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).
[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 ran MMDF as a telephone-based ARPANET gateway service for CSNET, which was a forerunner for NSFNET. Crocker was the author of RFC 822 , which was published in 1982 to define the format of Internet mail messages, [ 7 ] and he was the first listed author of the earlier RFC 733 on which it was based in 1977. [ 8 ]
This latter function is based on the first timestamp following the {} tag. To extend a current RfC for another 30 days, and to prevent Legobot from automatically ending the RfC during the next month, insert a current timestamp immediately before the original timestamp of the opening statement with either ~~~~ (name, time and date) or ...
When an RFC becomes an Internet Standard (STD), it is assigned an STD number but retains its RFC number. When an Internet Standard is updated, its number is unchanged but refers to a different RFC or set of RFCs. For example, in 2007 RFC 3700 was an Internet Standard (STD 1) and in May 2008 it was replaced with RFC 5000.
Since 1992, a new document was written to specify the evolution of the basic protocol towards its next full version. It supported both the simple request method of the 0.9 version and the full GET request that included the client HTTP version. This was the first of the many unofficial HTTP/1.0 drafts that preceded the final work on HTTP/1.0. [3]
[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 ...