RFC 1880
Internet Official Protocol Standards
RFC 1880: Internet Official Protocol Standards 🎀
okay bestie, so this is RFC 1880, titled Internet Official Protocol Standards 💅. It was written by J. Postel, who is the editor, and it's published by the Internet Architecture Board. It came out in November 1995 📅. It's a Standards Track doc with the STD: 1 label, which is literally the official list of what counts as an Internet standard 👑. It obsoletes a whole pile of older editions: RFC 1800, 1780, 1720, 1610, 1600, 1540, 1500, 1410, 1360, 1280, 1250, 1200, 1140, 1130, 1100, and 1083 🧚. It doesn't update anything else.
Status of this Memo ✨
This memo describes the state of standardization of protocols used in the Internet, as determined by the Internet Architecture Board (IAB). It's an Internet Standard, and it's giving public domain energy because distribution of it is unlimited 🌸.
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1. Definitions of Protocol State (Maturity Level) . . . . . . 9
4.1.1. Standard Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.1.6. Historic Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2. Definitions of Protocol Status (Requirement Level) . . . 10
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.1. The RFC Processing Decision Table . . . . . . . . . . . 11
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
6.2. Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.3. Network-Specific Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . 22
6.4. Draft Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
6.5. Proposed Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
6.6. Telnet Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.7. Experimental Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.8. Informational Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
6.9. Historic Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
6.10 Obsolete Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
7. Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
7.1. IAB, IETF, and IRTF Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
7.1.1. Internet Architecture Board (IAB) Contact . . . . . . 34
7.1.2. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Contact . . . . 34
7.1.3. Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) Contact . . . . . 35
7.2. Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Contact . . . 36
7.3. Request for Comments Editor Contact . . . . . . . . . . 37
7.4. Network Information Center Contact . . . . . . . . . . . 37
7.5. Sources for Requests for Comments . . . . . . . . . . . 38
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
9. Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38Introduction 🎀
okay so the intro basically says there's a bit about the standardization process and the RFC doc series first, then an explanation of the terms 💖. Sections 6.2 - 6.10 are where the lists of protocols at each stage of standardization live, and then there are pointers to references and contacts at the end 🧚.
This memo is meant to be issued about quarterly, so double-check that the copy you're reading is current 👀. Current copies can be grabbed from the Network Information Center (INTERNIC) or from the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), and the contact info is at the end of the memo. Do not use this edition after 1-March-96. Not me using an expired edition 🙈.
See Section 6.1 for 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 📜. See RFC-1601 for the IAB's charter, and RFC-1160 for how the IAB and its subsidiary groups are organized. Those subsidiary groups are the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) 🦋. Each of those has a steering group, called the IESG and the IRSG respectively 👑. The IETF works on these standards with the goal of coordinating how the Internet protocols evolve, and that coordination matters a LOT now that the protocols are being used in general commercial settings 💅. The definitive description of the Internet standards process is in RFC-1602.
Most Internet protocol development and standardization happens in the working groups of the IETF 🫶.
Protocols that are going to become Internet standards go through a series of states, or maturity levels (proposed standard, draft standard, and standard), with more and more scrutiny and testing at each step 🔍. Once 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 to advance the protocol 💜.
To give the Internet community time to think about and react to standardization proposals, there's a minimum delay: 6 months before a proposed standard can move up 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 (and the IESG's recommendation) 🍓. Going from draft standard to standard generally needs operational experience and demonstrated interoperability of two or more implementations (and the IESG's recommendation too) ✨.
When it's unclear what the right decision is about a protocol, a special review committee can be appointed, made up of experts from the IETF, IRTF, and IAB, whose job is to recommend an explicit action 🧐.
Getting a protocol advanced to proposed standard is a big deal, because it marks the protocol as a candidate for eventual standardization. It's literally "on the standards track" 🛤️. Advancing to draft standard is a major step too, and it basically warns the community that, unless major objections come up or flaws get discovered, the protocol will likely be advanced to standard in six months 😭.
Some protocols have been superseded by better ones, or just aren't used anymore. Those are still documented in this memo, labeled "historic" 🕰️.
Because early protocol research and development is worth documenting, some RFCs describe protocols that are still experimental. Those are labeled "experimental" in this memo. They're listed here as a convenience to the community, not as evidence that they've been standardized 🧪.
Other protocols, like ones from other standards organizations or particular vendors, might be interesting or recommended for use on the Internet. Their specs 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 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 reached wide implementation without the IESG's approval. For example, some vendor protocols became super important to the Internet community even though the IESG never recommended them 😤. However, the IAB strongly recommends using the standards process to evolve 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 protocols the IESG has actually approved. No cap, those words are VIP 👑💅.
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 (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 variety of possible systems: gateways, routers, terminal servers, workstations, and multi-user hosts all exist 🌈. The requirement level shown here is only a one-word label, and it might not be enough to capture the implementation requirements for a protocol in every situation 🙈. For some protocols, this document includes an extra status paragraph (an applicability statement). More detailed status info might also live in separate requirements documents (see Section 3) 🧚.
Part 1 of 9 is a wrap on the intro and Section 1, and Section 2, The Request for Comments Documents, is next up 💖✨
2. The Request for Comments Documents ✨
okay so, RFCs are basically the working notes of the "Network Working Group" 🤓, which is the Internet research and development community. 🧠 Any doc in this series can be about pretty much anything related to computer communication. It could be a meeting report, or it could be the full spec for a standard. 🎀
Notice: All standards are published as RFCs, but not all RFCs specify standards. 💅
anyone can submit a doc to be published as an RFC 🙌. submissions have to go by electronic mail to the RFC Editor (check the contact info at the end of this memo, and also 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 HUGE 🌈. 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 experimental work, the RFC Editor will notify the IESG before publication, which leaves room for the relevant IETF working group or IRTF research group to review it, and then the RFC Editor passes those comments back to the author. see Section 5.1 for more detail 🦋.
once a doc 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 of which version of a particular RFC is the latest. 💖 BUT a protocol (like File Transfer Protocol (FTP)) can get improved and re-documented many times across several different RFCs, so you have to check that you've got the most recent RFC for the protocol you care about 👀. this "Internet Official Protocol Standards" memo is the reference for working 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 them, see Sections 7.4 and 7.5.
3. Other Reference Documents
there are three other reference docs worth checking to see the current status of protocol specs and standardization 📚. they're 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 🪖. 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 🔢. 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. Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers
this doc goes over the specs that apply to gateways, and it gives guidance and clarification for any ambiguities 🛣️. Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers is RFC-1812 ✨.
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 📣. it's strongly advised to use the two sets of docs together, along with RFC-1122 and RFC-1123 💅.
ngl, these MIL-STD docs are kinda out of date now 🙈. the Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers (RFC-1812) and Host Requirements (RFC-1122, RFC-1123) take precedence over both the earlier RFCs and the MIL-STDs 👑.
the MIL-STD docs in question are:
2045-13501 Internet Routing between Autonomous Systems
2045-14502-01 Internet Transport Profile for DoD
Communications, Part 1: Transport and Internet Services
2045-14502-04 Internet Transport Profile for DoD
Communications, Part 4: LAN Media-Independent Requirements
2045-14503 Internet Transport Service Supporting OSI
Applications
2045-44500 Tactical Communications
2045-17503-01 Internet Message Transfer Profile for DoD
Communications Part 1: Simple Mail Transfer Protocol
2045-17503-02 Internet Message Transfer Profile for DoD
Communications Part 2: Format of Text Messages
2045-17504 Internet File Transfer Profile for DoD
Communications
2045-17505 Internet Domain Name Service (DNS) Profile for DoD
Communications
2045-17506 Internet Remote Login (RLOGIN) Profile for DoD
Communications
2045-17507 Internet Network Management Profile for DoD
Communications
2045-38000 DoD Network Management for DoD Communicationsthese docs are available from the Naval Publications and Forms Center 📦. you can request them by telephone, telegraph, or mail, but 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, 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 or requirement level is hard to fit into a one word label 😭. so these status labels should only be treated as an indication, and you should check a further description, or applicability statement 🔍.
when a protocol gets advanced to proposed standard or draft standard, it's labeled with a current status 🏷️.
at any given time, a protocol sits in a cell of the matrix below 🌈. protocols are likely to be in cells in about the proportions shown (the relative number of Xs tells you). a new protocol is most likely to start in the (proposed standard, elective) cell, or the (experimental, limited use) 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 to gateways; a few protocols are used in both. the definitions of the terms below will 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 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 protocols get STD numbers (see RFC-1311). they're split into two groups: (1) IP protocol and above, 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 desired 🙌. comments and test results should be submitted to the IESG 📮. there's a possibility that changes will be made in 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 spec 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 related to an operational service offering 🔬. they may be proposed as a service protocol at a later stage and become proposed standard, draft standard, and then standard protocols 🚀. but the designation of a protocol as experimental can sometimes be meant to suggest that the protocol, even if it's perhaps mature, isn't intended for operational use 🙈.
4.1.5. Informational Protocol 📖
protocols developed by other standards organizations, or 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 as 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 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 part is where we get into the nitty-gritty of how the RFC Editor and the IESG decide what gets labeled as a standard and what gets published as one. It's giving paperwork, but it's important paperwork 💅
5.1. The RFC Processing Decision Table 📋
Here's the current decision table for how the RFC Editor processes submissions. What happens 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 each code means:
(1) Publish. Full green light, it goes out 🌸
(2) Bogus. Tell the source about the rules. Standard or Draft Standard RFCs must come from the IESG, only. Anyone else trying is giving "not that, bestie" 🙅♀️
(3) Refer. Send it to an Area Director so a WG can review it. You'll only see it again once the IESG has approved it 🔁
(4) Notify. Tell both the IESG and the IRSG. If nobody raises a concern within two weeks, the RFC Editor does Discretion (5). If there are concerns, the RFC Editor either resolves them or does Refer (3) 👀
(5) Discretion. This one's all the RFC Editor's call. They decide whether a review is needed (and if so, who does it), and they decide whether to publish or not 👑
Of course, in every case the RFC Editor can ask for, or make, small changes for style, format, and presentation. Tidying up, not changing the substance ✨
The IESG has named the IESG Secretary as its agent. That person forwards documents that have IESG approval, and also records concerns raised in response to notifications (4) for the RFC Editor. Documents from Area Directors or Working Group Chairs may be handled the same way as documents from "other" 💖
5.2. The Standards Track Diagram 🛤️
There's a part of the STATUS and STATE categorization called the standards track. Here's the tea: it's really the changes of state that move a protocol along the track, though the status assignments can shift too 🦋
Single-line boxes in the diagram are temporary states, and double-line boxes are long-term states. A protocol is normally expected to stay in a temporary state for several months (at least six months for proposed standard, at least four months for draft standard). Long-term states? A protocol can hang out there for many years 🍓
A protocol can enter the standards track only on the IESG's recommendation, and it can move from one state to another along the track only on the IESG's recommendation too. So it takes IESG action to either start a protocol on the track or move it along 🧚
Usually, when a protocol enters the track, a decision gets made about its eventual STATUS and its requirement level or applicability (elective, recommended, or required). A somewhat less strict 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 is into state 1. And the STATUS decision can always be revisited later 🔄
|
+<----------------------------------------------+
| ^
V 0 | 4
+-----------+ +===========+
| enter |-->----------------+-------------->|experiment |
+-----------+ | +=====+=====+
| |
V 1 |
+-----------+ V
| proposed |-------------->+
+--->+-----+-----+ |
| | |
| V 2 |
+<---+-----+-----+ V
| draft std |-------------->+
+--->+-----+-----+ |
| | |
| V 3 |
+<---+=====+=====+ V
| standard |-------------->+
+=====+=====+ |
|
V 5
+=====+=====+
| historic |
+===========+Moving from proposed standard (1) to draft standard (2) can only happen by IESG action, and only after the protocol has been a proposed standard (1) for at least six months ⏳
Moving from draft standard (2) to standard (3) can only happen by IESG action, and only after the protocol has been a draft standard (2) for at least four months 🎀
Sometimes the call is that a protocol isn't ready for standardization yet, so it gets assigned to the experimental state (4). That's off the standards track, but the protocol can be resubmitted to get back on after more work. There are other routes into the experimental and historic states that don't involve IESG action 🧪
And sometimes one protocol gets replaced by another and becomes historic. Or a protocol on the standards track gets overtaken by another protocol (or other events) and becomes historic too (state 5). Iconic plot twist, honestly 💀
6. The Protocols 🌈
Subsection 6.1 lists recent RFCs and other changes. Subsections 6.2 through 6.10 list the standards grouped by protocol state 💜
6.1. Recent Changes ✨
6.1.1. New RFCs ✨
okay bestie, here's the new RFC drop 🎀 I'm going in order, and every entry gets its exact number, title, and status.
- 1880 - Internet Official Protocol Standards
- this memo, the one you're reading rn 💅
- 1871 - Addendum to RFC 1602 -- Variance Procedure
- this is a Best Current Practices document, so it doesn't specify any level of standard 🌸
- 1870 - SMTP Service Extension for Message Size Declaration
- a Standard protocol 🔥
- 1869 - SMTP Service Extensions
- a Standard protocol 🔥
- 1868 - ARP Extension - UNARP
- an Experimental protocol 🧪
- 1867 - Form-based File Upload in HTML
- an Experimental protocol 🧪
- 1866 - Hypertext Markup Language - 2.0
- a Proposed Standard protocol ⭐
- 1865 - not yet issued.
- 👀 still waiting on this one
- 1864 - The Content-MD5 Header Field
- a Draft Standard protocol ⭐
- 1863 - A BGP/IDRP Route Server alternative to a full mesh routing
- an Experimental protocol 🧪
- 1862 - Report of the IAB Workshop on Internet Information Infrastructure, October 12-14, 1994
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1861 - Simple Network Paging Protocol - Version 3 - Two-Way Enhanced
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1860 - Variable Length Subnet Table For IPv4
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1859 - ISO Transport Class 2 Non-use of Explicit Flow Control over TCP RFC1006 extension
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1858 - Security Considerations for IP Fragment Filtering
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1857 - A Model for Common Operational Statistics
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1856 - The Opstat Client-Server Model for Statistics Retrieval
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1855 - Netiquette Guidelines
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1854 - SMTP Service Extension for Command Pipelining
- a Proposed Standard protocol ⭐
- 1853 - IP in IP Tunneling
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1852 - IP Authentication using Keyed SHA
- an Experimental protocol 🧪
- 1851 - The ESP Triple DES Transform
- an Experimental protocol 🧪
- 1850 - OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base
- a Draft Standard protocol ⭐
- 1849 - not yet issued.
- still a mystery 🙈
- 1848 - MIME Object Security Services
- a Proposed Standard protocol ⭐
- 1847 - Security Multiparts for MIME: Multipart/Signed and Multipart/Encrypted
- a Proposed Standard protocol ⭐
- 1846 - SMTP 521 Reply Code
- an Experimental protocol 🧪
- 1845 - SMTP Service Extension for Checkpoint/Restart
- an Experimental protocol 🧪
- 1844 - Multimedia E-mail (MIME) User Agent Checklist
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1843 - ASCII Printable Characters-Based Chinese Character Encoding for Internet Messages
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1842 - ASCII Printable Characters-Based Chinese Character Encoding for Internet Messages
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- yes, same title as 1843, it's giving déjà vu 😭
- 1841 - PPP Network Control Protocol for LAN Extension
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1840 - not yet issued.
- 👀 nothing here yet
- 1839 - not yet issued.
- 👀 nothing here yet
- 1838 - Use of the X.500 Directory to support mapping between X.400 and RFC 822 Addresses
- an Experimental protocol 🧪
- 1837 - Representing Tables and Subtrees in the X.500 Directory
- an Experimental protocol 🧪
- 1836 - Representing the O/R Address hierarchy in the X.500 Directory Information Tree
- an Experimental protocol 🧪
- 1835 - Architecture of the WHOIS++ service
- a Proposed Standard protocol ⭐
- 1834 - Whois and Network Information Lookup Service, Whois++
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1833 - Binding Protocols for ONC RPC Version 2
- a Proposed Standard protocol ⭐
- 1832 - XDR: External Data Representation Standard
- a Proposed Standard protocol ⭐
- 1831 - RPC: Remote Procedure Call Protocol Specification Version 2
- a Proposed Standard protocol ⭐
- 1830 - SMTP Service Extensions for Transmission of Large and Binary MIME Messages
- an Experimental protocol 🧪
- 1829 - The ESP DES-CBC Transform
- a Proposed Standard protocol ⭐
- 1828 - IP Authentication using Keyed MD5
- a Proposed Standard protocol ⭐
- 1827 - IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)
- a Proposed Standard protocol ⭐
- 1826 - IP Authentication Header
- a Proposed Standard protocol ⭐
- 1825 - Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol
- a Proposed Standard protocol ⭐
- 1824 - The Exponential Security System TESS: An Identity-Based Cryptographic Protocol for Authenticated Key-Exchange (E.I.S.S.-Report 1995/4)
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1823 - The LDAP Application Program Interface
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1822 - A Grant of Rights to Use a Specific IBM patent with Photuris
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1821 - Integration of Real-time Services in an IP-ATM Network Architecture
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1820 - Multimedia E-mail (MIME) User Agent Checklist
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1819 - Internet Stream Protocol Version 2 (ST2) Protocol Specification - Version ST2+
- an Experimental protocol 🧪
- 1818 - Best Current Practices
- this defines the Best Current Practices subseries, and it doesn't specify any level of standard 👑
- 1817 - CIDR and Classful Routing
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1816 - U.S. Government Internet Domain Names
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
- 1815 - Character Sets ISO-10646 and ISO-10646-J-1
- an information document, no level of standard 🫶
6.1.2. Other Changes
okay so this bit is about older protocols that got a glow-up or a demotion 💀 the following are changes to protocols listed in the previous edition.
6.2. Standard Protocols ✨
here's the big table of standard protocols, bestie 💖 it's the main character of this whole section 👑
Protocol Name Status RFC STD *
======== ===================================== ======== ==== === =
-------- Internet Official Protocol Standards Req 1880 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
SMTP-SIZE SMTP Service Ext for Message Size Rec 1870 10 *
SMTP-EXT SMTP Service Extensions Rec 1869 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
IP-SMDS IP Datagrams over the SMDS Service Ele 1209 52[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from the previous edition of this document.]
Applicability Statements:
Okay bestie, IGMP is giving future main character energy 🦋. The Internet Architecture Board wants everyone to slowly move toward IP multicasting 📡, because it's way more efficient than broadcasting for lots of apps. The host interface was standardized in RFC-1112, BUT multicast-routing gateways are still experimental and not widely available 🥺. An Internet host SHOULD support all of RFC-1112 except the IGMP protocol itself, which is OPTIONAL (see RFC-1122 for more details) 💅. Even without IGMP, implementing RFC-1112 is a huge glow-up, since 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 Internet Architecture Board 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) 🎀.
RIP: The Routing Information Protocol (RIP) is widely implemented and used across the Internet 🌐. Still, implementors and users SHOULD be aware that RIP has some serious technical limitations as a routing protocol 😬. The IETF is currently 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 🫶.
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 working out strategies for this. RFC-1006 provides one interoperation mode, where TCP/IP is used to emulate TP0 so OSI applications can run. Hosts that wish 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, so OSI applications can run across the Internet using full OSI "stacks" 👑.
6.3. Network-Specific Standard Protocols ✨
Every Network-Specific Standard has 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-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 is expected that a system will support one or more physical networks, and for each physical network supported, the appropriate protocols from the above list MUST be supported. That means it is elective to support any particular type of physical network, but for the physical networks actually supported, it is REQUIRED that they be supported exactly according to the protocols in the above list. See also the Host and Gateway Requirements RFCs for more specific information on network-specific ("link layer") protocols 🧚.
6.4. Draft Standard Protocols 🎀
Protocol Name Status RFC
======== ===================================== ============== =====
CON-MD5 Content-MD5 Header Field Elective 1864*
OSPF-MIB OSPF Version 2 MIB Elective 1850*
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-8BIT SMTP Service Ext or 8bit-MIMEtransport Elective 1652
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
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 is anticipated that PPP will be advanced to the network-specifics standard protocol state in the future 🌸✨
6.5. Proposed Standard Protocols 🦋
okay bestie, here's the whole Proposed Standard lineup 💖 every single one is marked Elective, so you get to pick what's right for your build ✨
Protocol Name Status RFC
======== ===================================== ============== =====
HTML Hypertext Markup Language - 2.0 Elective 1866*
SMTP-Pipe SMTP Serv. Ext. for Command Pipelining Elective 1854*
MIME-Sec MIME Object Security Services Elective 1848*
MIME-Encyp MIME: Signed and Encrypted Elective 1847*
WHOIS++ Architecture of the WHOIS++ service Elective 1835*
-------- Binding Protocols for ONC RPC Version 2 Elective 1833*
XDR External Data Representation Standard Elective 1832*
RPC Remote Procedure Call Protocol V. 2 Elective 1831*
-------- ESP DES-CBC Transform Elective 1829*
-------- IP Authentication using Keyed MD5 Elective 1828*
ESP IP Encapsulating Security Payload Elective 1827*
-------- IP Authentication Header Elective 1826*
-------- Security Architecture for IP Elective 1825*
RREQ Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers Elective 1812
URL Relative Uniform Resource Locators Elective 1808
CLDAP Connection-less LDAP Elective 1798
OSPF-DC Ext. OSPF to Support Demand Circuits Elective 1793
TMUX Transport Multiplexing Protocol Elective 1692
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
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 1541
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
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.] so any row with a * on it got a glow-up since the last edition 💅
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 right here, with both
Okay so here's the rest of the Telnet Options lineup, with each one's 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 32🚩 Heads up: an asterisk at the end of a line means that line changed from the previous edition of this document ✨
6.7. Experimental Protocols 🧪
Every single Experimental protocol gets the Limited Use status, no exceptions 💜
Protocol Name RFC
======== ===================================== =====
UNARP ARP Extension - UNARP 1868*
------- Form-based File Upload in HTML 1867*
------- BGP/IDRP Route Server Alternative 1863*
------- IP Authentication using Keyed SHA 1852*
ESP3DES ESP Triple DES Transform 1851*
------- SMTP 521 Reply Code 1846*
------- SMTP Serv. Ext. for Checkpoint/Restart 1845*
------- X.500 Mapping X.400 and RFC 822 Addresses 1838*
------- Tables and Subtrees in the X.500 Directory 1837*
------- O/R Address hierarchy in X.500 1836*
------- SMTP Serv. Ext. Large and Binary MIME Msgs. 1830*
ST2 Stream Protocol Version 2 1819*
------- Content-Disposition Header 1806
------- Schema Publishing in X.500 Directory 1804
------- X.400-MHS use X.500 to support X.400-MHS Routing 1801
------- Class A Subnet Experiment 1797
TCP/IPXMIB TCP/IPX Connection Mib Specification 1792
------- TCP And UDP Over IPX Networks With Fixed Path MTU 1791
ICMP-DM ICMP Domain Name Messages 1788
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
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
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 🦋
Informational protocols don't have a status, so there's nothing to rank them on 🌸
Protocol Name RFC
======= ==================================== =====
SNPP Simple Network Paging Protocol - Version 2 1861*
-------- ISO Transport Class 2 Non-use Explicit Flow Control 1859*
over TCP RFC1006 extension
-------- IP in IP Tunneling 1853*
-------- PPP Network Control Protocol for LAN Extension 1841*
TESS The Exponential Security System 1824*
NFSV3 NFS Version 3 Protocol Specification 1813
-------- A Format for Bibliographic Records 1807
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 1706Okay bestie, the Informational list is wrapping up with these last rows 🦋
RADIO-PAGE TPC.INT Subdomain: Radio Paging -- Technical Procedures 1703
GRE-IPv4 Generic Routing Encapsulation over IPv4 1702
GRE Generic Routing Encapsulatio 1701
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 ⏳
Every Historic protocol has the Not Recommended status, so these are the old-school ones we're kinda retiring 🕰️💀
Protocol Name RFC STD
======== ===================================== ===== ===
-------- Mapping full 822 to Restricted 822 1137 *
BGP3 Border Gateway Protocol 3 (BGP-3) 1267,1268
-------- 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[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. Quick heads up: "Obsolete" or "obsoleted" is NOT an official state or status for a protocol, so this subsection is just here for your info 🫶
Ngl, it can look totally wrong to have an obsoleted RFC on the list of standards, but sometimes an older standard is still being swapped out for a newer one. That swap can take a year or two ⏳
For example, the Network Time Protocol (NTP) [RFC 1119] is a full Standard in its version 2, and in its version 3 it's a Draft Standard [RFC 1305]. Once version 3 becomes a full Standard, version 2 will be made Historic 🕰️
Lots of obsoleted protocols are kinda boring and get dropped from this memo altogether. Others are iconic enough that it makes sense to list them under their current status, with a reference to whatever replaces them 👑
RFC RFC Status Title *
==== ==== ========= =================================== =
1661 obsoletes 1548 Draft /Ele The Point to Point Protocol (PPP)
1305 obsoletes 1119 Std /Rec Network Time Protocol (Version 2)
1533 obsoletes 1497 Draft/Rec Bootstrap 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
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, especially the Draft Standard Protocols, to the Internet Architecture Board, care of Abel Winerib, the 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
Brian E. Carpenter
Chair of the IAB
CERN
European Laboratory for Particle Physics
1211 Geneva 23
Switzerland
+41 22 767-4967
brian@dxcoms.cern.ch7.1.2. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Contact
Contacts:
Paul Mockapetris
Chair of the IETF
@home.net, Inc.
101 University Avenue, Suite 240
Palo Alto, CA 94301
1-415-833-4950
pvm@home.net
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 🔥
For more on the status of protocol documents, check out the "Assigned Numbers" document (RFC-1700). Two docs sum up the requirements for hosts and gateways on the Internet: "Host Requirements" (RFC-1122 and RFC-1123) and "Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers" (RFC-1812) 📚
How to grab the most recent edition of this "Internet Official Protocol Standards" memo: the file in-notes/std/std1.txt can be copied over FTP from the FTP.ISI.EDU computer. Log in with 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.EDUYou can submit documents by email to the RFC Editor for publication as an RFC 💌 If the format or style stuff feels confusing, ask for the "Instructions for RFC Authors". In general, you can use the style of any recent RFC as your guide ✨
7.4. The Network Information Center and Requests for Comments Distribution Contact 💌
okay bestie, so RFC's can be grabbed from DS.INTERNIC.NET in a few ways: 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 give your e-mail address as the password ✨
For WAIS, you can use your local WAIS client, or telnet to DS.INTERNIC.NET and log in as "wais" (no password needed) to get to a WAIS client. Help and a tutorial for using WAIS are available online. The WAIS database you want to search is "rfcs" 🎀
Directory and Database Services also has a mail server, and it's giving very helpful vibes 🧚 Send a mail message to mailserv@ds.internic.net and put any of these 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 is also on Gopher now 🌈 It has resource listings, internet documents like RFCs, FYIs, STDs, and Internet Drafts, and publicly accessible databases. All of the collections are WAIS indexed, so you can search them right from the Gopher menu 💜
To get into the InterNIC Gopher Servers, connect to "internic.net" port 70.
Contact: admin@ds.internic.net 🫶
7.5. Sources for Requests for Comments
Want more ways to get RFCs over FTP or email? Send an EMAIL message to rfc-info@ISI.EDU with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. Here's an example 🦋
To: rfc-info@ISI.EDU
Subject: getting rfcs
help: ways_to_get_rfcs8. Security Considerations 💀
Security issues are not addressed in this memo. Plot twist: this one has zero security content, so keep that in mind 🙈
9. Author's Address 👑
Jon Postel, the author, can be reached at:
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: rfc1880 1995-11
- 💖 girlified by claude-haiku-5-5 on : a language model's rewrite of the original, under its terms