As per Relevance of the word technical, we have this rfc below:
Network Working Group RFC Editor, et al
Request for Comments: 2555 USC/
Category: Informational 7 April 1999
30 Years of
Status of this
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It
not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of
memo is unlimited
Copyright
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved
Table of
1. Introduction.................................................. 2
2. Reflections................................................... 2
3. The First Pebble: Publication of RFC 1........................ 3
4. RFCs - The Great Conversation................................. 5
5. Reflecting on 30 years of RFCs................................ 9
6. Favorite RFCs -- The First 30 Years...........................14
7. Security Considerations.......................................15
8. Acknowledgments...............................................15
9. Authors' Addresses............................................15
10. APPENDIX - RFC 1..............................................17
11. Full Copyright Statement......................................18
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 1]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
1. Introduction - Robert
Thirty years ago today, the first Request for Comments document
RFC 1, was published at UCLA (ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1.txt).
This was the first of a series that currently contains more than 2500
documents on computer networking, collected, archived, and edited
Jon Postel for 28 years. Jon has left us, but this 30th
tribute to the RFC series is assembled in grateful admiration for
massive contribution
The rest of this document contains a brief recollection from
present RFC Editor Joyce K. Reynolds, followed by recollections
three pioneers: Steve Crocker who wrote RFC 1, Vint Cerf whose long
range vision continues to guide us, and Jake Feinler who played a
role in the middle years of the RFC series
2. Reflections - Joyce K.
A very long time ago when I was dabbling in IP network number
protocol parameter assignments with Jon Postel, gateways were
"dumb", the Exterior Gateway Protocol (EGP) was in its infancy
TOPS-20 was in its heyday. I was aware of the Request for
(RFCs) document series, with Jon as the RFC Editor. I really didn'
know much of the innerworkings of what the task entailed. It
Jon's job and he quietly went about publishing documents for
ARPANET community
Meanwhile, Jon and I would have meetings in his office to go over
specific tasks of the day. One day, I began to notice that a pile
folders sitting to one side of his desk seemed to be growing. A
weeks later the pile had turned into two stacks of folders. I
him what they were. Apparently, they contained documents for
publication. Jon was trying to keep up with the increasing
of submissions for RFC publication
I mentioned to him one day that he should learn to let go of some
his work load and task it on to other people. He listened intently
but didn't comment. The very next day, Jon wheeled a computer
into my office which was stacked with those documents from his
intended for RFC publication. He had a big Cheshire cat grin on
face and stated, "I'm letting go!", and walked away
At the top of the stack was a big red three ring notebook.
contained the "NLS Textbook", which was prepared at ISI by Jon,
Sims and Linda Sato for use on ISI's TENEX and TOPS-20 systems.
reading its contents, I learned that the NLS system was designed
help people work with information on a computer. It included a
range of tools, from a simple set of commands for writing,
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 2]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
and printing documents to sophisticated methods for retrieving
communication information. NLS was the system Jon used to write
edit and create the RFCs. Thus began my indoctrination to the
publication series
Operating systems and computers have changed over the years,
Jon's perseverance about the consistency of the RFC style and
of the documents remained true. Unfortunately, Jon did not live
see the 30th Anniversary of this series that he unfailingly nurtured
Yet, the spirit of the RFC publication series continues as
approach the new millennium. Jon would be proud
3. The First Pebble: Publication of RFC 1 - Steve
RFC 1, "Host Software", issued thirty years ago on April 7, 1969
outlined some thoughts and initial experiments. It was a modest
entirely forgettable memo, but it has significance because it
part of a broad initiative whose impact is still with us today
At the time RFC 1 was written, the ARPANET was still under design
Bolt, Beranek and Newman had won the all-important contract to
and operate the Interface Message Processors or "IMPs",
forerunners of the modern routers. They were each the size of
refrigerator and cost about $100,000 in 1969 dollars
The network was scheduled to be deployed among the research
supported by ARPA's Information Processing Techniques Office (IPTO).
The first four nodes were to be at UCLA, SRI, University
California, Santa Barbara and University of Utah. The
installation, at UCLA, was set for September 1, 1969.
Although there had been considerable planning of the topology,
lines, modems and IMPs, there was little organization or
regarding network applications. It was assumed the research
would figure it out. This turned out to be a brilliant
decision at ARPA
Previously, in the summer of 1968, a handful of graduate students
staff members from the four sites were called together to discuss
forthcoming network. There was only a basic outline. BBN had
yet won the contract, and there was no technical specification
the network's operation. At the first meeting, we scheduled
meetings at each of the other laboratories, thus setting the
for today's thrice yearly movable feast. Over the next couple
years, the group grew substantially and we found ourselves
overflow crowds of fifty to a hundred people at Network Working
meetings. Compared to modern IETF meetings all over the world
attendance in excess of 1,000 people and several dozen active
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 3]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
groups, the early Network Working Groups were small and tame,
they seemed large and only barely manageable at the time.
tradition that doesn't seem to have changed at all is the spirit
unrestrained participation in working group meetings
Our initial group met a handful of times in the summer and fall
1968 and winter 1969. Our earliest meetings were unhampered
knowledge of what the network would look like or how it
interact with the hosts. Depending on your point of view,
either allowed us or forced us to think about broader and
topics. We recognized we would eventually have to get around
dealing with message formats and other specific details of low-
protocols, but our first thoughts focused on what applications
network might support. In our view, the 50 kilobit per
communication lines being used for the ARPANET seemed slow, and
worried that it might be hard to provide high-quality
service across the network. I wish we had not been so accurate
When BBN issued its Host-IMP specification in spring 1969,
freedom to wander over broad and grand topics ended. Before then
however, we tried to consider the most general designs and the
exciting applications. One thought that captured our imagination
the idea of downloading a small interpretative program at
beginning of a session. The downloaded program could then
the interactions and make efficient use of the narrow
between the user's local machine and the back-end system the user
interacting with. Jeff Rulifson at SRI was the prime mover of
line of thinking, and he took a crack at designing a Decode-
Language (DEL) [RFC 5]. Michel Elie, visiting at UCLA from France
worked on this idea further and published Proposal for a
Interchange Language (NIL) [RFC 51]. The emergence of Java
ActiveX in the last few years finally brings those early ideas
fruition, and we're not done yet. I think we will continue to
striking advances in combining communication and computing
I have already suggested that the early RFCs and the
Network Working Group laid the foundation for the
Engineering Task Force. Two all-important aspects of the early
deserve mention, although they're completely evident to anyone
participates in the process today. First, the technical direction
chose from the beginning was an open architecture based on
layers of protocol. We were frankly too scared to imagine that
could define an all-inclusive set of protocols that would
indefinitely. We envisioned a continual process of evolution
addition, and obviously this is what's happened
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 4]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
The RFCs themselves also represented a certain sense of fear.
several months of meetings, we felt obliged to write down
thoughts. We parceled out the work and wrote the initial batch
memos. In addition to participating in the technical design, I
on the administrative function of setting up a simple scheme
numbering and distributing the notes. Mindful that our group
informal, junior and unchartered, I wanted to emphasize these
were the beginning of a dialog and not an assertion of control
It's now been thirty years since the first RFCs were issued. At
time, I believed the notes were temporary and the entire series
die off in a year or so once the network was running. Thanks to
spectacular efforts of the entire community and the perseverance
dedication of Jon Postel, Joyce Reynolds and their crew, the
series of Requests for Comments evolved and thrived. It became
mainstay for sharing technical designs in the Internet community
the archetype for other communities as well. Like the Sorcerer'
Apprentice, we succeeded beyond our wildest dreams and our
fears
4. RFCs - The Great Conversation - Vint
A long time ago, in a network far, far away...
Considering the movement of planet Earth around the Sun and the
around the Milky Way galaxy, that first network IS far away in
relativistic sense. It takes 200 million years for the Sun to
its way around the galaxy, so thirty years is only an eyeblink on
galactic clock. But what a marvelous thirty years it has been!
RFCs document the odyssey of the ARPANET and, later, the Internet,
its creators and netizens explore, discover, build, re-build,
and resolve questions of design, concepts and applications
computer networking
It has been ultimately fascinating to watch the transformation of
RFCs themselves from their earliest, tentative dialog form to today'
much more structured character. The growth of applications such
email, bulletin boards and the world wide web have had much to
with that transformation, but so has the scale and impact of
Internet on our social and economic fabric. As the Internet has
on greater economic importance, the standards documented in the
have become more important and the RFCs more formal. The dialog
moved to other venues as technology has changed and the
styles have adapted
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 5]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
Hiding in the history of the RFCs is the history of
institutions for achieving cooperative work. And also hiding in
history are some heroes that haven't been acknowledged. On
thirtieth anniversary, I am grateful for the opportunity
acknowledge some of them. It would be possible to fill a book
such names - mostly of the authors of the RFCs, but as this must be
brief contribution, I want to mention four of them in particular
Steve Crocker, Jon Postel, Joyce K. Reynolds and Bob Braden
Steve Crocker is a modest man and would likely never make
observation that while the contents of RFC 1 might have been
forgettable, the act of writing RFC 1 was indicative of the brave
ultimately clear-visioned leadership that he brought to a
into the unknown. There were no guides in those days -
networking was new and few historical milestones prepared us for
lay ahead. Steve's ability to accommodate a diversity of views,
synthesize them into coherence and, like Tom Sawyer, to
others that they wanted to devote their time to working on
problems that lay in the path of progress can be found in the
RFCs and in the Network Working Group meetings that Steve led
In the later work on Internet, I did my best to emulate the
that Steve invented: the International Network Working Group (INWG
and its INWG Notes, the Internet Working Group and its
Experiment Notes (IENs) were brazen knock-offs of Steve'
organizational vision and style
It is doubtful that the RFCs would be the quality body of
they are today were it not for Jonathan Postel's devotion to
from the start. Somehow, Jon knew, even thirty years ago that
might be important to document what was done and why, to say
of trying to capture the debate for the benefit of future
wondering how we'd reached some of the conclusions we did (
probably shake their heads...).
Jon was the network's Boswell, but it was his devotion to quality
his remarkable mix of technical and editing skills that permeate
of the more monumental RFCs that dealt with what we now consider
TCP/IP standards. Many bad design decisions were re-worked thanks
Jon's stubborn determination that we all get it "right" - as
editor, he simply would not let something go out that didn't meet
personal quality filter. There were times when we moaned
complained, hollered and harangued, but in the end, most of the time
Jon was right and we knew it
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 6]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
Joyce K. Reynolds was at Jon's side for much of the time that Jon
the RFC editor and as has been observed, they functioned in
like a matched pair of superconducting electrons -
superconductors they were of the RFC series. For all
purposes, it was impossible to tell which of the two had edited
particular RFC. Joyce's passion for quality has matched Jon's
continues to this day. And she has the same subtle, puckish sense
humor that emerged at unexpected moments in Jon's stewardship.
example that affected me personally was Joyce's assignment of
2468 to the RFC written to remember Jon. I never would have
of that, and it was done so subtly that it didn't even ring a
until someone sent me an email asking whether this was a coincidence
In analog to classical mystery stories, the editor did it
Another unsung hero in the RFC saga is Bob Braden - another man
modesty belies contributions of long-standing and
proportions. It is my speculation that much of the quality of
RFCs can be traced to consultations among the USC/ISI team,
Jon, Joyce and Bob among others. Of course, RFC 1122 and 1123
as two enormous contributions to the clarity of the
standards. For that task alone, Bob deserves tremendous appreciation
but he has led the End-to-End Research Group for many years out
which has come some of the most important RFCs that refine
understanding of optimal implementation of the protocols,
TCP
When the RFCs were first produced, they had an almost 19th
character to them - letters exchanged in public debating the
of various design choices for protocols in the ARPANET. As email
bulletin boards emerged from the fertile fabric of the network,
far-flung participants in this historic dialog began to
increasing use of the online medium to carry out the discussion -
reducing the need for documenting the debate in the RFCs and, in
respects, leaving historians somewhat impoverished in the process
RFCs slowly became conclusions rather than debates
Jon permitted publication of items other than purely
documents in this series. Hence one finds poetry, humor (
the April 1 RFCs which are as funny today as they were when they
published), and reprints of valuable reference material mixed
the documents prepared by the network working groups
In the early 1970s, the Advanced Research Projects Agency
conducting several parallel research programs into packet
technology, after the stunning success of this idea in the ARPANET
Among these were the Packet Radio Network, the Atlantic
Satellite Network and the Internet projects. These each spawned
series akin to but parallel to the RFCs. PRNET Notes, ARPA
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 7]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
System Notes (bearing the obvious and unfortunate acronym...),
Internet Experiment Notes (IENs), and so on. After the
protocols were mandated to be used on the ARPANET and other DARPA
sponsored networks in January 1983 (SATNET actually converted
that), Internet- related notes were merged into the RFC series. For
time, after the Internet project seemed destined to bear fruit,
were published in parallel with RFCs. A few voices, Danny Cohen's
particular (who was then at USC/ISI with Jon Postel) suggested
separate series were a mistake and that it would be a lot easier
maintain and to search a single series. Hindsight seems to
proven Danny right as the RFC series, with its dedicated editors
seems to have borne the test of time far better than its
ephemeral counterparts
As the organizations associated with Internet continued to evolve
one sees the RFCs adapting to changed circumstances. Perhaps the
powerful influence can be seen from the evolution of the
Engineering Task Force from just one of several task forces
chairpersons formed the Internet Activities Board to the dominant
global Internet Standards development organization, managed by
Internet Engineering Steering Group and operating under the
of the Internet Society. The process of producing "standards-track
RFCs is now far more rigorous than it once was, carries far
impact on a burgeoning industry, and has spawned its own,
informal "Internet Drafts" series of short-lived documents
the working set of the IETF working groups
The dialogue that once characterized the early RFCs has given way
thrice-annual face-to-face meetings of the IETF and
quantities of email, as well as a growing amount of group-
work through chat rooms, shared white boards and even more
multicast conferences. The parallelism and the increasing quantity
transient dialogue surrounding the evolution of the Internet has
the task of technology historians considerably more difficult
although one can sense a counter-balancing through the
amount of information accumulating in the World Wide Web. Even
searches often turn up some surprising and sometimes embarrassing
memoranda - a number of which were once paper but which have
rendered into bits by some enterprising volunteer
The RFCs, begun so tentatively thirty years ago, and
edited and maintained by Jon Postel and his colleagues at USC/ISI
tell a remarkable story of exploration, achievement, and
by a growing mass of internauts who will not sleep until the
truly is for everyone. It is in that spirit that this remembrance
offered, and in particular, in memory of our much loved colleague
Jon Postel, without whose personal commitment to this archive,
story might have been vastly different and not nearly as remarkable
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 8]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
5. Reflecting on 30 years of RFCs - Jake
By now we know that the first RFC was published on April 7, 1969
Steve Crocker. It was entitled "Host Software". The second RFC
published on April 9, 1969 by Bill Duvall of SRI International (
called Stanford Research Institute or SRI), and it too was
"Host Software". RFC 2 was a response to suggestions made in RFC 1-
-and so the dialog began
Steve proposed 2 experiments in RFC 1:
"1) SRI is currently modifying their on-line retrieval system
will be the major software component of the Network
Center [or The SRI NIC as it soon came to be known] so that it can
modified with Model 35 teletypes. The control of the teletypes
be written in DEL [Decode-Encode Language]. All sites will write
compilers and use NLS [SRI Doug Engelbart's oNLine System]
the DEL program".
"2) SRI will write a DEL front end for full NLS, graphics included
UCLA and UTAH will use NLS with graphics".
RFC 2, issued 2 days later, proposed detailed procedures
connecting to the NLS documentation system across the network.
may think RFC 1 was an "entirely forgettable" document; however,
an information person, I beg to differ with him. The
presented in this first dialog were mind boggling, and eventually
to the kind of network interchange we are all using on the web today
(Fortunately, we have graduated beyond DEL and Model 35 teletypes!)
RFC 1 was, I believe, a paper document. RFC 2 was produced
via the SRI NLS system and was entered into the online SRI
Journal. However, it was probably mailed to each recipient via
mail by the NIC, as email and the File Transfer Protocol (FTP)
not yet been invented
RFC 3, again by Steve Crocker, was entitled, "
Conventions;" and we see that already the need for a few ground
was surfacing. More ground-breaking concepts were introduced in
RFC. It stated that
"The Network Working Group (NWG) is concerned with the HOST software
the strategies for using the network, and the initial
with the network. Documentation of the NWG's effort is through
such as this. Notes may be produced at any site by anybody
included in this series".
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 9]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
It goes on to say
"The content of a NWG note may be any thought, suggestion
etc.related to the Host software or other aspect of the network
Notes are encouraged to be timely rather than polished
Philosophical positions without examples or other specifics,
suggestions or implementation techniques without introductory
background explanation, and explicit questions without any
answers are all acceptable. The minimum length for a NWG note is
sentence".
"These standards (or lack of them) are stated explicitly for
reasons. First, there is a tendency to view a written statement
discussion of considerably less than authoritative ideas. Second
there is a natural hesitancy to publish something unpolished, and
hope to ease this inhibition".
Steve asked that this RFC be sent to a distribution list
of
Bob Kahn,
Larry Roberts,
Steve Carr,
Jeff Rulifson,
Ron Stoughton,
Steve Crocker,
Thus by the time the third RFC was published, many of the concepts
how to do business in this new networking environment had
established--there would be a working group of implementers (NWG
actually discussing and trying things out; ideas were to be free
wheeling; communications would be informal; documents would
deposited (online when possible) at the NIC and distributed freely
members of the working group; and anyone with something to
could come to the party. With this one document a swath
instantly cut through miles of red tape and pedantic process.
this radical for the times or what! And we were only up to RFC 3!
Many more RFCs followed and the SRI NLS Journal became
bibliographic search service of the ARPANET. It differed from
search services of the time in one important respect: when you got
"hit" searching the journal online, not only did you get a
telling you such things as the author and title; you got
associated little string of text called a "link". If you used
command called "jump to link", voila! you got the full text of
document. You did not have to go to the library, or send an
off to an issuing agency to get a copy of the document, as was
custom with other search services of the time. The whole
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 10]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
itself was right there immediately
Also, any document submitted to the journal could not be changed
New versions could be submitted, and these superceded old versions
but again the new versions could not be changed. Each document
given a unique identifying number, so it was easy to track.
features were useful in a fast-moving environment. Documents
went through several drafts before they were finally issued as an
or other official document, and being able to track versions was
useful
The SRI NLS Journal was revolutionary for the time; however,
to it online presented several operational problems. Host
were small and crowded, and the network was growing by leaps
bounds; so connections had to be timed out and broken to
everyone a chance at access. Also, the rest of the world was still
paper world (and there were no scanners or laser printers, folks!),
so the NIC still did a brisk business sending out paper documents
requestors
By 1972 when I became Principal Investigator for the NIC project,
ARPANET was growing rapidly, and more and more hosts were
attached to it. Each host was required to have a technical
known as the Technical Liaison, and most of the Liaison were
members of the NWG. Each Liaison was sent a set of documents by
NIC called "functional documents" which included the
Handbook (first issued by BBN and later published by the NIC.)
content of the Protocol Handbook was made up of key RFCs and
document called "BBN 1822" which specified the Host-to-Imp protocol
The NWG informed the NIC as to which documents should be included
the handbook; and the NIC assembled, published, and distributed
book. Alex McKenzie of BBN helped the NIC with the first version
the handbook, but soon a young fellow, newly out of grad school
named Jon Postel joined the NWG and became the NIC's contact
ARPA's spokesperson for what should be issued in the
Handbook
No one who is familiar with the RFCs can think of them
thinking of Dr. Jonathan Postel. He was "Mister RFC" to most of us
Jon worked at SRI in the seventies and had the office next to mine
We were both members of Doug Engelbart's Augmentation
Center. Not only was Jon a brilliant computer scientist, he
cared deeply about the process of disseminating information
establishing a methodology for working in a networking environment
We often had conversations way into the wee hours talking about
to do this "right". The network owes Jon a debt of gratitude for
dedication to the perpetuation of the RFCs. His work, along
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 11]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
that of his staff, the NWG, the IETF, the various NICs, and CNRI
keep this set of documents viable over the years was, and
to be, a labor of love
Jon left SRI in 1976 to join USC-ISI, but by that time the die
cast, and the RFCs, NWG, Liaison, and the NIC were part of
network's way of doing business. However, the SRI NLS Journal
was becoming too big for its host computer and could not handle
number of users trying to access it. Email and FTP had
implemented by now, so the NIC developed methodology for
information to users via distributed information servers across
network. A user could request an RFC by email from his host
and have it automatically delivered to his mailbox. Users could
purchase hardcopy subscriptions to the RFCs and copies of
Protocol Handbook, if they did not have network access
The NIC worked with Jon, ARPA, DCA, NSF, other NICs, and
agencies to have secondary reference sets of RFCs easily
to implementers throughout the world. The RFCs were also
freely with official standards bodies, manufacturers and vendors
other working groups, and universities. None of the RFCs were
restricted or classified. This was no mean feat when you
that they were being funded by DoD during the height of the Cold War
Many of us worked very hard in the early days to establish the
as the official set of technical notes for the development of
Internet. This was not an easy job. There were suggestions for
parallel efforts and splinter groups. There were naysayers all
the way because this was a new way of doing things, and the
was "coloring outside the lines" so to speak. Jon, as Editor-in
Chief was criticized because the RFCs were not issued by
"official" standards body, and the NIC was criticized because it
not an "official" document issuing agency. We both strived to
the new way of doing business with the old, and fortunately
usually supported by our government sponsors, who themselves
breaking new ground
Many RFCs were the end result of months of heated discussion
implementation. Authoring one of them was not for the faint
heart. Feelings often ran high as to what was the "right" way to go
Heated arguments sometimes ensued. Usually they were confined
substance, but sometimes they got personal. Jon would often step
and arbitrate. Eventually the NWG or the Sponsors had to say, "It'
a wrap. Issue a final RFC". Jon, as Editor-in-Chief of the RFCs
often took merciless flak from those who wanted to
discussing and implementing, or those whose ideas were left on
cutting room floor. Somehow he always managed to get past
controversies with style and grace and move on. We owe him
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 12]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
others, who served on the NWG or authored RFCs, an extreme debt
gratitude for their contributions and dedication
At no time was the controversy worse than it was when DoD
TCP/IP as its official host-to-host protocols for
networks. In March 1982, a military directive was issued by
Under Secretary of Defense, Richard DeLauer. It simply stated
the use of TCP and IP was mandatory for DoD communications networks
Bear in mind that a military directive is not something you discuss -
the time for discussion is long over when one is issued. Rather
military directive is something you DO. The ARPANET and
successor, the Defense Data Network, were military networks, so
gauntlet was down and the race was on to prove whether the
technology could do the job on a real operational network. You
no idea what chaos and controversy that little 2-page
caused on the network. (But that's a story for another time.)
However, that directive, along with RFCs 791 and 793 (IP and TCP
gave the RFCs as a group of technical documents stature
recognition throughout the world. (And yes, TCP/IP certainly did
the job!)
Jon and I were both government contractors, so of course followed
directions of our contracting officers. He was mainly under
to ARPA, whereas the NIC was mainly under contract to DCA. BBN
another key contractor. For the most part we all worked as a team
However, there was frequent turnover in military personnel
to both the ARPANET and the DDN, and we all collaborated to try
get all the new participants informed as to what was available
them when they joined the network. We also tried to
collaboration rather than duplication of effort, when it
appropriate. The NWG (or IETF as it is now known) and the
became the main vehicles for interagency collaboration as the
protocols began to be used on other government, academic,
commercial networks
I left SRI and the NIC project in 1989. At that time there
about 30,000 hosts on what was becoming known as the Internet,
just over a 1000 RFCs had been issued. Today there are millions
hosts on the Internet, and we are well past the 3000 mark for RFCs
It was great fun to be a part of what turned out to be
technological revolution. It is heartwarming to see that the
are still being issued by the IETF, and that they are still
based on ideas that have been discussed and implemented; that
concepts of online working groups and distributed information
are a way of life; that those little "links" (officially known
hypertext) have revolutionized the delivery of documents; and
the government, academia, and business are now all playing the
game for fun and profit. (Oh yes, I'm happy to see that Steve's
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 13]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
for integrated text and graphics has finally come to fruition
although that work took a little longer than 2 days.)
6. Favorite RFCs -- The First 30 Years - Celeste
Five years ago, Jon Postel and I had wanted to publish a 25th
anniversary book, but, alas, we were both too busy working on
projects. We determined then that we should commemorate
thirtieth anniversary by collecting together thirty "RFC Editors
Choice" RFCs based on original ideas expressed throughout the
30 years of their existence
Jon's untimely death in October 1998 prevented us from
this goal. We did, however, start to put online some of the
RFCs, including RFC 1. We weren't sure whether we were going to
to make them look as close to the typewritten originals as possible
or to make a few adjustments and format them according to the
RFC style. Those of you who still have your copies of RFC 1
note the concessions we made to NROFF the online version. The hand
drawn diagrams of the early RFCs also present interesting
for conversion into ASCII format
There are still opportunities to assist the RFC Editor to put many
the early RFCs online. Check the URL
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-online.html for more information on
project
In memory of Jon, we are compiling a book for publication next
of "Favorite RFCs -- The First 30 Years".
We have set up a web interface
http://www.rfc-editor.org/voterfc.
for tabulating votes and recording the responses. We will
email as well. Please send your email responses to: voterfc@isi.edu
We prefer votes accompanied by explanations for the vote choice
We reserve the right to add to the list several RFCs that Jon
had already selected for the collection. Voting closes December 31,
1999.
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 14]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
7. Security
Security issues are not discussed in this commemorative RFC
8.
Thank you to all the authors who contributed to this RFC on
notice. Thanks also to Fred Baker and Eve Schooler who goaded
into action. A special acknowledgment to Eitetsu Baumgardner,
student at USC, who NROFFed this document and who assisted in
formatting of RFCs 1, 54, and 62, converting hand-drawn diagrams
ASCII format
9. Authors'
Robert
USC/Information Sciences
4676 Admiralty Way #1001
Marina del Rey, CA 90292
Phone: +1 310-822-1511
Fax: +1 310 823 6714
EMail: braden@isi.
Joyce K.
USC/Information Sciences
4676 Admiralty Way #1001
Marina del Rey, CA 90292
Phone: +1 310-822-1511
Fax: +1 310-823-6714
EMail: jkrey@isi.
Steve
Steve Crocker Associates,
5110 Edgemoor
Bethesda, MD 20814
Phone: +1 301-654-4569
Fax: +1 202-478-0458
EMail: crocker@mbl.
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 15]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
Vint
EMail: vcerf@mci.
Jake
SRI Network Information
1972-1989
EMail: feinler@juno.
Celeste
USC/Information Sciences
4676 Admiralty Way #1001
Marina del Rey, CA 90292
Phone: +1 310-822-1511
Fax: +1 310-823-6714
EMail: celeste@isi.
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 16]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
10. APPENDIX - RFC 1
The cover page said at the top
"Network Working
Request for Comments
and then came an internal UCLA distribution list
V. Cerf, S. Crocker, M. Elie, G. Estrin, G. Fultz, A. Gomez
D. Karas, L. Kleinrock, J. Postel, M. Wingfield, R. Braden
and W. Kehl
followed by an "Off Campus" distribution list
A. Bhushan (MIT), S. Carr (Utah), G. Cole (SDC), W. English (SRI),
K. Fry (Mitre), J. Heafner (Rand), R. Kahn (BBN), L. Roberts (ARPA),
P. Rovner (MIT), and R. Stoughton (UCSB).
The following title page
"Network Working
Request for Comments: 1"
at the top, and then
HOST
STEVE
7 APRIL 1969
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 17]
RFC 2555 30 Years of RFCs 7 April 1999
11. Full Copyright
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved
This document and translations of it may be copied and
to others, and derivative works that comment on or
explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied
published and distributed, in whole or in part,
restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright
and this paragraph are included on all such copies and
works. However, this document itself may not be modified in
way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to
Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as
for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case
procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet
process must be followed, or as required to translate it
languages other than English
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will
be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns
This document and the information contained herein is provided
an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
RFC Editor, et al. Informational [Page 18]
if you see any problems within the linking, don't worry be happy,
this is version 0.1 of the Relevance System and you gotta expect some crappy subroutines sometimes,
just be content we did not write this in Java, which would have made this "bigger and better" HAHAHHA.
RFC documents can be found at I.E.T.F.
Relevance System Copyright © 2002 Spectrum WorldResearch
other technical nosh by ServerMasters Corporation
collaboration of BobX
