Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Although written by Steve Crocker, the RFC had emerged from an early working group discussion between Steve Crocker, Steve Carr, and Jeff Rulifson. In RFC 3, which first defined the RFC series, Crocker started attributing the RFC series to the Network Working Group. Rather than being a formal committee, it was a loose association of researchers ...
This is a partial list of RFCs (request for comments memoranda). A Request for Comments (RFC) is a publication in a series from the principal technical development and standards-setting bodies for the Internet, most prominently the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF).
[79] [80] This practice of publishing April Fool's Day RFCs is specifically acknowledged in the instructions memo for RFC authors, with a tongue-in-cheek note saying: "Note that in past years the RFC Editor has sometimes published serious documents with April 1 dates. Readers who cannot distinguish satire by reading the text may have a future ...
RFC 1945 HTTP/1.0; RFC 9110 HTTP Semantics; RFC 9111 HTTP Caching; RFC 9112 HTTP/1.1; RFC 9113 HTTP/2; RFC 7541 HTTP/2: HPACK Header Compression; RFC 8164 HTTP/2: Opportunistic Security for HTTP/2; RFC 8336 HTTP/2: The ORIGIN HTTP/2 Frame; RFC 8441 HTTP/2: Bootstrapping WebSockets with HTTP/2; RFC 9114 HTTP/3; RFC 9204 HTTP/3: QPACK: Field ...
To alert readers that an RfC has ended, you may optionally enclose the talk page section in a box using a tag pair such as {{closed rfc top}}/{{closed rfc bottom}} or {{archive top}}/{{archive bottom}}. This is not required, and may be done with or without a closing statement about the discussions results.
Your own opinions should be posted in a separate comment, not in the question itself. (The question is the part of the page shown on one of the RFC listing pages, such as Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies.) Any publicizing of the RfC should also be neutral. One option is to say only that input is requested, with a link to the RfC.
“This is the Hollywood ‘Brat Pack,’” Blum wrote in his piece. “It is to the 1980s what the Rat Pack was to the 1960s — a roving band of famous young stars on the prowl for parties ...
For example, in 2007 RFC 3700 was an Internet Standard (STD 1) and in May 2008 it was replaced with RFC 5000. RFC 3700 received Historic status, and RFC 5000 became STD 1. The list of Internet standards was originally published as STD 1 but this practice has been abandoned in favor of an online list maintained by the RFC Editor. [18]