Note: This page [http://gtm.vlsm.org/in-rfc.html] is a tribute to the late Dr. Jonathan "--jon." Bruce Postel who occasionally started his email with "Hello." See also [http://gtm.vlsm.org/in-iana.html], RFC-2441, as well as RFC-2468. Do not forget to vote your favorite RFC!.

Hello.

This following is a list of more than 130 interesting (IMHO-lah!) not-so-technical Request For Comments (RFC) citations. It was extracted from http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc-index.txt. Some parts (or the whole) of the abstract or introduction were cited. To get a full text of an RFC, please follow the URL of the related RFC. To get a full list of the Internet Official Protocol Standards, see STD-1 which is (currently) RFC-2600. See also the the RFC editor page.

0. RTFR: an Introduction to the RFC Jungle
1. Read The Fine RFCs -- part I
   • IANA and Jon Postel
   • Organizations in the Internet Standard Process Realm: ISOC, IAB, IESG, IETF, IEPG, and IRTF
   • The RFC-Editor
2. Read The Fine RFCs -- part II
   • General Information
   • DNS, IP Addresses, and Identifiers
3. Read The Fine RFCs -- part III
   • TCP/IP and Email
   • ETC
   • Agreements
4. Read The Fine RFCs -- part IV
   • VIR -- Very Interesting RFCs :-)

IANA and tributes to the late Dr. Jonathan "--jon." Bruce Postel
(6 August 1943 - 16 October 1998)

• RFC-2468: I REMEMBER IANA.
  V. Cerf. 17-October-1998. (Format: TXT=8543 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  Jon, our beloved IANA, is gone. Even as I write these words I cannot quite grasp this stark fact. We had almost lost him once before in 1991. Surely we knew he was at risk as are we all. But he had been our rock, the foundation on which our every web search and email was built, always there to mediate the random dispute, to remind us when our documentation did not do justice to its subject, to make difficult decisions with apparent ease, and to consult when careful consideration was needed. We will survive our loss and we will remember. He has left a monumental legacy for all Internauts to contemplate. Steadfast service for decades, moving when others seemed paralyzed, always finding the right course in a complex minefield of technical and sometimes political obstacles.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2441: Working with Jon -- Tribute delivered at UCLA, October 30, 1998.
  D. Cohen. November 1998. (Format: TXT=11992 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL).

  Jon and I worked together from 1977 until 1993 when I left ISI. According to ISI's management Jon worked for me for several years, and I worked for him for several years. In reality we never worked for each other (nor for ISI), we always worked together, to advance the technology that we believed in. Over most of those 16 years we had our offices together, and always worked with each other, even when we worked on totally different projects.
  [... complete text ...]

Organizations in the I* Realm: ISOC, IAB, IESG, IETF, IEPG, and IRTF

• RFC-2600: Internet Official Protocol Standards.
  J. Reynolds, R. Braden. March 2000. (Format: TXT=86139 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC2500, RFC2400, RFC2300, RFC2200, RFC2000, RFC1920, RFC1880, RFC1800, RFC1780, RFC1720, RFC1610, RFC1600, RFC1540, RFC1500, RFC1410, RFC1360,RFC1280, RFC1250, RFC1200, RFC1140, RFC1130, RFC1100, RFC1083) (Also STD0001) (Status: STANDARD)

  This memo is published by the RFC Editor in accordance with Section 2.1 of "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", RFC 2026, which specifies the rules and procedures by which all Internet standards are set. This memo is prepared by the RFC Editor for the IESG and IAB. Please see http://www.rfc-editor.org for later updates to this document.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2135: Internet Society By-Laws.
  ISOC Board of Trustees. April 1997. (Format: TXT=20467 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  These are the by-laws of the Internet Society, as amended, as of June 1996. They are published for the information of the IETF community at the request of the poisson working group. Please refer to the ISOC web page (www.isoc.org) for the current version of the by-laws.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2134: Articles of Incorporation of Internet Society.
  ISOC Board of Trustees. April 1997. (Format: TXT=9131 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  These are the articles of incorporation of the Internet Society. They are published for the information of the IETF community at the request of the poisson working group.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-1601: Charter of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB).
  C. Huitema. March 1994. (Format: TXT=12424 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC1358) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  This memo documents the composition, selection, roles, and organization of the Internet Architecture Board and its subsidiary organizations.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-1358: Charter of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB).
  L. Chapin. August 1992. (Format: TXT=11328 bytes) (Obsoleted by RFC1601) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  The Internet Architecture Board (IAB) shall be constituted and shall operate as a technical advisory group of the Internet Society.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-1160: Internet Activities Board.
  V. Cerf. May-01-1990. (Format: TXT=28182 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC1120) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  In 1968, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) initiated an effort to develop a technology which is now known as packet switching. This technology had its roots in message switching methods, but was strongly influenced by the development of low-cost minicomputers and digital telecommunications techniques during the mid-1960's [BARAN 64, ROBERTS 70, HEART 70, ROBERTS 78]. A very useful survey of this technology can be found in [IEEE 78].
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2727: IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees.
  J. Galvin. February 2000. (Format: TXT=33396 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC2282) (Also BCP0010) (Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)

  The process by which the members of the IAB and IESG are selected, confirmed, and recalled is specified. This document is a self- consistent, organized compilation of the process as it was known at the time of publication.
  This document is a revision of and supercedes RFC2282. It is a complete specification of the process by which members of the IAB and IESG are selected, confirmed, and recalled as of the date of its approval. However, these procedures are subject to change and such change takes effect immediately upon its approval, regardless of whether this document has yet been revised.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2031: IETF-ISOC relationship.
  E. Huizer. October 1996. (Format: TXT=8816 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  This memo summarises [sic] the issues on IETF - ISOC relationships as the have been discussed by the Poised Working Group. The purpose of the document is to gauge consensus on these issues. And to allow further discussions where necessary.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-1640: The Process for Organization of Internet Standards Working Group (POISED).
  S. Crocker. June 1994. (Format: TXT=21780 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  This report, originally prepared in January 1993 provides a summary of the POISED WG, starting from the events leading to the formation of the WG to the end of 1992. Necessarily, this synopsis represents my own perception, particularly for the "prehistory" period. Quite a few people hold strong views about both the overall sequence and specific events. My intent here is to convey as neutral a point of view as possible.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-1396: The Process for Organization of Internet Standards Working Group (POISED).
  S. Crocker. January 1993. (Format: TXT=22096 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  This report provides a summary of the POISED Working Group (WG), starting from the events leading to the formation of the WG to the end of 1992. Necessarily, this synopsis represents my own perception, particularly for the "prehistory" period. Quite a few people hold strong views about both the overall sequence and specific events. My intent here is to convey as neutral a point of view as possible.

  The POISED WG resulted from two sequences of activity, both intimately related to the growth of the Internet. During 1991, there was great concern that the IP address space was being depleted and that the routing tables were growing too large. Some change in the IP addressing and routing mechanisms seemed inevitable, and it became urgent to explore and choose what those changes should be. The ROAD Working Group was formed to study the issues and recommend changes. The ROAD group returned with a specific recommendation for the short term, but did not reach a conclusion on a long term plan.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2026: The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3.
  S. Bradner. October 1996. (Format: TXT=86731 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC1602) (Also BCP0009) (Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)

  This memo documents the process used by the Internet community for the standardization of protocols and procedures. It defines the stages in the standardization process, the requirements for moving a document between stages and the types of documents used during this process. It also addresses the intellectual property rights and copyright issues associated with the standards process.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-1871: Addendum to RFC 1602 -- Variance Procedure.
  J. Postel. November 1995. (Format: TXT=7747 bytes) (Updates RFC1602, RFC1603) (Also BCP0002) (Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)

  This document describes a modification to the IETF procedures to allow an escape from a situation where the existing procedures are not working or do not seem to apply. This is a modification to the procedures of RFC 1602 and 1603.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2028: The Organizations Involved in the IETF Standards Process.
  R. Hovey, S. Bradner. October 1996. (Format: TXT=13865 bytes) (Also BCP0011) (Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)

  This document describes the individuals and organizations involved in the IETF. This includes descriptions of the IESG, the IETF Working Groups and the relationship between the IETF and the Internet Society.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2418: IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures.
  S. Bradner. September 1998. (Format: TXT=62857 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC1603) (Also BCP0025) (Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)

  The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has responsibility for developing and reviewing specifications intended as Internet Standards. IETF activities are organized into working groups (WGs). This document describes the guidelines and procedures for formation and operation of IETF working groups. It also describes the formal relationship between IETF participants WG and the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) and the basic duties of IETF participants, including WG Chairs, WG participants, and IETF Area Directors.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-1718: The Tao of IETF - A Guide for New Attendees of the Internet Engineering Task Force.
  The IETF Secretariat & G. Malkin. November 1994. (Format: TXT=50477 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC1539) (Also FYI0017) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  Over the last two years, the attendance at Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) plenary meetings has grown phenomenally. Approximately one third of the attendees are new to the IETF at each meeting, and many of those go on to become regular attendees. When the meetings were smaller, it wasn't very difficult for a newcomer to get into the swing of things. Today, however, a newcomer meets many more new people, some previously known only as the authors of documents or thought provoking e-mail messages.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-1336: Who's Who in the Internet: Biographies of IAB, IESG and IRSG Members.
  G. Malkin. May 1992. (Format: TXT=92119 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  This FYI RFC contains biographical information about members of the Internet Activities Board (IAB), the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), and the the Internet Research Steering Group (IRSG) of the Internet Research Task Force (IRTF).
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-1251: Who's Who in the Internet: Biographies of IAB, IESG and IRSG Members.
  G. Malkin. Aug-01-1991. (Format: TXT=70383 bytes) (Also FYI0009) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  This FYI RFC contains biographical information about members of the Internet Activities Board (IAB), the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), and the the Internet Research Steering Group (IRSG) of the Internet Research Task Force (IRTF).
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2014: IRTF Research Group Guidelines and Procedures.
  A. Weinrib, J. Postel. October 1996. (Format: TXT=27507 bytes) (Also BCP0008) (Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)

  The Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) has responsibility for organizing groups to investigate research topics related to the Internet protocols, applications, and technology. IRTF activities are organized into Research Groups. This document describes the guidelines and procedures for formation and operation of IRTF Research Groups. It describes the relationship between IRTF participants, Research Groups, the Internet Research Steering Group (IRSG) and the Internet Architecture Board (IAB). The basic duties of IRTF participants, including the IRTF Chair, Research Group Chairs and IRSG members are defined.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2436: Collaboration between ISOC/IETF and ITU-T.
  R. Brett, S. Bradner, G. Parsons. October 1998. (Format: TXT=31154 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  This document describes the collaboration process between the ITU-T and ISOC/IETF. The process was documented by ITU-T at its TSAG (Telecommunication Standardization Advisory Group) meeting in September 1998. All participants of this meeting (including Study Group chairmen and the ISOC Vice President for Standards) assisted in the creation of this document. Subsequently, it was sent to all ITU-T Study Groups and ISOC/IETF to ensure that everyone was aware of the process. Feedback is requested by the next meeting of TSAG in April 1999. This document is identical to the document produced by TSAG.

  Please send any comments on this document to ISOC at poised@tis.com and for information to the ITU-T TSAG group at tsagco-op@itu.int
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2690: A Proposal for an MOU-Based ICANN Protocol Support Organization.
  S. Bradner. September 1999. (Format: TXT=14221 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  This is a copy of the proposal for an MOU-based Protocol Supporting Organization that was submitted to ICANN on April 23, 1999. It proposal was developed primarily by using the open Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) poisson working group mailing list to discuss successive versions of the proposal. In addition the proposal has benefited from extensive discussion within the IETF's Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) and Internet Architecture Board (IAB). The proposal also benefited from extended discussions with representatives of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) and the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).

• RFC-2691: A Memorandum of Understanding for an ICANN Protocol Support Organization.
  S. Bradner. September 1999. (Format: TXT=18940 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  This is the text of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that was signed by ICANN, the IETF, the ITU-T, W3C and ETSI on July 14, 1999 in Oslo. This MoU creates the Protocol Support Organization (PSO) within the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). This MoU was developed by representatives of the IETF, ITU, W3C, ETSI, and ICANN with the help of Jorge Contreras of Hale and Dorr.

• RFC-1690: Introducing the Internet Engineering and Planning Group (IEPG).
  G. Huston. August 1994. (Format: TXT=3013 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  The Internet Engineering and Planning Group (IEPG) is a group principally comprised of Internet Service Operators. The common objective of the group is to promote a technically coordinated operational environment of the Global Internet.
  [... complete text ...]

The RFC Editor

• RFC-2360: Guide for Internet Standards Writers.
  G. Scott. June 1998. (Format: TXT=47280 bytes) (Also BCP0022) (Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)

  This document is a guide for Internet standard writers. It defines those characteristics that make standards coherent, unambiguous, and easy to interpret. In addition, it singles out usage believed to have led to unclear specifications, resulting in non-interoperable interpretations in the past. These guidelines are to be used with RFC 2223, "Instructions to RFC Authors".
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2223: Instructions to RFC Authors.
  J. Postel, J. Reynolds. October 1997. (Format: TXT=37948 bytes) (Obsoletes RFC1543, RFC1111, RFC825) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  This Request for Comments (RFC) provides information about the preparation of RFCs, and certain policies relating to the publication of RFCs.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2119: Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels .
  S. Bradner. March 1997. (Format: TXT=4723 bytes) (Also BCP0014) (Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)

  In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. Authors who follow these guidelines should incorporate this phrase near the beginning of their document:

  The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119.

  
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-1796: Not All RFCs are Standards. C. Huitema, J. Postel & S. Crocker. April 1995. (Format: TXT=7049 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  The "Request for Comments" (RFC) document series is the official publication channel for Internet standards documents and other publications of the IESG, IAB, and Internet community. From time to time, and about every six months in the last few years, someone questions the rationality of publishing both Internet standards and informational documents as RFCs. The argument is generally that this introduces some confusion between "real standards" and "mere publications".
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2555: 30 Years of RFCs.
  RFC Editor, et al.. Apr-07-1999. (Format: TXT=42902 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  Thirty years ago today, the first Request for Comments document, RFC 1, was published at UCLA (ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1.txt). This was the first of a series that currently contains more than 2500 documents on computer networking, collected, archived, and edited by Jon Postel for 28 years. Jon has left us, but this 30th anniversary tribute to the RFC series is assembled in grateful admiration for his massive contribution.

  The rest of this document contains a brief recollection from the present RFC Editor Joyce K. Reynolds, followed by recollections from three pioneers: Steve Crocker who wrote RFC 1, Vint Cerf whose long- range vision continues to guide us, and Jake Feinler who played a key role in the middle years of the RFC series.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-1818: Best Current Practices.
  J. Postel, T. Li & Y. Rekhter. August 1995. (Format: TXT=4114 bytes) (Also BCP0001) (Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)

  This document describes a new series of documents which describe best current practices for the Internet community. Documents in this series carry the endorsement of the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-1311: Introduction to the STD Notes .
  J. Postel. March 1992. (Format: TXT=11308 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  The STDs are a subseries of notes within the RFC series that are the Internet standards. The intent is to identify clearly for the Internet community those RFCs which document Internet standards.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-1150: FYI on FYI: Introduction to the FYI Notes.
  G.S. Malkin, J.K. Reynolds. Mar-01-1990. (Format: TXT=7867 bytes) (Also FYI0001) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

  The FYI series of notes is designed to provide Internet users with a central repository of information about any topics which relate to the Internet. FYIs topics may range from historical memos on "Why it was was done this way" to answers to commonly asked operational questions.

  The FYIs are intended for a wide audience. Some FYIs will cater to beginners, while others will discuss more advanced topics. An FYI may be submitted by anyone who has something to contribute and has the time to do so.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-2434: Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs.
  T. Narten, H. Alvestrand. October 1998. (Format: TXT=25092 bytes) (Also BCP0026) (Status: BEST CURRENT PRACTICE)

  Many protocols make use of identifiers consisting of constants and other well-known values. Even after a protocol has been defined and deployment has begun, new values may need to be assigned (e.g., for a new option type in DHCP, or a new encryption or authentication algorithm for IPSec). To insure that such quantities have consistent values and interpretations in different implementations, their assignment must be administered by a central authority. For IETF protocols, that role is provided by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA).

  In order for the IANA to manage a given name space prudently, it needs guidelines describing the conditions under which new values can be assigned. If the IANA is expected to play a role in the management of a name space, the IANA must be given clear and concise instructions describing that role. This document discusses issues that should be considered in formulating a policy for assigning values to a name space and provides guidelines to document authors on the specific text that must be included in documents that place demands on the IANA.
  [... complete text ...]

• RFC-30: Documentation Conventions.
  S.D. Crocker. Feb-04-1970. (Format: TXT=4041 bytes) (Updates RFC0010, RFC0016, RFC0024, RFC0027) (Status: UNKNOWN)

  The Network Working Group consists of interested pleople [sic] from existing or potential ARPA network sites. Membership is not closed. The Network Working Group (NWG) is concerned with the HOST software, the strategies for using the network, and initial experience with the network. Documentation of the NWG's effort is through notes such as this. Notes may be produced at any site by anybody and included in this series.
  [... complete text ...]

Full Copyright Statement

Based on BCP-9 (currently RFC-2026), RFCs are copyrighted by the Internet Society as following:

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (date). All Rights Reserved.

This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English.

The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.