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 ...
Almost every April Fools' Day (1 April) since 1989, the Internet RFC Editor has published one or more humorous Request for Comments (RFC) documents, following in the path blazed by the June 1973 RFC 527 called ARPAWOCKY, a parody of Lewis Carroll's nonsense poem "Jabberwocky". The following list also includes humorous RFCs published on other dates.
[nb 1] He was instrumental in forming a Network Working Group (NWG) in 1969 and was the instigator of the Request for Comment (RFC) series, [6] authoring the first RFC [7] and many more. [8] Crocker led other graduate students, including Jon Postel and Vint Cerf, in designing a host-host protocol known as the Network Control Program (NCP).
Between 1945 and June 1947, the RFC, the War Assets Corporation, and the War Assets Administration (the disposal function of the RFC was transferred to WAC on January 15, 1946, and to the WAA in March 1946) processed approximately 61,600 remaining World War II aircraft, Some 34,700 “utility“ type were sold for primarily commercial purposes ...
[4] [5] [6] It is the form required by IETF Requests for Comments (RFC) and working groups. [7] This spelling also appears in most dictionaries. [8] [9] [4] [10] e-mail was originally the form favored in edited published American English and British English writing, and was formerly preferred by some style guides. [4] E-mail is sometimes used. [11]
The format of an email address is local-part@domain, where the local-part may be up to 64 octets long and the domain may have a maximum of 255 octets. [5] The formal definitions are in RFC 5322 (sections 3.2.3 and 3.4.1) and RFC 5321—with a more readable form given in the informational RFC 3696 (written by J. Klensin, the author of RFC 5321) and the associated errata.
The aim of RfC discussions is to improve the encyclopedia, and they may relate to article content pages, editorial disputes; changes to policies, guidelines, or procedures; or other topics. An RfC invites comment from a broader selection of editors than a normal talk page discussion. The normal talk page guidelines apply to these discussions
If an RFC is part of a proposal that is on the Standards Track, then at the first stage, the standard is proposed and subsequently organizations decide whether to implement this Proposed Standard. After the criteria in RFC 6410 is met (two separate implementations, widespread use, no errata etc.), [12] the RFC can advance to Internet Standard.