Movatterモバイル変換
[0]ホーム
[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]
Obsoleted by:2000 HISTORIC
Network Working Group Internet Architecture BoardRequest for Comments: 1920 J. Postel, EditorObsoletes:1880,1800,1780,1720, March 19961610,1600,1540,1500,1410,1360,1280, 1250, 1200, 1140, 1130, 1100, 1083STD: 1Category: Standards TrackINTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDSStatus of this Memo This memo describes the state of standardization of protocols used in the Internet as determined by the Internet Architecture Board (IAB). This memo is an Internet Standard. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.Table of Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21. The Standardization Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32. The Request for Comments Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . .53. Other Reference Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63.1. Assigned Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63.2. Gateway Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63.3. Host Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63.4. The MIL-STD Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64. Explanation of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .84.1. Definitions of Protocol State (Maturity Level) . . . . . .94.1.1. Standard Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94.1.2. Draft Standard Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94.1.3. Proposed Standard Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94.1.4. Experimental Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94.1.5. Informational Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .104.1.6. Historic Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .104.2. Definitions of Protocol Status (Requirement Level) . . .104.2.1. Required Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .104.2.2. Recommended Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .104.2.3. Elective Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .104.2.4. Limited Use Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .104.2.5. Not Recommended Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .105. The Standards Track . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .115.1. The RFC Processing Decision Table . . . . . . . . . . .115.2. The Standards Track Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . .126. The Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .146.1. Recent Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19966.1.1. New RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .146.1.2. Other Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .186.2. Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .206.3. Network-Specific Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . .226.4. Draft Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .236.5. Proposed Standard Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . .246.6. Telnet Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .286.7. Experimental Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .296.8. Informational Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .326.9. Historic Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .336.10 Obsolete Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .357. Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .367.1. IAB, IETF, and IRTF Contacts . . . . . . . . . . . . . .367.1.1. Internet Architecture Board (IAB) Contact . . . . . .367.1.2. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Contact . . . .367.1.3. Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) Contact . . . . .377.2. Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Contact . . .387.3. Request for Comments Editor Contact . . . . . . . . . .397.4. Network Information Center Contact . . . . . . . . . . .397.5. Sources for Requests for Comments . . . . . . . . . . .408. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .409. Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40Introduction A discussion of the standardization process and the RFC document series is presented first, followed by an explanation of the terms. Sections6.2 -6.10 contain the lists of protocols in each stage of standardization. Finally are pointers to references and contacts for further information. This memo is intended to be issued approximately quarterly; please be sure the copy you are reading is current. Current copies may be obtained from the Network Information Center (INTERNIC) or from the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) (see the contact information at the end of this memo). Do not use this edition after 15-July-96. SeeSection 6.1 for a description of recent changes. In the official lists in sections6.2 -6.10, an asterisk (*) next to a protocol denotes that it is new to this document or has been moved from one protocol level to another, or differs from the previous edition of this document.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19961. The Standardization Process The Internet Architecture Board maintains this list of documents that define standards for the Internet protocol suite. SeeRFC-1601 for the charter of the IAB andRFC-1160 for an explanation of the role and organization of the IAB and its subsidiary groups, the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the Internet Research Task Force (IRTF). Each of these groups has a steering group called the IESG and IRSG, respectively. The IETF develops these standards with the goal of co-ordinating the evolution of the Internet protocols; this co-ordination has become quite important as the Internet protocols are increasingly in general commercial use. The definitive description of the Internet standards process is found inRFC-1602. The majority of Internet protocol development and standardization activity takes place in the working groups of the IETF. Protocols which are to become standards in the Internet go through a series of states or maturity levels (proposed standard, draft standard, and standard) involving increasing amounts of scrutiny and testing. When a protocol completes this process it is assigned a STD number (seeRFC-1311). At each step, the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) of the IETF must make a recommendation for advancement of the protocol. To allow time for the Internet community to consider and react to standardization proposals, a minimum delay of 6 months before a proposed standard can be advanced to a draft standard and 4 months before a draft standard can be promoted to standard. It is general practice that no proposed standard can be promoted to draft standard without at least two independent implementations (and the recommendation of the IESG). Promotion from draft standard to standard generally requires operational experience and demonstrated interoperability of two or more implementations (and the recommendation of the IESG). In cases where there is uncertainty as to the proper decision concerning a protocol a special review committee may be appointed consisting of experts from the IETF, IRTF and the IAB with the purpose of recommending an explicit action. Advancement of a protocol to proposed standard is an important step since it marks a protocol as a candidate for eventual standardization (it puts the protocol "on the standards track"). Advancement to draft standard is a major step which warns the community that, unless major objections are raised or flaws are discovered, the protocol is likely to be advanced to standard in six months.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 Some protocols have been superseded by better ones or are otherwise unused. Such protocols are still documented in this memorandum with the designation "historic". Because it is useful to document the results of early protocol research and development work, some of the RFCs document protocols which are still in an experimental condition. The protocols are designated "experimental" in this memorandum. They appear in this report as a convenience to the community and not as evidence of their standardization. Other protocols, such as those developed by other standards organizations, or by particular vendors, may be of interest or may be recommended for use in the Internet. The specifications of such protocols may be published as RFCs for the convenience of the Internet community. These protocols are labeled "informational" in this memorandum. In addition to the working groups of the IETF, protocol development and experimentation may take place as a result of the work of the research groups of the Internet Research Task Force, or the work of other individuals interested in Internet protocol development. The the documentation of such experimental work in the RFC series is encouraged, but none of this work is considered to be on the track for standardization until the IESG has made a recommendation to advance the protocol to the proposed standard state. A few protocols have achieved widespread implementation without the approval of the IESG. For example, some vendor protocols have become very important to the Internet community even though they have not been recommended by the IESG. However, the IAB strongly recommends that the standards process be used in the evolution of the protocol suite to maximize interoperability (and to prevent incompatible protocol requirements from arising). The use of the terms "standard", "draft standard", and "proposed standard" are reserved in any RFC or other publication of Internet protocols to only those protocols which the IESG has approved. In addition to a state (like "Proposed Standard"), a protocol is also assigned a status, or requirement level, in this document. The possible requirement levels ("Required", "Recommended", "Elective", "Limited Use", and "Not Recommended") are defined inSection 4.2. When a protocol is on the standards track, that is in the proposed standard, draft standard, or standard state (seeSection 5), the status shown inSection 6 is the current status. Few protocols are required to be implemented in all systems; this is because there is such a variety of possible systems, for example,Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 gateways, routers, terminal servers, workstations, and multi-user hosts. The requirement level shown in this document is only a one word label, which may not be sufficient to characterize the implementation requirements for a protocol in all situations. For some protocols, this document contains an additional status paragraph (an applicability statement). In addition, more detailed status information may be contained in separate requirements documents (seeSection 3).2. The Request for Comments Documents The documents called Request for Comments (or RFCs) are the working notes of the "Network Working Group", that is the Internet research and development community. A document in this series may be on essentially any topic related to computer communication, and may be anything from a meeting report to the specification of a standard. Notice: All standards are published as RFCs, but not all RFCs specify standards. Anyone can submit a document for publication as an RFC. Submissions must be made via electronic mail to the RFC Editor (see the contact information at the end of this memo, and seeRFC 1543). While RFCs are not refereed publications, they do receive technical review from the task forces, individual technical experts, or the RFC Editor, as appropriate. The RFC series comprises a wide range of documents, ranging from informational documents of general interests to specifications of standard Internet protocols. In cases where submission is intended to document a proposed standard, draft standard, or standard protocol, the RFC Editor will publish the document only with the approval of the IESG. For documents describing experimental work, the RFC Editor will notify the IESG before publication, allowing for the possibility of review by the relevant IETF working group or IRTF research group and provide those comments to the author. SeeSection5.1 for more detail. Once a document is assigned an RFC number and published, that RFC is never revised or re-issued with the same number. There is never a question of having the most recent version of a particular RFC. However, a protocol (such as File Transfer Protocol (FTP)) may be improved and re-documented many times in several different RFCs. It is important to verify that you have the most recent RFC on a particular protocol. This "Internet Official Protocol Standards"Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 memo is the reference for determining the correct RFC for the current specification of each protocol. The RFCs are available from the INTERNIC, and a number of other sites. For more information about obtaining RFCs, see Sections7.4 and 7.5.3. Other Reference Documents There are three other reference documents of interest in checking the current status of protocol specifications and standardization. These are the Assigned Numbers, the Gateway Requirements, and the Host Requirements. Note that these documents are revised and updated at different times; in case of differences between these documents, the most recent must prevail. Also, one should be aware of the MIL-STD publications on IP, TCP, Telnet, FTP, and SMTP. These are described inSection 3.4.3.1. Assigned Numbers The "Assigned Numbers" document lists the assigned values of the parameters used in the various protocols. For example, IP protocol codes, TCP port numbers, Telnet Option Codes, ARP hardware types, and Terminal Type names. Assigned Numbers was most recently issued asRFC-1700.3.2. Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers This document reviews the specifications that apply to gateways and supplies guidance and clarification for any ambiguities. Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers isRFC-1812.3.3. Host Requirements This pair of documents reviews and updates the specifications that apply to hosts, and it supplies guidance and clarification for any ambiguities. Host Requirements was issued asRFC-1122 andRFC-1123.3.4. The MIL-STD Documents The Internet community specifications for IP (RFC-791) and TCP (RFC-793) and the DoD MIL-STD specifications are intended to describe exactly the same protocols. Any difference in the protocols specified by these sets of documents should be reported to DISA and to the IESG. It is strongly advised that the two sets of documents be used together, along withRFC-1122 andRFC-1123.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 Note that these MIL-STD are now somewhat out of date. The Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers (RFC-1812) and Host Requirements (RFC-1122,RFC-1123) take precedence over both earlier RFCs and the MIL-STDs. 2045-13501 Internet Routing between Autonomous Systems 2045-14502-01 Internet Transport Profile for DoD Communications, Part 1: Transport and Internet Services 2045-14502-04 Internet Transport Profile for DoD Communications, Part 4: LAN Media-Independent Requirements 2045-14503 Internet Transport Service Supporting OSI Applications 2045-44500 Tactical Communications 2045-17503-01 Internet Message Transfer Profile for DoD Communications Part 1: Simple Mail Transfer Protocol 2045-17503-02 Internet Message Transfer Profile for DoD Communications Part 2: Format of Text Messages 2045-17504 Internet File Transfer Profile for DoD Communications 2045-17505 Internet Domain Name Service (DNS) Profile for DoD Communications 2045-17506 Internet Remote Login (RLOGIN) Profile for DoD Communications 2045-17507 Internet Network Management Profile for DoD Communications 2045-38000 DoD Network Management for DoD Communications These documents are available from the Naval Publications and Forms Center. Requests can be initiated by telephone, telegraph, or mail; however, it is preferred that private industry use form DD1425, if possible. Naval Publications and Forms Center, Code 3015 5801 Tabor Ave Philadelphia, PA 19120 Phone: 1-215-697-3321 (order tape) 1-215-697-4834 (conversation)Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 7]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19964. Explanation of Terms There are two independent categorization of protocols. The first is the "maturity level" or STATE of standardization, one of "standard", "draft standard", "proposed standard", "experimental", "informational" or "historic". The second is the "requirement level" or STATUS of this protocol, one of "required", "recommended", "elective", "limited use", or "not recommended". The status or requirement level is difficult to portray in a one word label. These status labels should be considered only as an indication, and a further description, or applicability statement, should be consulted. When a protocol is advanced to proposed standard or draft standard, it is labeled with a current status. At any given time a protocol occupies a cell of the following matrix. Protocols are likely to be in cells in about the following proportions (indicated by the relative number of Xs). A new protocol is most likely to start in the (proposed standard, elective) cell, or the (experimental, limited use) cell. S T A T U S Req Rec Ele Lim Not +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ Std | X | XXX | XXX | | | S +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ Draft | X | X | XXX | | | T +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ Prop | | X | XXX | | | A +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ Info | | | | | | T +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ Expr | | | | XXX | | E +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ Hist | | | | | XXX | +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+ What is a "system"? Some protocols are particular to hosts and some to gateways; a few protocols are used in both. The definitions of the terms below will refer to a "system" which is either a host or a gateway (or both). It should be clear from the context of the particular protocol which types of systems are intended.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 8]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19964.1. Definitions of Protocol State Every protocol listed in this document is assigned to a "maturity level" or STATE of standardization: "standard", "draft standard", "proposed standard", "experimental", or "historic". 4.1.1. Standard Protocol The IESG has established this as an official standard protocol for the Internet. These protocols are assigned STD numbers (seeRFC-1311). These are separated into two groups: (1) IP protocol and above, protocols that apply to the whole Internet; and (2) network-specific protocols, generally specifications of how to do IP on particular types of networks. 4.1.2. Draft Standard Protocol The IESG is actively considering this protocol as a possible Standard Protocol. Substantial and widespread testing and comment are desired. Comments and test results should be submitted to the IESG. There is a possibility that changes will be made in a Draft Standard Protocol before it becomes a Standard Protocol. 4.1.3. Proposed Standard Protocol These are protocol proposals that may be considered by the IESG for standardization in the future. Implementation and testing by several groups is desirable. Revision of the protocol specification is likely. 4.1.4. Experimental Protocol A system should not implement an experimental protocol unless it is participating in the experiment and has coordinated its use of the protocol with the developer of the protocol. Typically, experimental protocols are those that are developed as part of an ongoing research project not related to an operational service offering. While they may be proposed as a service protocol at a later stage, and thus become proposed standard, draft standard, and then standard protocols, the designation of a protocol as experimental may sometimes be meant to suggest that the protocol, although perhaps mature, is not intended for operational use.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 9]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 4.1.5. Informational Protocol Protocols developed by other standard organizations, or vendors, or that are for other reasons outside the purview of the IESG, may be published as RFCs for the convenience of the Internet community as informational protocols. 4.1.6. Historic Protocol These are protocols that are unlikely to ever become standards in the Internet either because they have been superseded by later developments or due to lack of interest.4.2. Definitions of Protocol Status This document lists a "requirement level" or STATUS for each protocol. The status is one of "required", "recommended", "elective", "limited use", or "not recommended". 4.2.1. Required Protocol A system must implement the required protocols. 4.2.2. Recommended Protocol A system should implement the recommended protocols. 4.2.3. Elective Protocol A system may or may not implement an elective protocol. The general notion is that if you are going to do something like this, you must do exactly this. There may be several elective protocols in a general area, for example, there are several electronic mail protocols, and several routing protocols. 4.2.4. Limited Use Protocol These protocols are for use in limited circumstances. This may be because of their experimental state, specialized nature, limited functionality, or historic state. 4.2.5. Not Recommended Protocol These protocols are not recommended for general use. This may be because of their limited functionality, specialized nature, or experimental or historic state.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 10]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19965. The Standards Track This section discusses in more detail the procedures used by the RFC Editor and the IESG in making decisions about the labeling and publishing of protocols as standards.5.1. The RFC Processing Decision Table Here is the current decision table for processing submissions by the RFC Editor. The processing depends on who submitted it, and the status they want it to have. +==========================================================+ |**************| S O U R C E | +==========================================================+ | Desired | IAB | IESG | IRSG | Other | | Status | | | | | +==========================================================+ | | | | | | | Standard | Bogus | Publish | Bogus | Bogus | | or | (2) | (1) | (2) | (2) | | Draft | | | | | | Standard | | | | | +--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ | | | | | | | | Refer | Publish | Refer | Refer | | Proposed | (3) | (1) | (3) | (3) | | Standard | | | | | | | | | | | +--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ | | | | | | | | Notify | Publish | Notify | Notify | | Experimental | (4) | (1) | (4) | (4) | | Protocol | | | | | | | | | | | +--------------+----------+----------+----------+----------+ | | | | | | | Information | Publish | Publish |Discretion|Discretion| | or Opinion | (1) | (1) | (5) | (5) | | Paper | | | | | | | | | | | +==========================================================+ (1) Publish. (2) Bogus. Inform the source of the rules. RFCs specifying Standard, or Draft Standard must come from the IESG, only.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 11]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 (3) Refer to an Area Director for review by a WG. Expect to see the document again only after approval by the IESG. (4) Notify both the IESG and IRSG. If no concerns are raised in two weeks then do Discretion (5), else RFC Editor to resolve the concerns or do Refer (3). (5) RFC Editor's discretion. The RFC Editor decides if a review is needed and if so by whom. RFC Editor decides to publish or not. Of course, in all cases the RFC Editor can request or make minor changes for style, format, and presentation purposes. The IESG has designated the IESG Secretary as its agent for forwarding documents with IESG approval and for registering concerns in response to notifications (4) to the RFC Editor. Documents from Area Directors or Working Group Chairs may be considered in the same way as documents from "other".5.2. The Standards Track Diagram There is a part of the STATUS and STATE categorization that is called the standards track. Actually, only the changes of state are significant to the progression along the standards track, though the status assignments may change as well. The states illustrated by single line boxes are temporary states, those illustrated by double line boxes are long term states. A protocol will normally be expected to remain in a temporary state for several months (minimum six months for proposed standard, minimum four months for draft standard). A protocol may be in a long term state for many years. A protocol may enter the standards track only on the recommendation of the IESG; and may move from one state to another along the track only on the recommendation of the IESG. That is, it takes action by the IESG to either start a protocol on the track or to move it along. Generally, as the protocol enters the standards track a decision is made as to the eventual STATUS, requirement level or applicability (elective, recommended, or required) the protocol will have, although a somewhat less stringent current status may be assigned, and it then is placed in the the proposed standard STATE with that status. So the initial placement of a protocol is into state 1. At any time the STATUS decision may be revisited.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 12]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 | +<----------------------------------------------+ | ^ V 0 | 4 +-----------+ +===========+ | enter |-->----------------+-------------->|experiment | +-----------+ | +=====+=====+ | | V 1 | +-----------+ V | proposed |-------------->+ +--->+-----+-----+ | | | | | V 2 | +<---+-----+-----+ V | draft std |-------------->+ +--->+-----+-----+ | | | | | V 3 | +<---+=====+=====+ V | standard |-------------->+ +=====+=====+ | | V 5 +=====+=====+ | historic | +===========+ The transition from proposed standard (1) to draft standard (2) can only be by action of the IESG and only after the protocol has been proposed standard (1) for at least six months. The transition from draft standard (2) to standard (3) can only be by action of the IESG and only after the protocol has been draft standard (2) for at least four months. Occasionally, the decision may be that the protocol is not ready for standardization and will be assigned to the experimental state (4). This is off the standards track, and the protocol may be resubmitted to enter the standards track after further work. There are other paths into the experimental and historic states that do not involve IESG action. Sometimes one protocol is replaced by another and thus becomes historic, or it may happen that a protocol on the standards track is in a sense overtaken by another protocol (or other events) and becomes historic (state 5).Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 13]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19966. The Protocols Subsection 6.1 lists recent RFCs and other changes. Subsections6.2 - 6.10 list the standards in groups by protocol state.6.1. Recent Changes6.1.1. New RFCs: 1920 - Internet Official Protocol Standards This memo. 1918 - Address Allocation for Private Internets This is a Best Current Practices document and does not specify any level of standard. 1917 - An Appeal to the Internet Community to Return Unused IP Networks (Prefixes) to the IANA This is a Best Current Practices document and does not specify any level of standard. 1916 - Enterprise Renumbering: Experience and Information Solicitation This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard. 1915 - Variance for The PPP Connection Control Protocol and The PPP Encryption Control Protocol This is a Best Current Practices document and does not specify any level of standard. 1914 - How to Interact with a Whois++ Mesh A Proposed Standard protocol. 1913 - Architecture of the Whois++ Index Service A Proposed Standard protocol. 1912 - Common DNS Operational and Configuration Errors This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 14]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 1911 - Voice Profile for Internet Mail An Experimental protocol. 1910 - User-based Security Model for SNMPv2 An Experimental protocol. 1909 - An Administrative Infrastructure for SNMPv2 An Experimental protocol. 1908 - Coexistence between Version 1 and Version 2 of the Internet-standard Network Management Framework A Draft Standard protocol. 1907 - Management Information Base for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) A Draft Standard protocol. 1906 - Transport Mappings for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) A Draft Standard protocol. 1905 - Protocol Operations for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) A Draft Standard protocol. 1904 - Conformance Statements for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) A Draft Standard protocol. 1903 - Textual Conventions for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) A Draft Standard protocol. 1902 - Structure of Management Information for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) A Draft Standard protocol.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 15]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 1901 - Introduction to Community-based SNMPv2 An Experimental protocol. 1900 - Renumbering Needs Work This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard. 1899 - not yet issued. 1898 - CyberCash Credit Card Protocol Version 0.8 This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard. 1897 - IPv6 Testing Address Allocation An Experimental protocol. 1896 - The text/enriched MIME Content-type This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard. 1895 - The Application/CALS-1840 Content-type This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard. 1894 - An Extensible Message Format for Delivery Status Notifications A Proposed Standard protocol. 1893 - Enhanced Mail System Status Codes A Proposed Standard protocol. 1892 - The Multipart/Report Content Type for the Reporting of Mail System Administrative Messages A Proposed Standard protocol. 1891 - SMTP Service Extension for Delivery Status Notifications A Proposed Standard protocol.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 16]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 1890 - RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control A Proposed Standard protocol. 1889 - RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time Applications A Proposed Standard protocol. 1888 - not yet issued. 1887 - An Architecture for IPv6 Unicast Address Allocation This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard. 1886 - DNS Extensions to support IP version 6 A Proposed Standard protocol. 1885 - Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) A Proposed Standard protocol. 1884 - IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture A Proposed Standard protocol. 1883 - Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification A Proposed Standard protocol. 1882 - The 12-Days of Technology Before Christmas This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard. 1881 - IPv6 Address Allocation Management This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard. 1879 - Class A Subnet Experiment Results and Recommendations This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 17]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 1878 - Variable Length Subnet Table For IPv4 This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard. 1877 - PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol Extensions for Name Server Addresses This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard. 1876 - A Means for Expressing Location Information in the Domain Name System An Experimental protocol. 1875 - UNINETT PCA Policy Statements This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard. 1874 - SGML Media Types An Experimental protocol. 1873 - Message/External-Body Content-ID Access Type An Experimental protocol. 1872 - The MIME Multipart/Related Content-type An Experimental protocol. 1865 - EDI Meets the Internet Frequently Asked Questions about Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) on the Internet This is an information document and does not specify any level of standard.6.1.2. Other Changes: The following are changes to protocols listed in the previous edition. 1451 - Manager to Manager Management Information Base Moved to Historic.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 18]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 1447 - Party MIB for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Moved to Historic. 1446 - Security Protocols for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Moved to Historic. 1445 - Administrative Model for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Moved to Historic. 1058 - Routing Information Protocol Moved to Historic.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 19]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19966.2. Standard ProtocolsProtocol Name Status RFC STD *======== ===================================== ======== ==== === =-------- Internet Official Protocol Standards Req 1920 1-------- Assigned Numbers Req 1700 2-------- Host Requirements - Communications Req 1122 3-------- Host Requirements - Applications Req 1123 3IP Internet Protocol Req 791 5 as amended by:---------------- IP Subnet Extension Req 950 5-------- IP Broadcast Datagrams Req 919 5-------- IP Broadcast Datagrams with Subnets Req 922 5ICMP Internet Control Message Protocol Req 792 5IGMP Internet Group Multicast Protocol Rec 1112 5UDP User Datagram Protocol Rec 768 6TCP Transmission Control Protocol Rec 793 7TELNET Telnet Protocol Rec 854,855 8FTP File Transfer Protocol Rec 959 9SMTP Simple Mail Transfer Protocol Rec 821 10SMTP-SIZE SMTP Service Ext for Message Size Rec 1870 10SMTP-EXT SMTP Service Extensions Rec 1869 10MAIL Format of Electronic Mail Messages Rec 822 11CONTENT Content Type Header Field Rec 1049 11NTPV2 Network Time Protocol (Version 2) Rec 1119 12DOMAIN Domain Name System Rec 1034,1035 13DNS-MX Mail Routing and the Domain System Rec 974 14SNMP Simple Network Management Protocol Rec 1157 15SMI Structure of Management Information Rec 1155 16Concise-MIB Concise MIB Definitions Rec 1212 16MIB-II Management Information Base-II Rec 1213 17NETBIOS NetBIOS Service Protocols Ele 1001,1002 19ECHO Echo Protocol Rec 862 20DISCARD Discard Protocol Ele 863 21CHARGEN Character Generator Protocol Ele 864 22QUOTE Quote of the Day Protocol Ele 865 23USERS Active Users Protocol Ele 866 24DAYTIME Daytime Protocol Ele 867 25TIME Time Server Protocol Ele 868 26TFTP Trivial File Transfer Protocol Ele 1350 33TP-TCP ISO Transport Service on top of the TCP Ele 1006 35ETHER-MIB Ethernet MIB Ele 1643 50PPP Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) Ele 1661 51PPP-HDLC PPP in HDLC Framing Ele 1662 51IP-SMDS IP Datagrams over the SMDS Service Ele 1209 52[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from theprevious edition of this document.]Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 20]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996Applicability Statements: IGMP -- The Internet Architecture Board intends to move towards general adoption of IP multicasting, as a more efficient solution than broadcasting for many applications. The host interface has been standardized inRFC-1112; however, multicast-routing gateways are in the experimental stage and are not widely available. An Internet host should support all ofRFC-1112, except for the IGMP protocol itself which is optional; seeRFC-1122 for more details. Even without IGMP, implementation ofRFC-1112 will provide an important advance: IP-layer access to local network multicast addressing. It is expected that IGMP will become recommended for all hosts and gateways at some future date. SMI, MIB-II SNMP -- The Internet Architecture Board recommends that all IP and TCP implementations be network manageable. At the current time, this implies implementation of the Internet MIB-II (RFC-1213), and at least the recommended management protocol SNMP (RFC-1157). RIP -- The Routing Information Protocol (RIP) is widely implemented and used in the Internet. However, both implementors and users should be aware that RIP has some serious technical limitations as a routing protocol. The IETF is currently devpeloping several candidates for a new standard "open" routing protocol with better properties than RIP. The IAB urges the Internet community to track these developments, and to implement the new protocol when it is standardized; improved Internet service will result for many users. TP-TCP -- As OSI protocols become more widely implemented and used, there will be an increasing need to support interoperation with the TCP/IP protocols. The Internet Engineering Task Force is formulating strategies for interoperation.RFC-1006 provides one interoperation mode, in which TCP/IP is used to emulate TP0 in order to support OSI applications. Hosts that wish to run OSI connection-oriented applications in this mode should use the procedure described inRFC-1006. In the future, the IAB expects that a major portion of the Internet will support both TCP/IP and OSI (inter-)network protocols in parallel, and it will then be possible to run OSI applications across the Internet using full OSI protocol "stacks".Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 21]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19966.3. Network-Specific Standard ProtocolsAll Network-Specific Standards have Elective status.Protocol Name State RFC STD *======== ===================================== ===== ===== === =IP-ATM Classical IP and ARP over ATM Prop 1577IP-FR Multiprotocol over Frame Relay Draft 1490ATM-ENCAP Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM Prop 1483IP-TR-MC IP Multicast over Token-Ring LANs Prop 1469IP-FDDI Transmission of IP and ARP over FDDI Net Std 1390 36IP-HIPPI IP and ARP on HIPPI Prop 1374IP-X.25 X.25 and ISDN in the Packet Mode Draft 1356IP-FDDI Internet Protocol on FDDI Networks Draft 1188ARP Address Resolution Protocol Std 826 37RARP A Reverse Address Resolution Protocol Std 903 38IP-ARPA Internet Protocol on ARPANET Std BBN1822 39IP-WB Internet Protocol on Wideband Network Std 907 40IP-E Internet Protocol on Ethernet Networks Std 894 41IP-EE Internet Protocol on Exp. Ethernet Nets Std 895 42IP-IEEE Internet Protocol on IEEE 802 Std 1042 43IP-DC Internet Protocol on DC Networks Std 891 44IP-HC Internet Protocol on Hyperchannel Std 1044 45IP-ARC Transmitting IP Traffic over ARCNET Nets Std 1201 46IP-SLIP Transmission of IP over Serial Lines Std 1055 47IP-NETBIOS Transmission of IP over NETBIOS Std 1088 48IP-IPX Transmission of 802.2 over IPX Networks Std 1132 49[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from theprevious edition of this document.]Applicability Statements: It is expected that a system will support one or more physical networks and for each physical network supported the appropriate protocols from the above list must be supported. That is, it is elective to support any particular type of physical network, and for the physical networks actually supported it is required that they be supported exactly according to the protocols in the above list. See also the Host and Gateway Requirements RFCs for more specific information on network-specific ("link layer") protocols.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 22]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19966.4. Draft Standard ProtocolsProtocol Name Status RFC======== ===================================== ============== =====COEX-MIB Coexistence between SNMPV1 & SNMPV2 Elective 1908*SNMPv2-MIB MIB for SNMPv2 Elective 1907*TRANS-MIB Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 Elective 1906*OPS-MIB Protocol Operations for SNMPv2 Elective 1905*CONF-MIB Conformance Statements for SNMPv2 Elective 1904*CONV-MIB Textual Conventions for SNMPv2 Elective 1903*SMIV2 SMI for SNMPv2 Elective 1902*CON-MD5 Content-MD5 Header Field Elective 1864OSPF-MIB OSPF Version 2 MIB Elective 1850STR-REP String Representation ... Elective 1779X.500syn X.500 String Representation ... Elective 1778X.500lite X.500 Lightweight ... Elective 1777BGP-4-APP Application of BGP-4 Elective 1772BGP-4 Border Gateway Protocol 4 Elective 1771PPP-DNCP PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol Elective 1762RMON-MIB Remote Network Monitoring MIB Elective 1757802.5-MIB IEEE 802.5 Token Ring MIB Elective 1748BGP-4-MIB BGP-4 MIB Elective 1657POP3 Post Office Protocol, Version 3 Elective 1725RIP2-MIB RIP Version 2 MIB Extension Elective 1724RIP2 RIP Version 2-Carrying Additional Info. Elective 1723RIP2-APP RIP Version 2 Protocol App. Statement Elective 1722SIP-MIB SIP Interface Type MIB Elective 1694------- Def Man Objs Parallel-printer-like Elective 1660------- Def Man Objs RS-232-like Elective 1659------- Def Man Objs Character Stream Elective 1658SMTP-8BIT SMTP Service Ext or 8bit-MIMEtransport Elective 1652OSI-NSAP Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation Elective 1629OSPF2 Open Shortest Path First Routing V2 Elective 1583ISO-TS-ECHO Echo for ISO-8473 Elective 1575DECNET-MIB DECNET MIB Elective 1559------- Message Header Ext. of Non-ASCII Text Elective 1522MIME Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions Elective 1521802.3-MIB IEEE 802.3 Repeater MIB Elective 1516BRIDGE-MIB BRIDGE-MIB Elective 1493NTPV3 Network Time Protocol (Version 3) Elective 1305IP-MTU Path MTU Discovery Elective 1191FINGER Finger Protocol Elective 1288BOOTP Bootstrap Protocol Recommended 951,1497NICNAME WhoIs Protocol Elective 954[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from theprevious edition of this document.]Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 23]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996Applicability Statements: PPP -- Point to Point Protocol is a method of sending IP over serial lines, which are a type of physical network. It is anticipated that PPP will be advanced to the network-specifics standard protocol state in the future.6.5. Proposed Standard ProtocolsProtocol Name Status RFC======== ===================================== ============== =====WHOIS++M How to Interact with a Whois++ Mesh Elective 1914*WHOIS++A Architecture of Whois++ Index Service Elective 1913*DSN Delivery Status Notifications Elective 1894*EMS-CODE Enhanced Mail System Status Codes Elective 1893*MIME-RPT Multipart/Report Elective 1892*SMTP-DSN SMTP Delivery Status Notifications Elective 1891*RTP-AV RTP Audio/Video Profile Elective 1890*RTP Transport Protocol for Real-Time Apps Elective 1889*DNS-IPV6 DNS Extensions to support IPv6 Elective 1886*ICMPv6 ICMPv6 for IPv6 Elective 1885*IPV6-Addr IPv6 Addressing Architecture Elective 1884*IPV6 IPv6 Specification Elective 1883*HTML Hypertext Markup Language - 2.0 Elective 1866SMTP-Pipe SMTP Serv. Ext. for Command Pipelining Elective 1854MIME-Sec MIME Object Security Services Elective 1848MIME-Encyp MIME: Signed and Encrypted Elective 1847WHOIS++ Architecture of the WHOIS++ service Elective 1835-------- Binding Protocols for ONC RPC Version 2 Elective 1833XDR External Data Representation Standard Elective 1832RPC Remote Procedure Call Protocol V. 2 Elective 1831-------- ESP DES-CBC Transform Ele/Req 1829-------- IP Authentication using Keyed MD5 Ele/Req 1828ESP IP Encapsulating Security Payload Ele/Req 1827IPV6-AH IP Authentication Header Ele/Req 1826-------- Security Architecture for IP Ele/Req 1825RREQ Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers Elective 1812URL Relative Uniform Resource Locators Elective 1808CLDAP Connection-less LDAP Elective 1798OSPF-DC Ext. OSPF to Support Demand Circuits Elective 1793TMUX Transport Multiplexing Protocol Elective 1692TFTP-Opt TFTP Options Elective 1784TFTP-Blk TFTP Blocksize Option Elective 1783TFTP-Ext TFTP Option Extension Elective 1782OSI-Dir OSI User Friendly Naming ... Elective 1781MIME-EDI MIME Encapsulation of EDI Objects Elective 1767Lang-Tag Tags for Identification of Languages Elective 1766XNSCP PPP XNS IDP Control Protocol Elective 1764Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 24]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996BVCP PPP Banyan Vines Control Protocol Elective 1763Print-MIB Printer MIB Elective 1759ATM-SIG ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM Elective 1755IPNG Recommendation for IP Next Generation Elective 1752802.5-SSR 802.5 SSR MIB using SMIv2 Elective 1749SDLCSMIv2 SNADLC SDLC MIB using SMIv2 Elective 1747BGP4/IDRP BGP4/IDRP for IP/OSPF Interaction Elective 1745AT-MIB Appletalk MIB Elective 1742MacMIME MIME Encapsulation of Macintosh files Elective 1740URL Uniform Resource Locators Elective 1738POP3-AUTH POP3 AUTHentication command Elective 1734IMAP4-AUTH IMAP4 Authentication Mechanisms Elective 1731IMAP4 Internet Message Access Protocol V4 Elective 1730PPP-MP PPP Multilink Protocol Elective 1717RDBMS-MIB RDMS MIB - using SMIv2 Elective 1697MODEM-MIB Modem MIB - using SMIv2 Elective 1696ATM-MIB ATM Management Version 8.0 using SMIv2 Elective 1695SNANAU-MIB SNA NAUs MIB using SMIv2 Elective 1665PPP-TRANS PPP Reliable Transmission Elective 1663BGP-4-IMP BGP-4 Roadmap and Implementation Elective 1656-------- Postmaster Convention X.400 Operations Elective 1648TN3270-En TN3270 Enhancements Elective 1647PPP-BCP PPP Bridging Control Protocol Elective 1638UPS-MIB UPS Management Information Base Elective 1628AAL5-MTU Default IP MTU for use over ATM AAL5 Elective 1626PPP-SONET PPP over SONET/SDH Elective 1619PPP-ISDN PPP over ISDN Elective 1618DNS-R-MIB DNS Resolver MIB Extensions Elective 1612DNS-S-MIB DNS Server MIB Extensions Elective 1611FR-MIB Frame Relay Service MIB Elective 1604PPP-X25 PPP in X.25 Elective 1598OSPF-NSSA The OSPF NSSA Option Elective 1587OSPF-Multi Multicast Extensions to OSPF Elective 1584SONET-MIB MIB SONET/SDH Interface Type Elective 1595RIP-DC Extensions to RIP to Support Demand Cir. Elective 1582-------- Evolution of the Interfaces Group of MIB-II Elective 1573PPP-LCP PPP LCP Extensions Elective 1570X500-MIB X.500 Directory Monitoring MIB Elective 1567MAIL-MIB Mail Monitoring MIB Elective 1566NSM-MIB Network Services Monitoring MIB Elective 1565CIPX Compressing IPX Headers Over WAM Media Elective 1553IPXCP PPP Internetworking Packet Exchange Control Elective 1552DHCP-BOOTP Interoperation Between DHCP and BOOTP Elective 1534DHCP-BOOTP DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions Elective 1533BOOTP Clarifications and Extensions BOOTP Elective 1532DHCP Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Elective 1541SRB-MIB Source Routing Bridge MIB Elective 1525CIDR-STRA CIDR Address Assignment... Elective 1519Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 25]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996CIDR-ARCH CIDR Architecture... Elective 1518CIDR-APP CIDR Applicability Statement Elective 1517-------- 802.3 MAU MIB Elective 1515HOST-MIB Host Resources MIB Elective 1514-------- Token Ring Extensions to RMON MIB Elective 1513FDDI-MIB FDDI Management Information Base Elective 1512KERBEROS Kerberos Network Authentication Ser (V5) Elective 1510GSSAPI Generic Security Service API: C-bindings Elective 1509GSSAPI Generic Security Service Application... Elective 1508DASS Distributed Authentication Security... Elective 1507-------- X.400 Use of Extended Character Sets Elective 1502HARPOON Rules for Downgrading Messages... Elective 1496Mapping MHS/RFC-822 Message Body Mapping Elective 1495Equiv X.400/MIME Body Equivalences Elective 1494IDPR Inter-Domain Policy Routing Protocol Elective 1479IDPR-ARCH Architecture for IDPR Elective 1478PPP/Bridge MIB Bridge PPP MIB Elective 1474PPP/IP MIB IP Network Control Protocol of PPP MIB Elective 1473PPP/SEC MIB Security Protocols of PPP MIB Elective 1472PPP/LCP MIB Link Control Protocol of PPP MIB Elective 1471X25-MIB Multiprotocol Interconnect on X.25 MIB Elective 1461SNMPv2 Coexistence between SNMPv1 and SNMPv2 Elective 1452SNMPv2 Management Information Base for SNMPv2 Elective 1450SNMPv2 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 Elective 1449SNMPv2 Protocol Operations for SNMPv2 Elective 1448SNMPv2 Conformance Statements for SNMPv2 Elective 1444SNMPv2 Textual Conventions for SNMPv2 Elective 1443SNMPv2 SMI for SNMPv2 Elective 1442SNMPv2 Introduction to SNMPv2 Elective 1441PEM-KEY PEM - Key Certification Elective 1424PEM-ALG PEM - Algorithms, Modes, and Identifiers Elective 1423PEM-CKM PEM - Certificate-Based Key Management Elective 1422PEM-ENC PEM - Message Encryption and Auth Elective 1421SNMP-IPX SNMP over IPX Elective 1420SNMP-AT SNMP over AppleTalk Elective 1419SNMP-OSI SNMP over OSI Elective 1418FTP-FTAM FTP-FTAM Gateway Specification Elective 1415IDENT-MIB Identification MIB Elective 1414IDENT Identification Protocol Elective 1413DS3/E3-MIB DS3/E3 Interface Type Elective 1407DS1/E1-MIB DS1/E1 Interface Type Elective 1406BGP-OSPF BGP OSPF Interaction Elective 1403-------- Route Advertisement In BGP2 And BGP3 Elective 1397SNMP-X.25 SNMP MIB Extension for X.25 Packet Layer Elective 1382SNMP-LAPB SNMP MIB Extension for X.25 LAPB Elective 1381PPP-ATCP PPP AppleTalk Control Protocol Elective 1378PPP-OSINLCP PPP OSI Network Layer Control Protocol Elective 1377TABLE-MIB IP Forwarding Table MIB Elective 1354Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 26]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996SNMP-PARTY-MIB Administration of SNMP Elective 1353SNMP-SEC SNMP Security Protocols Elective 1352SNMP-ADMIN SNMP Administrative Model Elective 1351TOS Type of Service in the Internet Elective 1349PPP-AUTH PPP Authentication Elective 1334PPP-LINK PPP Link Quality Monitoring Elective 1333PPP-IPCP PPP Control Protocol Elective 1332------- X.400 1988 to 1984 downgrading Elective 1328------- Mapping between X.400(1988) Elective 1327TCP-EXT TCP Extensions for High Performance Elective 1323FRAME-MIB Management Information Base for Frame Elective 1315NETFAX File Format for the Exchange of Images Elective 1314IARP Inverse Address Resolution Protocol Elective 1293FDDI-MIB FDDI-MIB Elective 1285------- Encoding Network Addresses Elective 1277------- Replication and Distributed Operations Elective 1276------- COSINE and Internet X.500 Schema Elective 1274BGP-MIB Border Gateway Protocol MIB (Version 3) Elective 1269ICMP-ROUT ICMP Router Discovery Messages Elective 1256IPSO DoD Security Options for IP Elective 1108OSI-UDP OSI TS on UDP Elective 1240STD-MIBs Reassignment of Exp MIBs to Std MIBs Elective 1239IPX-IP Tunneling IPX Traffic through IP Nets Elective 1234GINT-MIB Extensions to the Generic-Interface MIB Elective 1229IS-IS OSI IS-IS for TCP/IP Dual Environments Elective 1195IP-CMPRS Compressing TCP/IP Headers Elective 1144NNTP Network News Transfer Protocol Elective 977[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from theprevious edition of this document.][Note: Ele/Req indicates elective for use with IPv4 and required for usewith IPv6.]Applicability Statements: OSPF -RFC 1370 is an applicability statement for OSPF.Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 27]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19966.6. Telnet OptionsFor convenience, all the Telnet Options are collected here with boththeir state and status.Protocol Name Number State Status RFC STD======== ===================================== ===== ====== ==== ===TOPT-BIN Binary Transmission 0 Std Rec 856 27TOPT-ECHO Echo 1 Std Rec 857 28TOPT-RECN Reconnection 2 Prop Ele ...TOPT-SUPP Suppress Go Ahead 3 Std Rec 858 29TOPT-APRX Approx Message Size Negotiation 4 Prop Ele ...TOPT-STAT Status 5 Std Rec 859 30TOPT-TIM Timing Mark 6 Std Rec 860 31TOPT-REM Remote Controlled Trans and Echo 7 Prop Ele 726TOPT-OLW Output Line Width 8 Prop Ele ...TOPT-OPS Output Page Size 9 Prop Ele ...TOPT-OCRD Output Carriage-Return Disposition 10 Prop Ele 652TOPT-OHT Output Horizontal Tabstops 11 Prop Ele 653TOPT-OHTD Output Horizontal Tab Disposition 12 Prop Ele 654TOPT-OFD Output Formfeed Disposition 13 Prop Ele 655TOPT-OVT Output Vertical Tabstops 14 Prop Ele 656TOPT-OVTD Output Vertical Tab Disposition 15 Prop Ele 657TOPT-OLD Output Linefeed Disposition 16 Prop Ele 658TOPT-EXT Extended ASCII 17 Prop Ele 698TOPT-LOGO Logout 18 Prop Ele 727TOPT-BYTE Byte Macro 19 Prop Ele 735TOPT-DATA Data Entry Terminal 20 Prop Ele 1043TOPT-SUP SUPDUP 21 Prop Ele 736TOPT-SUPO SUPDUP Output 22 Prop Ele 749TOPT-SNDL Send Location 23 Prop Ele 779TOPT-TERM Terminal Type 24 Prop Ele 1091TOPT-EOR End of Record 25 Prop Ele 885TOPT-TACACS TACACS User Identification 26 Prop Ele 927TOPT-OM Output Marking 27 Prop Ele 933TOPT-TLN Terminal Location Number 28 Prop Ele 946TOPT-3270 Telnet 3270 Regime 29 Prop Ele 1041TOPT-X.3 X.3 PAD 30 Prop Ele 1053TOPT-NAWS Negotiate About Window Size 31 Prop Ele 1073TOPT-TS Terminal Speed 32 Prop Ele 1079TOPT-RFC Remote Flow Control 33 Prop Ele 1372TOPT-LINE Linemode 34 Draft Ele 1184TOPT-XDL X Display Location 35 Prop Ele 1096TOPT-ENVIR Telnet Environment Option 36 Hist Not 1408TOPT-AUTH Telnet Authentication Option 37 Exp Ele 1416TOPT-ENVIR Telnet Environment Option 39 Prop Ele 1572TOPT-EXTOP Extended-Options-List 255 Std Rec 861 32Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 28]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from theprevious edition of this document.]6.7. Experimental ProtocolsAll Experimental protocols have the Limited Use status.Protocol Name RFC======== ===================================== =====MIME-VP Voice Profile for Internet Mail 1911*SNMPV2SM User-based Security Model for SNMPv2 1910*SNMPV2AI SNMPv2 Administrative Infrastructure 1909*SNMPV2CB Introduction to Community-based SNMPv2 1901*------- IPv6 Testing Address Allocation 1897*DNS-LOC Location Information in the DNS 1876*SGML-MT SGML Media Types 1874*CONT-MT Access Type Content-ID 1873*RELAT-MT Multipart/Related 1872*UNARP ARP Extension - UNARP 1868------- Form-based File Upload in HTML 1867------- BGP/IDRP Route Server Alternative 1863------- IP Authentication using Keyed SHA 1852ESP3DES ESP Triple DES Transform 1851------- SMTP 521 Reply Code 1846------- SMTP Serv. Ext. for Checkpoint/Restart 1845------- X.500 Mapping X.400 andRFC 822 Addresses 1838------- Tables and Subtrees in the X.500 Directory 1837------- O/R Address hierarchy in X.500 1836------- SMTP Serv. Ext. Large and Binary MIME Msgs. 1830ST2 Stream Protocol Version 2 1819------- Content-Disposition Header 1806------- Schema Publishing in X.500 Directory 1804------- X.400-MHS use X.500 to support X.400-MHS Routing 1801------- Class A Subnet Experiment 1797TCP/IPXMIB TCP/IPX Connection Mib Specification 1792------- TCP And UDP Over IPX Networks With Fixed Path MTU 1791ICMP-DM ICMP Domain Name Messages 1788CLNP-MULT Host Group Extensions for CLNP Multicasting 1768OSPF-OVFL OSPF Database Overflow 1765RWP Remote Write ProtocolL - Version 1.0 1756NARP NBMA Address Resolution Protocol 1735DNS-DEBUG Tools for DNS debugging 1713DNS-ENCODE DNS Encoding of Geographical Location 1712TCP-POS An Extension to TCP: Partial Order Service 1693------- DNS to DistributeRFC1327 Mail Address Mapping Tables 1664T/TCP TCP Extensions for Transactions 1644UTF-7 A Mail-Safe Transformation Format of Unicode 1642MIME-UNI Using Unicode with MIME 1641Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 29]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996FOOBAR FTP Operation Over Big Address Records 1639X500-CHART Charting Networks in the X.500 Directory 1609X500-DIR Representing IP Information in the X.500 Directory 1608SNMP-DPI SNMP Distributed Protocol Interface 1592CLNP-TUBA Use of ISO CLNP in TUBA Environments 1561REM-PRINT TPC.INT Subdomain Remote Printing - Technical 1528EHF-MAIL Encoding Header Field for Internet Messages 1505REM-PRT An Experiment in Remote Printing 1486RAP Internet Route Access Protocol 1476TP/IX TP/IX: The Next Internet 1475X400 Routing Coordination for X.400 Services 1465DNS Storing Arbitrary Attributes in DNS 1464IRCP Internet Relay Chat Protocol 1459TOS-LS Link Security TOS 1455SIFT/UFT Sender-Initiated/Unsolicited File Transfer 1440DIR-ARP Directed ARP 1433TEL-SPX Telnet Authentication: SPX 1412TEL-KER Telnet Authentication: Kerberos V4 1411MAP-MAIL X.400 Mapping and Mail-11 1405TRACE-IP Traceroute Using an IP Option 1393DNS-IP Experiment in DNS Based IP Routing 1383RMCP Remote Mail Checking Protocol 1339TCP-HIPER TCP Extensions for High Performance 1323MSP2 Message Send Protocol 2 1312DSLCP Dynamically Switched Link Control 1307-------- X.500 and Domains 1279IN-ENCAP Internet Encapsulation Protocol 1241CLNS-MIB CLNS-MIB 1238CFDP Coherent File Distribution Protocol 1235SNMP-DPI SNMP Distributed Program Interface 1228IP-AX.25 IP Encapsulation of AX.25 Frames 1226ALERTS Managing Asynchronously Generated Alerts 1224MPP Message Posting Protocol 1204SNMP-BULK Bulk Table Retrieval with the SNMP 1187DNS-RR New DNS RR Definitions 1183IMAP2 Interactive Mail Access Protocol 1176NTP-OSI NTP over OSI Remote Operations 1165DMF-MAIL Digest Message Format for Mail 1153RDP Reliable Data Protocol 908,1151TCP-ACO TCP Alternate Checksum Option 1146IP-DVMRP IP Distance Vector Multicast Routing 1075VMTP Versatile Message Transaction Protocol 1045COOKIE-JAR Authentication Scheme 1004NETBLT Bulk Data Transfer Protocol 998IRTP Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol 938LDP Loader Debugger Protocol 909RLP Resource Location Protocol 887NVP-II Network Voice Protocol ISI-memoInternet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 30]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996PVP Packet Video Protocol ISI-memo[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from theprevious edition of this document.]Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 31]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19966.8. Informational ProtocolsInformation protocols have no status.Protocol Name RFC======= ==================================== =====CYBERCASH CyberCash Credit Card Protocol Version 0.8 1898*-------- text/enriched MIME Content-type 1896*-------- Application/CALS-1840 Content-type 1895*-------- PPP IPCP Extensions for Name Server Addresses 1877*SNPP Simple Network Paging Protocol - Version 2 1861-------- ISO Transport Class 2 Non-use Explicit Flow Control 1859 over TCPRFC1006 extension-------- IP in IP Tunneling 1853-------- PPP Network Control Protocol for LAN Extension 1841TESS The Exponential Security System 1824NFSV3 NFS Version 3 Protocol Specification 1813-------- A Format for Bibliographic Records 1807SDMD IPv4 Option for Sender Directed MD Delivery 1770SNTP Simple Network Time Protocol 1769SNOOP Snoop Version 2 Packet Capture File Format 1761BINHEX MIME Content Type for BinHex Encoded Files 1741RWHOIS Referral Whois Protocol 1714DNS-NSAP DNS NSAP Resource Records 1706RADIO-PAGE TPC.INT Subdomain: Radio Paging -- Technical Procedures 1703GRE-IPv4 Generic Routing Encapsulation over IPv4 1702GRE Generic Routing Encapsulatio 1701IPXWAN Novell IPX Over Various WAN Media 1634ADSNA-IP Advanced SNA/IP: A Simple SNA Transport Protocol 1538AUBR Appletalk Update-Based Routing Protocol...1504TACACS Terminal Access Control Protocol 1492SUN-NFS Network File System Protocol 1094SUN-RPC Remote Procedure Call Protocol Version 2 1057GOPHER The Internet Gopher Protocol 1436------- Data Link Switching: Switch-to-Switch Protocol 1434LISTSERV Listserv Distribute Protocol 1429------- Replication Requirements 1275PCMAIL Pcmail Transport Protocol 1056MTP Multicast Transport Protocol 1301BSD Login BSD Login 1282DIXIE DIXIE Protocol Specification 1249IP-X.121 IP to X.121 Address Mapping for DDN 1236OSI-HYPER OSI and LLC1 on HYPERchannel 1223HAP2 Host Access Protocol 1221SUBNETASGN On the Assignment of Subnet Numbers 1219SNMP-TRAPS Defining Traps for use with SNMP 1215DAS Directory Assistance Service 1202MD4 MD4 Message Digest Algorithm 1186Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 32]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996LPDP Line Printer Daemon Protocol 1179[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from theprevious edition of this document.]6.9. Historic ProtocolsAll Historic protocols have Not Recommended status.Protocol Name RFC STD======== ===================================== ===== ===SNMPv2 Manager-to-Manager MIB Elective 1451 *SNMPv2 Party MIB for SNMPv2 Elective 1447 *SNMPv2 Security Protocols for SNMPv2 Elective 1446 *SNMPv2 Administrative Model for SNMPv2 Elective 1445 *RIP Routing Information Protocol Ele 1058 34 *-------- Mapping full 822 to Restricted 822 1137BGP3 Border Gateway Protocol 3 (BGP-3) 1267,1268-------- Gateway Requirements Req 1009 4EGP Exterior Gateway Protocol Rec 904 18SNMP-MUX SNMP MUX Protocol and MIB 1227OIM-MIB-II OSI Internet Management: MIB-II 1214IMAP3 Interactive Mail Access Protocol Version 3 1203SUN-RPC Remote Procedure Call Protocol Version 1 1050802.4-MIP IEEE 802.4 Token Bus MIB 1230CMOT Common Management Information Services 1189-------- Mail Privacy: Procedures 1113-------- Mail Privacy: Key Management 1114-------- Mail Privacy: Algorithms 1115NFILE A File Access Protocol 1037HOSTNAME HOSTNAME Protocol 953SFTP Simple File Transfer Protocol 913SUPDUP SUPDUP Protocol 734BGP Border Gateway Protocol 1163,1164MIB-I MIB-I 1156SGMP Simple Gateway Monitoring Protocol 1028HEMS High Level Entity Management Protocol 1021STATSRV Statistics Server 996POP2 Post Office Protocol, Version 2 937RATP Reliable Asynchronous Transfer Protocol 916HFEP Host - Front End Protocol 929THINWIRE Thinwire Protocol 914HMP Host Monitoring Protocol 869GGP Gateway Gateway Protocol 823RTELNET Remote Telnet Service 818CLOCK DCNET Time Server Protocol 778MPM Internet Message Protocol 759Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 33]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996NETRJS Remote Job Service 740NETED Network Standard Text Editor 569RJE Remote Job Entry 407XNET Cross Net Debugger IEN-158NAMESERVER Host Name Server Protocol IEN-116MUX Multiplexing Protocol IEN-90GRAPHICS Graphics Protocol NIC-24308[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from theprevious edition of this document.]Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 34]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19966.10. Obsolete ProtocolsSome of the protocols listed in this memo are described in RFCs that areobsoleted by newer RFCs. "Obsolete" or "obsoleted" is not an officialstate or status of protocols. This subsection is for information only.While it may seem to be obviously wrong to have an obsoleted RFC in thelist of standards, there may be cases when an older standard is in theprocess of being replaced. This process may take a year or two.Many obsoleted protocols are of little interest and are dropped fromthis memo altogether. Some obsoleted protocols have received enoughrecognition that it seems appropriate to list them under their currentstatus and with the following reference to their current replacement.RFC RFC Status Title *==== ==== ========= =================================== =1305 obsoletes 1119Stan/Rec Network Time Protocol version 21390 obsoletes 1188Draf/Elec Transmission of IP and ARP over FDDI*1533 obsoletes 1497Draf/Rec BOOTP Vendor Information Extensions1542 obsoletes 1532Prop/Elec Extensions for Bootstrap Protocol *1573 obsoletes 1229Prop/Elec Ext. to the Generic-Interface MIB1773 obsoletes 1656Prop/Elec BGP-4 Protocol Document *1902 obsoletes 1442Prop/Elec SMI for SNMPv2 *1903 obsoletes 1443Prop/Elec Textual Conventions for SNMPv2 *1904 obsoletes 1444Prop/Elec Conformance Statements for SNMPv2 *1905 obsoletes 1448Prop/Elec Protocol Operations for SNMPv2 *1906 obsoletes 1449Prop/Elec Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 *1907 obsoletes 1450Prop/Elec MIB for SNMPv2 *1908 obsoletes 1452Prop/Elec Coexistence between SNMPv1 & SNMPv2 *1320 obsoletes 1186Info/ The MD4 Message Digest Algorithm1529 obsoletes 1486Expe/Limi An Experiment in Remote Printing *1592 obsoletes 1228Expe/Limi SNMP Distributed Protocol Interface *1057 obsoletes 1050Hist/Not RPC: Remote Procedure Call Protocol1158 obsoletes 1156Hist/Not Management Information Base - I *1267 obsoletes 1163Hist/Not A Border Gateway Protocol (BGP)1268 obsoletes 1164Hist/Not Border Gateway Protocol 3 (BGP-3)1421 obsoletes 1113Hist/Not PEM - Part I1422 obsoletes 1114Hist/Not PEM - Part II1423 obsoletes 1115Hist/Not PEM - Part III1655 obsoletes 1268Hist/Not Application of the BGP *1716 obsoletes 1009Hist/Not Towards Requirements for IP Routers *Thanks to Lynn Wheeler for compiling the information in this subsection.[Note: an asterisk at the end of a line indicates a change from theprevious edition of this document.]Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 35]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19967. Contacts7.1. IAB, IETF, and IRTF Contacts 7.1.1. Internet Architecture Board (IAB) Contact Please send your comments about this list of protocols and especially about the Draft Standard Protocols to the Internet Architecture Board care of Abel Winerib, IAB Executive Director. Contacts: Abel Winerib Executive Director of the IAB Intel, JF2-64 2111 NE 25th Avenue Hillsboro, OR 97124 1-503-696-8972 AWeinrib@ibeam.jf.intel.com Brian E. Carpenter Chair of the IAB CERN European Laboratory for Particle Physics 1211 Geneva 23 Switzerland +41 22 767-4967 brian@dxcoms.cern.ch 7.1.2. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Contact Contacts: Fred Baker Chair of the IETF cisco Systems, Inc. 519 Lado Drive Santa Barbara, CA 93111 1-805-681-0115 fred@cisco.comInternet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 36]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 Steve Coya IESG Secretary Corporation for National Research Initiatives 1895 Preston White Drive, Suite 100 Reston, VA 22091 1-703-620-8990 scoya@CNRI.RESTON.VA.US Steve Coya Executive Director of the IETF Corporation for National Research Initiatives 1895 Preston White Drive, Suite 100 Reston, VA 22091 1-703-620-8990 scoya@CNRI.RESTON.VA.US 7.1.3. Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) Contact Contact: Abel Winerib Chair of the IRTF Intel, JF2-64 2111 NE 25th Avenue Hillsboro, OR 97124 1-503-696-8972 AWeinrib@ibeam.jf.intel.comInternet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 37]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19967.2. Internet Assigned Numbers Authority Contact Contact: Joyce K. Reynolds Internet Assigned Numbers Authority USC/Information Sciences Institute 4676 Admiralty Way Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6695 1-310-822-1511 IANA@ISI.EDU The protocol standards are managed by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority. Please refer to the document "Assigned Numbers" (RFC-1700) for further information about the status of protocol documents. There are two documents that summarize the requirements for host and gateways in the Internet, "Host Requirements" (RFC-1122 andRFC-1123) and "Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers" (RFC-1812). How to obtain the most recent edition of this "Internet Official Protocol Standards" memo: The file "in-notes/std/std1.txt" may be copied via FTP from the FTP.ISI.EDU computer using the FTP username "anonymous" and FTP password "guest".Internet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 38]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 19967.3. Request for Comments Editor Contact Contact: Jon Postel RFC Editor USC/Information Sciences Institute 4676 Admiralty Way Marina del Rey, CA 90292-6695 1-310-822-1511 RFC-Editor@ISI.EDU Documents may be submitted via electronic mail to the RFC Editor for consideration for publication as RFC. If you are not familiar with the format or style requirements please request the "Instructions for RFC Authors". In general, the style of any recent RFC may be used as a guide.7.4. The Network Information Center and Requests for Comments Distribution Contact RFC's may be obtained from DS.INTERNIC.NET via FTP, WAIS, and electronic mail. Through FTP, RFC's are stored as rfc/rfcnnnn.txt or rfc/rfcnnnn.ps where 'nnnn' is the RFC number. Login as "anonymous" and provide your e-mail address as the password. Through WAIS, you may use either your local WAIS client or telnet to DS.INTERNIC.NET and login as "wais" (no password required) to access a WAIS client. Help information and a tutorial for using WAIS are available online. The WAIS database to search is "rfcs". Directory and Database Services also provides a mail server interface. Send a mail message to mailserv@ds.internic.net and include any of the following commands in the message body: document-by-name rfcnnnn where 'nnnn' is the RFC number The text version is sent. file /ftp/rfc/rfcnnnn.yyy where 'nnnn' is the RFC number. and 'yyy' is 'txt' or 'ps'. help to get information on how to use the mailserver. The InterNIC directory and database services collection of resource listings, internet documents such as RFCs, FYIs, STDs, and Internet Drafts, and publicly accessible databases are alsoInternet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 39]
RFC 1920 Internet Standards March 1996 now available via Gopher. All our collections are WAIS indexed and can be searched from the Gopher menu. To access the InterNIC Gopher Servers, please connect to "internic.net" port 70. Contact: admin@ds.internic.net7.5. Sources for Requests for Comments Details on many sources of RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to "rfc-info@ISI.EDU" with the message body "help: ways_to_get_rfcs". For example: To: rfc-info@ISI.EDU Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs8. Security Considerations Security issues are not addressed in this memo.9. Author's Address Jon Postel USC/Information Sciences Institute 4676 Admiralty Way Marina del Rey, CA 90292 Phone: 310-822-1511 Fax: 310-823-6714 Email: Postel@ISI.EDUInternet Architecture Board Standards Track [Page 40]
[8]ページ先頭