Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
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).
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 ...
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.
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).
He also created the Request for Comments (RFC) series, [93] authoring the very first RFC and many more. [94] He was instrumental in creating the ARPA Network Working Group, the forerunner of the modern Internet Engineering Task Force. In 1972, Crocker moved to the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) to become a program manager.
This is useful to resume an interrupted download (when a file is very large), when only a part of a content has to be shown or dynamically added to the already visible part by a browser (i.e. only the first or the following n comments of a web page) in order to spare time, bandwidth and system resources, etc. HTTP/2, HTTP/3
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