RFC 1780
Internet Official Protocol Standards
RFC 1780: Internet Official Protocol Standards ✨
- Number: RFC 1780 (STD 1) 💖
- Title: INTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS
- Series: Network Working Group, Request for Comments
- Published by: Internet Architecture Board 🧚
- Editor: J. Postel
- Date: March 1995 🌸
- Category: Standards Track
- Obsoletes: RFCs 1720, 1610, 1600, 1540, 1500, 1410, 1360, 1280, 1250, 1200, 1140, 1130, 1100, 1083 💅
Status of this Memo
okay so this memo describes where things stand with standardization for the protocols used across the Internet, as decided by the Internet Architecture Board (IAB). it IS an Internet Standard 👑 and you're free to distribute it as much as you want, no restrictions. 🫶
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.2. Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6.3. Network-Specific Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.4. Draft Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.5. Proposed Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
6.6. Telnet Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.7. Experimental Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.8. Informational Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
6.9. Historic Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
6.10 Obsolete Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
7. Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
7.1. IAB, IETF, and IRTF Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
7.1.1. Internet Architecture Board (IAB) Contact . . . . . . 35
7.1.2. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Contact . . . . 35
7.1.3. Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) Contact . . . . . 36
7.2. Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Contact . . . 37
7.3. Request for Comments Editor Contact . . . . . . . . . . 38
7.4. Network Information Center Contact . . . . . . . . . . . 38
7.5. Sources for Requests for Comments . . . . . . . . . . . 39
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
9. Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39Introduction ✨
okay so the vibe here is: first we talk about how standardization works and what the RFC series is, then we explain the terms, and at the end you get pointers to references and contacts. 🦋 Sections 6.2 - 6.10 are where the protocol lists live, one list per stage of standardization.
this memo is meant to come out roughly every quarter, so bestie, please 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) (check the contact info at the end of this memo). Do not use this edition after 15-Jul-95. 💀
see Section 6.1 for the 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, got moved from one protocol level to another, or is different 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 IAB's charter, check RFC-1601. For how the IAB and its subsidiary groups are organized, check RFC-1160. Those subsidiary groups are the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the Internet Research Task Force (IRTF), and each one has a steering group, called the IESG and IRSG respectively. The IETF develops these standards so the Internet protocols keep evolving in a coordinated way, and that coordination has gotten super important now that the 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 IETF working groups 🧚
protocols that are going to become Internet standards move through a series of states, or maturity levels (proposed standard, draft standard, and standard), and each step involves more scrutiny and testing 🔍 Once a protocol finishes this whole 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.
the community needs time to think about and react to standardization proposals, so there's a minimum delay: 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 a proposed standard doesn't get promoted to draft standard without at least two independent implementations (plus the IESG's recommendation). 🛠️ Going from draft standard to standard generally needs operational experience and demonstrated interoperability of two or more implementations (plus the IESG's recommendation). 💅
if it's unclear what the right decision is for a protocol, a special review committee can be appointed, made up of experts from the IETF, IRTF, and the IAB. Their job is to recommend 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 an even bigger step. It warns the community that, unless major objections come up or flaws get discovered, the protocol is likely to be advanced to standard in six months. 😭
some protocols have been superseded by better ones or just aren't used anymore. These still get documented in this memo, marked as "historic" 🌸
because early protocol research and development is worth documenting, some RFCs describe protocols that are still experimental. These are designated "experimental" in this memo. They show up in this report as a convenience for the community, not as evidence that they've been standardized. 🧪
other protocols, like ones developed by other standards organizations or particular vendors, might be interesting or even recommended for use on the Internet. Their specifications can 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 from the research groups of the Internet Research Task Force, or from other individuals who are into Internet protocol development. Documenting this 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 gotten really widely implemented without the IESG's approval. For example, some vendor protocols became super important to the Internet community even though the IESG never recommended them. 😤 Still, the IAB strongly recommends using the standards process to evolve the protocol suite, so you get better interoperability and so incompatible protocol requirements don't pop up. The terms "standard", "draft standard", and "proposed standard" are reserved, in any RFC or other publication of Internet protocols, for protocols the IESG has approved. Hands off the labels, unless the IESG signed off 🙅♀️
on top of a state (like "Proposed Standard"), each 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 (meaning it's in the proposed standard, draft standard, or standard state, see Section 5), the status shown in Section 6 is the current one. 💜
not every protocol is required to be implemented in every system, and that makes sense because systems are so varied. Think gateways, routers, terminal servers, workstations, and multi-user hosts 🍓 So the requirement level in this document is only a one-word label, and it might not be enough to capture what a protocol needs in every situation. Some protocols get an extra status paragraph in this document (an applicability statement). Plus, more detailed status info might live in separate requirements documents (see Section 3). 🎀
⚠️ bestie, the one-word label is NOT the whole story. Check the applicability statement and the requirements documents too! 🫶
Part 1 of 8. More to come, so stay tuned 🌈
2. The Request for Comments Documents 📚✨
okay so the documents called Request for Comments (or RFCs) are the working notes of the "Network Working Group", aka the Internet research and development community 🫶 A doc in this series can be about basically anything in computer communication, from a meeting report all the way up to a full standard spec 💅
Notice: All standards are published as RFCs, but not all RFCs specify standards. 🌈
anyone can submit a document for publication as an RFC 🦋 Submissions go by electronic mail to the RFC Editor (check the contact info at the end of this memo, and see RFC 1543).
RFCs are not refereed publications, but they do get technical review from the task forces, individual technical experts, or the RFC Editor, depending on what's needed 🌸
The RFC series is giving range 🎀 It covers everything from informational docs of general interest all the way to specs for standard Internet protocols. When a submission is meant to document a proposed standard, draft standard, or standard protocol, the RFC Editor will only publish it with the approval of the IESG 👑 For docs describing experimental work, the RFC Editor will notify the IESG before publication, which allows for the possibility of review by the relevant IETF working group or IRTF research group, and the comments then go back 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 is never a question of having the most recent version of a particular RFC. A protocol (like File Transfer Protocol (FTP)), though, can get improved and re-documented many times across different RFCs 🧚 That's why it's important to double check that you have the most recent RFC on 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 💖
The RFCs are available from the INTERNIC and a bunch of other sites. For more on getting RFCs, see Sections 7.4 and 7.5 🍓
3. Other Reference Documents 🗂️
okay so there are three other reference docs worth checking when you want the current status of protocol specs and standardization 💜 They are the Assigned Numbers, the Gateway Requirements, and the Host Requirements. These get revised and updated at different times, so if they ever disagree, the most recent one wins 🏆
also, be aware of the MIL-STD publications on IP, TCP, Telnet, FTP, and SMTP 🫧 These are 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 💅 For example: 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 is strongly advised that the two sets be used together, along with RFC-1122 and RFC-1123 📚🫶
The Internet and the DoD MIL-STD specs for the FTP, SMTP, and Telnet protocols are essentially 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 docs are available from the Naval Publications and Forms Center 📮 Requests can be started by telephone, telegraph, or mail. However, private industry is preferred to 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 🔍💖
okay so there are two independent categorizations of protocols 🧠 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 (requirement level) is hard to squish into a one word label 🙈 So treat these status labels as just an indication, and go check the further description or applicability statement too ✨
When a protocol is advanced 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 tend to cluster in about the 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 and some are particular to gateways, and a few are used in both 💜 The definitions of the terms below refer to a "system", which is either a host or a gateway (or both). It should be clear from the context of the particular protocol which types of systems are intended ✨
4.1. Definitions of Protocol State 🌸
Every protocol listed in this document 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 protocols are assigned 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, which are 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 sent to the IESG. There's a possibility that changes will 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 the ones developed as part of an ongoing research project that isn't tied to an operational service offering 🔬 They might be proposed as a service protocol later on, and then become proposed standard, draft standard, and eventually standard protocols 🌟 But calling a protocol experimental can sometimes mean it's not meant for operational use, even if it's pretty mature 🙈
4.1.5. Informational Protocol 📖
Protocols developed by other standards organizations, by vendors, or that are outside the purview of the IESG for other reasons may be published as RFCs for the convenience of the Internet community 🎁 Those are informational protocols 💖
4.1.6. Historic Protocol 🕰️
These are protocols that are unlikely to ever become standards on the Internet, either because they've been superseded by later developments or because of lack of interest 💀
4.2. Definitions of Protocol Status 🏷️
This document 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 the nitty gritty of the procedures the RFC Editor and the IESG use when they decide how protocols get labeled and published as standards 💅✨
5.1. The RFC Processing Decision Table
okay bestie, here's the current decision table for how the RFC Editor handles submissions 💅 It depends on two things: who sent it in, and what status they're hoping it gets ✨
+==========================================================+
|**************| 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 | | | | |
| | | | | |
+==========================================================+Here's what those little numbers mean 🦋
- (1) Publish.
- (2) Bogus. Inform the source of the rules. RFCs specifying Standard, or Draft Standard must come from the IESG, only. 🙅♀️
- (3) Refer to an Area Director for review by a WG. 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), else RFC Editor to resolve the concerns or do Refer (3). ⏳
- (5) RFC Editor's discretion. The RFC Editor decides if a review is needed and if so by whom. RFC Editor decides to publish or not. 👑
Of course, in all cases the RFC Editor can request or make minor changes for style, format, and presentation purposes. ✨
The IESG has designated the IESG Secretary as its agent for forwarding documents with IESG approval and for 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
there's a part of the STATUS and STATE categorization that's called the standards track 🛤️ Actually, only the changes of state are significant to the progression along the standards track, though the status assignments may change as well. It's the state changes that really matter, babe ✨
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 remain in a temporary state for several months (minimum six months for proposed standard, minimum four months for draft standard). A protocol may be in a long term state for many years. 🌸
A protocol may enter the standards track only on the recommendation of the IESG, and may move from one state to another along the track only on the recommendation of the IESG. That's the vibe: it takes action by the IESG to either start a protocol on the track or to move it along. 💅
Generally, as the protocol enters the standards track, a decision is made as to the eventual STATUS, requirement level or applicability (elective, recommended, or required) the protocol will have. A somewhat less stringent current status may be assigned, and then it's placed in the proposed standard STATE with that status. So the initial placement of a protocol is into state 1. At any time the STATUS decision may be revisited. 🔄
|
+<----------------------------------------------+
| ^
V 0 | 4
+-----------+ +===========+
| enter |-->----------------+-------------->|experiment |
+-----------+ | +=====+=====+
| |
V 1 |
+-----------+ V
| proposed |-------------->+
+--->+-----+-----+ |
| | |
| V 2 |
+<---+-----+-----+ V
| draft std |-------------->+
+--->+-----+-----+ |
| | |
| V 3 |
+<---+=====+=====+ V
| standard |-------------->+
+=====+=====+ |
|
V 5
+=====+=====+
| historic |
+===========+The transition from proposed standard (1) to draft standard (2) can only be by action of the IESG, and only after the protocol has been proposed standard (1) for at least six months. ⏰
The transition from draft standard (2) to standard (3) can only be by action of the IESG, and only after the protocol has been draft standard (2) for at least four months. 🎀
Occasionally, the decision may be that the protocol isn't ready for standardization and gets assigned to the experimental state (4). This is off the standards track, and the protocol may be resubmitted to enter the standards track after further work. There are other paths into the experimental and historic states that don't involve IESG action. 🧪
Sometimes one protocol gets replaced by another and thus becomes historic, or it may happen that a protocol on the standards track is in a sense overtaken by another protocol (or other events) and becomes historic (state 5). Rip, but that's life 🥀😭
6. The Protocols
okay so this part is the big list of protocols 🧚 Subsection 6.1 lists recent RFCs and other changes. Subsections 6.2 - 6.10 list the standards in groups by protocol state. 💜
6.1. Recent Changes
6.1.1. New RFCs ✨
okay bestie, these are the new RFCs that just dropped 💅 some are info docs (no standard level), some are actual protocols with a status. here they all are 🦋
- 1786 - Representation of IP Routing Policies in a Routing Registry (ripe-81++)
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1785 - TFTP Option Negotiation Analysis
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1784 - TFTP Timeout Interval and Transfer Size Options
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1783 - TFTP Blocksize Option
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1782 - TFTP Option Extension
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1781 - Using the OSI Directory to Achieve User Friendly Naming
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1780 - Internet Official Protocol Standards
- This memo.
- 1779 - A String Representation of Distinguished Names
- A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1778 - The String Representation of Standard Attribute Syntaxes
- A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1777 - Lightweight Directory Access Protocol
- A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1776 - Not yet issued.
- 1775 - To Be "On" the Internet
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1774 - BGP-4 Protocol Analysis
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1773 - Experience with the BGP-4 protocol
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1772 - Application of the Border Gateway Protocol in the Internet
- A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1771 - A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)
- A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1770 - IPv4 Option for Sender Directed Multi-Destination Delivery
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1769 - Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP)
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1768 - Host Group Extensions for CLNP Multicasting
- An Experimental protocol.
- 1767 - MIME Encapsulation of EDI Objects
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1766 - Tags for the Identification of Languages
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1765 - OSPF Database Overflow
- An Experimental protocol.
- 1764 - The PPP XNS IDP Control Protocol (XNSCP)
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1763 - The PPP Banyan Vines Control Protocol (BVCP)
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1762 - The PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol (DNCP)
- A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1761 - Snoop Version 2 Packet Capture File Format
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1760 - The S/KEY One-Time Password System
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1759 - Printer MIB
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1758 - NADF Standing Documents: A Brief Overview
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1757 - Remote Network Monitoring Management Information Base
- A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1756 - Remote Write ProtocolL - Version 1.0
- An Experimental protocol.
- 1755 - ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1754 - IP over ATM Working Group's Recommendations for the ATM Forum's Multiprotocol
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1753 - IPng Technical Requirements Of the Nimrod Routing and Addressing Architecture
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1752 - The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation Protocol
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1751 - A Convention for Human-Readable 128-bit Keys
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1750 - Randomness Recommendations for Security
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1749 - IEEE 802.5 Station Source Routing MIB using SMIv2
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1748 - IEEE 802.5 MIB using SMIv2
- A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1747 - Definitions of Managed Objects for SNA Data Link Control (SDLC) using SMIv2
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1746 - Ways to Define User Expectations
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1745 - BGP4/IDRP for IP---OSPF Interaction
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1744 - Observations on the Management of the Internet Address Space
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1743 - IEEE 802.5 MIB using SMIv2
- A Draft Standard protocol.
- 1742 - AppleTalk Management Information Base II
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1741 - MIME Content Type for BinHex Encoded Files
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1740 - MIME Encapsulation of Macintosh Files - MacMIME
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1739 - A Primer On Internet and TCP/IP Tools
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1738 - Uniform Resource Locators (URL)
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1737 - Functional Requirements for Uniform Resource Names
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1736 - Functional Recommendations for Internet Resource Locators
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1735 - NBMA Address Resolution Protocol (NARP)
- An Experimental protocol.
- 1734 - POP3 AUTHentication command
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1733 - Distributed Electronic Mail Models In IMAP4
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1732 - IMAP4 Compatibility with IMAP2 and IMAP2bis
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1731 - IMAP4 Authentication Mechanisms
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1730 - Internet Message Access Protocol - Version 4
- A Proposed Standard protocol.
- 1729 - Using the Z39.50 Information Retrieval Protocol
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1728 - Resource Transponders
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1727 - A Vision of an Integrated Internet Information Service
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1726 - Technical Criteria for Choosing IP The Next Generation (IPng)
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
- 1719 - A Direction for IPng
- This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.
6.1.2. Other Changes 🌸
these are changes to protocols that were already listed in the previous edition, so they're glow-ups, not new arrivals 🫶
- 1657 - Definitions of Managed Objects for the Fourth Version of the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP-4) using SMIv2904 - Exterior Gateway Protocol
- Elevated to Draft Standard.
- 1009 - Gateway Requirements
- Moved to Historic.
6.2. Standard Protocols 👑
and now the big table of standard protocols 🎀 the little asterisk at the end of a line means it changed since the previous edition, so keep an eye out 👀
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
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 51Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the previous edition of this document. 💜
okay so the IAB has some very clear vibes about these protocols 🫶 Here's the applicability statement for IGMP: the Internet Architecture Board wants IP multicasting to become the norm, because it's a way more efficient move than broadcasting for lots of apps 🦋 The host interface is standardized in RFC-1112, but multicast-routing gateways are still experimental and not widely available yet, so not super accessible rn 😭 An Internet host should support all of RFC-1112, EXCEPT the IGMP protocol itself, which is optional (see RFC-1122 for the deets) ✨ Even without IGMP, implementing RFC-1112 is still a major glow-up, because 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, so keep an eye out 👀
Applicability Statements, SMI and MIB-II SNMP: the IAB recommends that all IP and TCP implementations be network manageable 💅 Right now that means implementing the Internet MIB-II (RFC-1213), plus at least the recommended management protocol SNMP (RFC-1157) 🎀
Applicability Statements, RIP: RIP (the Routing Information Protocol) is everywhere and widely implemented, but ngl it has some serious technical limitations as a routing protocol 💀 Both implementors and users should be aware of that 🙈 The IETF is currently developing several candidates for a new standard "open" routing protocol with way 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 are going to get improved Internet service 🫶
Applicability Statements, TP-TCP: as OSI protocols get more widely implemented and used, there's going to be a growing need to support interoperation with the TCP/IP protocols 🧚 The Internet Engineering Task Force is formulating strategies for that interoperation 💜 RFC-1006 gives 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 🌸 The IAB expects that a major portion of the Internet will eventually support both TCP/IP and OSI (inter-)network protocols in parallel, which means OSI applications will be able to run across the Internet using full OSI protocol "stacks" 👑 iconic future, honestly ✨
6.3. Network-Specific Standard Protocols 🌈
All Network-Specific Standards have Elective status 🎀
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 Draft 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:
It's expected that a system will support one or more physical networks, and for each physical network it supports, the matching protocols from the list above must be supported 🧚 So supporting any particular type of physical network is elective, but for the networks you actually do support, they're required to follow the protocols in the list above exactly 💅 Also, check out the Host and Gateway Requirements RFCs for more specific info on network-specific ("link layer") protocols 📚
6.4. Draft Standard Protocols 💖
Protocol Name Status RFC
======== ===================================== ============== =====
STR-REP String Representation ... Elective 1779*
X.500syn X.500 String Representation ... Elective 1778*
X.500lite X.500 Lightweight ... Elective 1777*
BGP-4-APP Application of BGP-4 Elective 1772*
BGP-4 Border Gateway Protocol 4 Elective 1771*
PPP-DNCP PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol Elective 1762*
RMON-MIB Remote Network Monitoring MIB Elective 1757*
802.5-MIB IEEE 802.5 Token Ring MIB Elective 1748*
BGP-4-MIB BGP-4 MIB Elective 1657*
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 method of sending IP over serial lines, which are a type of physical network 🎀 It's anticipated that PPP will be advanced to the network-specific standard protocol state in the future, so PPP is on its way up ✨ main character arc unlocked 🦋
6.5. Proposed Standard Protocols ✨
okay bestie, this is the Proposed Standard list and it is HUGE 😭 every single one here is marked Elective, so no pressure, just vibes 💅 the asterisks mark anything that changed from the last edition 🦋
Protocol Name Status RFC
======== ===================================== ============== =====
TFTP-Opt TFTP Options Elective 1784*
TFTP-Blk TFTP Blocksize Option Elective 1783*
TFTP-Ext TFTP Option Extension Elective 1782*
OSI-Dir OSI User Friendly Naming ... Elective 1781*
MIME-EDI MIME Encapsulation of EDI Objects Elective 1767*
Lang-Tag Tags for Identification of Languages Elective 1766*
XNSCP PPP XNS IDP Control Protocol Elective 1764*
BVCP PPP Banyan Vines Control Protocol Elective 1763*
Print-MIB Printer MIB Elective 1759*
ATM-SIG ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM Elective 1755*
IPNG Recommendation for IP Next Generation Elective 1752*
802.5-SSR 802.5 SSR MIB using SMIv2 Elective 1749*
SDLCSMIv2 SNADLC SDLC MIB using SMIv2 Elective 1747*
BGP4/IDRP BGP4/IDRP for IP/OSPF Interaction Elective 1745*
AT-MIB Appletalk MIB Elective 1742*
MacMIME MIME Encapsulation of Macintosh files Elective 1740*
URL Uniform Resource Locators Elective 1738*
POP3-AUTH POP3 AUTHentication command Elective 1734*
IMAP4-AUTH IMAP4 Authentication Mechanisms Elective 1731*
IMAP4 Internet Message Access Protocol V4 Elective 1730*
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-IMP BGP-4 Roadmap and Implementation Elective 1656
-------- 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
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
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
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
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
GINT-MIB Extensions to the Generic-Interface MIB Elective 1229
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 977[Note: 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, all the Telnet Options are collected here with both
Okay so here's the lineup with their state and status 💖
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 32Quick heads-up 🎀 [Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the previous edition of this document.]
6.7. Experimental Protocols ✨
All Experimental protocols have the Limited Use status. 🧪
Protocol Name RFC
======== ===================================== =====
CLNP-MULT Host Group Extensions for CLNP Multicasting 1768*
OSPF-OVFL OSPF Database Overflow 1765*
RWP Remote Write ProtocolL - Version 1.0 1756*
NARP NBMA Address Resolution Protocol 1735*
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-memo[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the previous edition of this document.] 💅
6.8. Informational Protocols 🦋
Information protocols have no status. 🌸
Protocol Name RFC
======= ==================================== =====
SDMD IPv4 Option for Sender Directed MD Delivery 1770*
SNTP Simple Network Time Protocol 1769*
SNOOP Snoop Version 2 Packet Capture File Format 1761*
BINHEX MIME Content Type for BinHex Encoded Files 1741*
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 1179[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the previous edition of this document.] 🍓
6.9. Historic Protocols 👑
All Historic protocols have Not Recommended status, bestie 💀 so none of these are the move anymore 🙅♀️
Protocol Name RFC STD
======== ===================================== ===== ===
-------- Gateway Requirements Req 1009 4*
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📝 an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the previous edition of this document.
6.10. Obsolete Protocols
Okay so some of the 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 of protocols, so don't go looking for it on a badge 🙃 This subsection is for information only 🎀
Ngl it may seem obviously wrong to have an obsoleted RFC on the list of standards, but there may be cases where an older standard is in the middle of being replaced. That process may 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 🕰️
Many obsoleted protocols are of little interest and get dropped from this memo altogether 🥀 Some obsoleted protocols have gotten enough recognition that it makes sense to list them under their current status, along with a reference to their current 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 ProtocolA huge thank you to Lynn Wheeler of Britton Lee for compiling the info in this subsection 🫶
📝 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.jf.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
Steve Coya
IESG Secretary
Corporation for National Research Initiatives
1895 Preston White Drive, Suite 100
Reston, VA 22091
1-703-620-8990
scoya@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:
Abel Winerib
Chair of the IRTF
Intel, JF2-64
2111 NE 25th Avenue
Hillsboro, OR 97124
1-503-696-8972
AWeinrib@ibeam.jf.intel.com7.2. 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 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 are not familiar with the format or style requirements, please 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 are also now available via Gopher 🌈 All our collections are WAIS indexed and can be searched from the Gopher menu. To access the InterNIC Gopher Servers, please 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 may be obtained 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. 😱💀
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: rfc1780 1995-03
- 💖 girlified by claude-haiku-5-5 on : a language model's rewrite of the original, under its terms