initiatives
1895 Preston White Drive, Suite 100
Reston, VA 22091
1-703-620-8990
jstewart@CNRI.RESTON.VA.US
Steve Coya
Executive Director of the IETF
Corporation for National Research Initiatives
1895 Preston White Drive, Suite 100
Reston, VA 22091
1-703-620-8990
scoya@CNRI.RESTON.VA.US7.1.3. Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) Contact
Contact:
Jon Postel
Chair of the IRTF
USC/Information Sciences Institute
4676 Admiralty Way
Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6695
1-310-822-1511
Postel@ISI.EDU7.2. Internet Assigned Numbers Authority Contact
Contact:
Joyce K. Reynolds
Internet Assigned Numbers Authority
USC/Information Sciences Institute
4676 Admiralty Way
Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6695
1-310-822-1511
IANA@ISI.EDUThe protocol standards are managed by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority 🗂️
Please refer to the document "Assigned Numbers" (RFC-1700) for further information about the status of protocol documents. There are two documents that summarize the requirements for host and gateways in the Internet: "Host Requirements" (RFC-1122 and RFC-1123) and "Gateway Requirements" (RFC-1009) 📚
How to obtain the most recent edition of this "Internet Official Protocol Standards" memo: the file in-notes/std/std1.txt may be copied via FTP from the FTP.ISI.EDU computer, using the FTP username anonymous and the FTP password guest.
7.3. Request for Comments Editor Contact
Contact:
Jon Postel
RFC Editor
USC/Information Sciences Institute
4676 Admiralty Way
Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6695
1-310-822-1511
RFC-Editor@ISI.EDUDocuments may be submitted via electronic mail to the RFC Editor for consideration for publication as RFC. If you aren't familiar with the format or style requirements, request the "Instructions for RFC Authors". In general, the style of any recent RFC may be used as a guide ✍️
7.4. The Network Information Center and Requests for Comments Distribution Contact
RFC's may be obtained from DS.INTERNIC.NET via FTP, WAIS, and electronic mail. Through FTP, RFC's are stored as rfc/rfcnnnn.txt or rfc/rfcnnnn.ps, where 'nnnn' is the RFC number. Log in as anonymous and provide your e-mail address as the password. Through WAIS, you may use either your local WAIS client or telnet to DS.INTERNIC.NET and log in as wais (no password required) to access a WAIS client. Help information and a tutorial for using WAIS are available online. The WAIS database to search is "rfcs" 🔍
Directory and Database Services also provides a mail server interface. Send a mail message to mailserv@ds.internic.net and include any of the following commands in the message body:
document-by-name rfcnnnn where 'nnnn' is the RFC number
The text version is sent.
file /ftp/rfc/rfcnnnn.yyy where 'nnnn' is the RFC number.
and 'yyy' is 'txt' or 'ps'.
help to get information on how to use
the mailserver.The InterNIC directory and database services collection of resource listings, internet documents such as RFCs, FYIs, STDs, and Internet Drafts, and publicly accessible databases is also available via Gopher. All of the collections are WAIS indexed and can be searched from the Gopher menu 🌈
To access the InterNIC Gopher Servers, connect to internic.net port 70.
Contact: admin@ds.internic.net
7.5. Sources for Requests for Comments
Details on many sources of RFCs via FTP or EMAIL are available by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info@ISI.EDU with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example:
To: rfc-info@ISI.EDU
Subject: getting rfcs
help: ways_to_get_rfcs8. Security Considerations
🚨 Security issues are not addressed in this memo. Not one word on security in here, so this doc is not where you'll find answers on that front 😱
9. Author's Address
Jon Postel
USC/Information Sciences Institute
4676 Admiralty Way
Marina del Rey, CA 90292
Phone: 310-822-1511
Fax: 310-823-6714
Email: Postel@ISI.EDU📦 where this page comes from
- ietf: rfc1720 1994-11
- 💖 girlified by claude-haiku-5-5 on : a language model's rewrite of the original, under its terms