As per Relevance of the word comments, we have this rfc below:
Network Working Group J.
Request for Comments: 1000 J.
August 1987
Obsoletes: RFCs 084, 100, 160, 170, 200, 598, 699, 800, 899, 999
THE REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REFERENCE
STATUS OF THIS
This RFC is a reference guide for the Internet community
summarizes of all the Request for Comments issued between April 1969
and March 1987. This guide also categorizes the RFCs by topic
This RFC Reference Guide is intended to provide a historical
by categorizing and summarizing of the Request for Comments numbers 1
through 999 issued between the years 1969-1987. These documents
been crossed referenced to indicate which RFCs are current, obsolete
or revised. Distribution of this memo is unlimited
THE ORIGINS OF RFCS - by Stephen D.
The DDN community now includes hundreds of nodes and thousands
users, but once it was all a gleam in Larry Roberts' eye. While
of the development proceeded according to a grand plan, the design
the protocols and the creation of the RFCs was largely accidental
The procurement of the ARPANET was initiated in the summer of 1968 --
Remember Vietnam, flower children, etc? There had been
experiments at various ARPA sites to link together computer systems
but this was the first version to explore packet-switching on a
scale. ("ARPA" didn't become "DARPA" until 1972.) Unlike most
the ARPA/IPTO procurements of the day, this was a
procurement. The contract called for four IMPs to be delivered
UCLA, SRI, UCSB and The University of Utah. These sites were
a Sigma 7 with the SEX operating system, an SDS 940 with the
operating system, an IBM 360/75 with OS/MVT (or perhaps OS/MFT),
a DEC PDP-10 with the Tenex operating system. Options existed
additional nodes if the first experiments were successful. BBN
the procurement in December 1968, but that gets ahead of this story
Part of the reason for selecting these four sites was these
existing ARPA computer science research contractors. The
usage of the ARPANET was not spelled out in advance, and the
community could be counted on to take some initiative. To
this process, a meeting was called during the summer
representatives from the selected sites, chaired by Elmer
Reynolds & Postel [Page 1]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
from SRI. If memory serves me correctly, Jeff Rulifson came
SRI, Ron Stoughton from UCSB, Steve Carr from Utah and I came
UCLA. (Apologies to anyone I've left out; records are inaccessible
lost at this point.) At this point we knew only that the network
coming, but the precise details weren't known
That first meeting was seminal. We had lots of questions -- how
and hosts would be connected, what hosts would say to each other,
what applications would be supported. No one had any answers,
the prospects seemed exciting. We found ourselves imagining
kinds of possibilities -- interactive graphics,
processes, automatic data base query, electronic mail -- but no
knew where to begin. We weren't sure whether there was really
to think hard about these problems; surely someone from the
would be along by and by to bring the word. But we did come to
conclusion: We ought to meet again. Over the next several months,
managed to parlay that idea into a series of exchange meetings
each of our sites, thereby setting the most important precedent
protocol design
The first few meetings were quite tenuous. We had no
charter. Most of us were graduate students and we expected that
professional crew would show up eventually to take over the
we were dealing with. Without clear definition of what the host-
interface would look like, or even what functions the IMP
provide, we focused on exotic ideas. We envisioned the
of application specific protocols, with code downloaded to
sites, and we took a crack at designing a language to support this
The first version was known as DEL, for "Decode-Encode Language"
a later version was called NIL, for "Network Interchange Language."
When the IMP contract was finally let and BBN provided some
information on the host-IMP interface, all attention shifted
low-level matters and the ambitious ideas for automatic
of code evaporated. It was several years before ideas like
procedure calls and typed objects reappeared
In February of 1969 we met for the first time with BBN. I don'
think any of us were prepared for that meeting. The BBN folks,
by Frank Heart, Bob Kahn, Severo Ornstein and Will Crowther,
themselves talking to a crew of graduate students they hadn'
anticipated. And we found ourselves talking to people whose
concern was how to get bits to flow quickly and reliably but hadn'
-- of course -- spent any time considering the thirty or forty
of protocol above the link level. And while BBN didn't take over
protocol design process, we kept expecting that an official
design team would announce itself
A month later, after a particularly delightful meeting in Utah,
became clear to us that we had better start writing down
Reynolds & Postel [Page 2]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
discussions. We had accumulated a few notes on the design of DEL
other matters, and we decided to put them together in a set of notes
I remember having great fear that we would offend whomever
official protocol designers were, and I spent a sleepless
composing humble words for our notes. The basic ground rules
that anyone could say anything and that nothing was official. And
emphasize the point, I labeled the notes "Request for Comments."
never dreamed these notes would distributed through the very
we were discussing in these notes. Talk about Sorcerer's Apprentice
Over the spring and summer of 1969 we grappled with the
problems of protocol design. Although we had a vision of the
potential for intercomputer communication, designing usable
was another matter. A custom hardware interface and custom
into the operating system was going to be required for anything
designed, and we anticipated serious difficulty at each of the sites
We looked for existing abstractions to use. It would have
convenient if we could have made the network simply look like a
drive to each host, but we knew that wouldn't do
It was clear we needed to support remote login for interactive use --
later known as Telnet -- and we needed to move files from machine
machine. We also knew that we needed a more fundamental point
view for building a larger array of protocols. Unfortunately
operating systems of that era tended to view themselves as the
of the universe; symmetric cooperation did not fit into the
currently available within these operating systems. And time
pressing: The first IMP was due to be delivered to UCLA September 1,
1969, and the rest were scheduled at monthly intervals
At UCLA we scrambled to build a host-IMP interface. SDS, the
of the Sigma 7, wanted many months and many dollars to do the job
Mike Wingfield, another grad student at UCLA, stepped in and
to get interface built in six weeks for a few thousand dollars.
had a gorgeous, fully instrumented interface working in five and
half weeks. I was in charge of the software, and we were
running a bit late. September 1 was Labor Day, so I knew I had
couple of extra days to debug the software. Moreover, I had
BBN was having some timing troubles with the software, so I had
hope they'd miss the ship date. And I figured that first
Honeywell people would install the hardware -- IMPs were built out
Honeywell 516s in those days -- and then BBN people would come in
few days later to shake down the software. An easy couple of
of grace
BBN fixed their timing trouble, air shipped the IMP, and it
on our loading dock on Saturday, August 30. They arrived with
IMP, wheeled it into our computer room, plugged it in and
Reynolds & Postel [Page 3]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
software restarted from where it had been when the plug was pulled
Cambridge. Still Saturday, August 30. Panic time at UCLA
The second IMP was delivered to SRI at the beginning of October,
ARPA's interest was intense. Larry Roberts and Barry Wessler came
for a visit on November 21, and we actually managed to demonstrate
Telnet-like connection to SRI
With the pressure to get something working and the general
as to how to achieve the high generality we all aspired to, we
and defined the first set of protocols to include only Telnet and
functions. In particular, only asymmetric, user-server
were supported. In December 1969, we met with Larry Roberts in Utah
and suffered our first direct experience with "redirection".
made it abundantly clear that our first step was not big enough,
we went back to the drawing board. Over the next few months
designed a symmetric host-host protocol, and we defined an
implementation of the protocol known as the Network Control Program
("NCP" later came to be used as the name for the protocol, but
originally meant the program within the operating system that
connections. The protocol itself was known blandly only as
host-host protocol.) Along with the basic host-host protocol,
also envisioned a hierarchy of protocols, with Telnet, FTP and
splinter protocols as the first examples. If we had only
the ancient mystics, we would have seen immediately that seven
were required
The initial experiment had been declared an immediate success and
network continued to grow. More and more people started coming
meetings, and the Network Working Group began to take shape.
Group meetings started to have 50 and 100 people in
instead of the half dozen we had had in 1968 and early 1969. We
one meeting in conjunction with the Spring Joint Computer
in Atlantic City in 1971. In October 1971 we all convened at MIT
a major protocol "fly-off". Representatives from each site were
hand, and everyone tried to log in to everyone else's site. With
exception of one site that was completely down, the matrix was
completely filled in, and we had reached a major milestone
connectivity
The rapid growth of the network and the working group also led to
large pile of RFCs. When the 100th RFC was in sight, Peggy Karp
on the task of indexing them. That seemed like a large task then
and we could have hardly anticipated seeing more than a 1000
several years later
Where will it end? The network has the exceeded all estimates of
growth. It has been transformed, extended, cloned, renamed
reimplemented. I doubt if there is a single computer still on
Reynolds & Postel [Page 4]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
network that was on it in 1971. But the RFCs march on. Maybe I'
write a few words for RFC 10,000.
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS BY
The RFCs are categorized into several broad groups and within
groups are subdivided by topic. For example, the RFCs relating
file transfer are in 5 (Applications) c (File Transfer).
1.
1a. Assigned Numbers
997, 990, 960, 943, 923, 900, 870, 820, 790, 776, 770, 762,
758, 755, 750, 739, 717, 604, 503, 433, 349, 322, 317, 204,
179, 175, 167.
1b. Official Protocols
991, 961, 944, 924, 901, 880, 840, 694, 661, 617, 582, 580,
552.
774 - Internet Protocol Handbook Table of
1c. Meeting Notes and
898 - Gateway Special Interest Group Meeting
808, 805, 469 - Computer Mail Meeting
910, 807 - Multimedia Mail Meeting
585 - ARPANET Users Interest Working Group
549, 396, 282, 253 - Graphics Meeting
371 - International Computer Communications
327 - Data and File Transfer Workshop
316 - Data Management Working Group Meeting
164, 131, 116, 108, 101, 082, 077, 066, 063, 037, 021 -
Working Group
1d. Meeting Announcements and Group
828 - Data Communications: IFIP's International "Network"
631 - Call for Papers: International Meeting on
and Data
584 - Charter for ARPANET Users Interest Working
537 - Announcement of NGG
526 - Technical Meeting - Digital Image Processing
504 - Workshop
483 - Cancellation of the Resource Notebook Framework
474, 314, 246, 232, 134 - Network Graphics Working
Reynolds & Postel [Page 5]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
471 - Announcement of a (Tentative) Workshop on Multi-
Executive
461 - Telnet Meeting
457 -
456 -
454 - File Transfer Protocol Meeting
453 - Meeting Announcement to Discuss a Network Mail
374 - IMP System
359 - The Status of the Release of the New IMP System (2600)
343, 331 - IMP System Change
324 - RJE Protocol
323 - Formation of Network Measurement Group (NMG
320 - Workshop on Hard Copy Line
309 - Data and File Transfer Workshop
299 - Information Management
295 - Report of the Protocol
291, 188, 173 - Data Management
245, 234, 207, 188, 173, 140, 116, 099, 087, 085, 075, 043, 035
- Network Working Group
222 - System Programmer's
212 - NWG Meeting on Network
157 - Invitation to the Second Symposium on Problems in
Optimization of Data Communication
149 - The Best Laid Plans...
147 - The Definition of a
111 - Pressure from the
048 - A Possible Protocol
046 - ARPA Network Protocol
1e. Distribution
402, 363, 329, 303, 300, 211, 168, 155 - ARPA Network
069 - Distribution List Change for
052 - Updated Distribution
1f.
980 - Protocol Document Order
952, 810, 608 - Host Table
945 - A DoD Statement on the NRC
902 - ARPA-Internet Protocol
849 - Suggestions for Improved Host Table
678 - Document
602 - The Stockings Were Hung by the Chimney With
115 - Some Network Information Center Policies on
053 - An Official Protocol
Reynolds & Postel [Page 6]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
1g. Request for Comments
999, 899, 800, 699 - Requests for Comments
825 - Request for Comments on Requests for
629 - Scenario for Using the Network
628 - Status of RFC Numbers and a Note on Pre-assigned
598, 200, 170, 160, 100, 084 - RFC
1h.
829 - Packet Satellite Technology Reference
290 - Computer Network and Data Sharing: A
243 - Network and Data Sharing
1i.
637 - Change of Network Address for SU-
634 - Change in Network Address for Haskins
616 - Latest Network
609 - Statement of Upcoming Move of NIC/NLS
590 - MULTICS Address
588 - London Node is Now
551 - NYU, ANL, and LBL Joining the
544 - Locating On-Line Documentation at SRI-
543 - Network Journal Submission and
518 - ARPANET
511 - Enterprise Phone Service to NIC From ARPANET
510 - Request for Network Mailbox
432 - Network Logical
423, 389 - UCLA Campus Computing Network Liaison Staff for
421 - A Software Consulting Service for Network
419 - MIT-DMS on
416 - The ARC System will be Unavailable for Use
Thanksgiving
405 - Correction to RFC 404
404 - Host Address Changes Involving Rand and
403 - Desirability of a Network 1108
386 - Letter to TIP Users - 2
384 - Official Site IDENTS for Organizations in the
381 - Three Aids to Improved Network
356 - ARPA Network Control
334 - Network Use on May 8
305 - Unknown Host
301 - BBN IMP No. 5 and NCC Schedule for March 4, 1972
276 - NIC
249 - Coordination of Equipment and Supplies
Reynolds & Postel [Page 7]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
223 - Network Information Center Schedule for Network
185 - NIC Distribution of Manuals and
154 - Exposition
136 - Host Accounting and Administrative
118 - Information Required for Each Service Available to
095 - Distribution of NWG/RFC's Through the
016 -
2. ARPANET Host to Host
2a. Network Control
801 - NCP/TCP Transition
773 - Comments on NCP/TCP Mail Service Transition
714 - A Host/Host Protocol for an ARPANET-type
689 - Tenex NCP Finite State Machine for
663 - A Lost Message Detection and Recovery
636 - TIP/TENEX Reliability
635 - An Assessment of ARPANET
534, 516, 512 - Lost Message
492, 467 - Proposed Change to Host-Host
Resynchronization of Connection
489 - Comment on Resynchronization of Connection
425 - "But my NCP Costs $500 a day..."
210 - Improvement of Flow
197 - Initial Connection Protocol -
176 - Comments on Byte Size for
165 - A Proferred Official Initial Connection
147 - The Definition of a
142 - Time-out Mechanism in the Host-Host
132, 124, 107, 102 - Output of the Host-Host Protocol
Cleaning
129 - A Request for Comments on Socket Name
128 -
117 - Some Comments on the Official
072 - Proposed Moratorium on Changes to Network
068 - Comments on Memory Allocation Control Commands (CEASE
ALL, GVB, RET) and
065 - Comments on Host-Host Protocol Document Number 1
060 - A Simplified NCP
059 - Flow Control-Fixed Versus Demand
058 - Logical Message
057, 054 - An Official Protocol
056 - Third Level
055 - A Prototypical Implementation of the
050, 049, 048, 047, 046, 045, 044, 040, 039, 038, 036, 033 -
New Host-Host
Reynolds & Postel [Page 8]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
042 - Message Data
023 - Transmission of Multiple Control
022 - Host-Host Control Message
018 - Comments Re: Host-Host control
015 - Network Subsystem for Time Sharing
011 - Implementation of the Host-Host Software Procedures
009, 001 - Host
008 - ARPA Network Functional
005 -
002 -
2b. Initial Connection
202 - Possible Deadlock in
197 - Initial Connection Protocol -
161 - A Solution to the Race Condition in the
151, 148, 143, 127, 123 - A Proferred Official
150 - The Use of IPC
145 - Initial Connection Protocol Control
093 - Initial Connection
080 - Protocol and Data
066 - 3rd Level Ideas and Other
3. Internet
3a. Internet
815 - IP Datagram Reassembly
791, 760 - Internet Protocol (IP
781 - A Specification of the Internet Protocol IP
3b. Internet Control Message
792, 777 - Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP
3c. Gateway
985 - Requirements for Internet
975 - Autonomous
970 - On Packet Switches With Infinite
911 - EGP Gateway under Berkeley
904, 890, 888, 827 - Exterior Gateway
875 - Gateways, Architectures, and
823 - Gateway Gateway
Reynolds & Postel [Page 9]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
3d.
986 - Working Draft - Guidelines for the Use of Internet-
Addressing in the ISO Connectionless-Mode
981 - An Experimental Multiple-Path Routing
963 - Some Problems with the Specification of the
Standard Internet
950 - Internet Standard Subnetting
947 - Multi-Network Broadcasting Within the
940, 917, 925, 932, 936, 922 - Internet Subnets
925, 917, 826 - Multi-LAN Address Resolution
919, 922 - Broadcasting Internet
891 - DCN Local-Network
871 - A Perspective on the ARPANET Reference
831 - Backup Access to the European Side of
817 - Modularity and Efficiency in Protocol
816 - Fault Isolation and
814 - Name, Addresses, Ports, and
796 - Address
795 - Service
730 - Extensible Field
4. Host
4a. User Datagram
768 - User Datagram
4b. Transmission Control
983 - ISO Transport Services on Top of the
964 - Some Problems with the Specification of the
Standard Transmission Control
896 - Congestion Control in IP/TCP
889 - Internet Delay
879 - The TCP Maximum Segment Size and Related
872 - TCP-ON-A-
817 - Modularity and Efficiency in Protocol
816 - Fault Isolation and
814 - Name, Addresses, Ports, and
794 - Pre-
793, 761, 675 - Transmission Control
721 - Out of Band Control Signals in a Host to Host
700 - A Protocol
4c. Transaction Protocols and Distributed Operating
955 - Towards a Transport Service for Transaction
Reynolds & Postel [Page 10]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
938 - Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol Functional
Interface
908 - Reliable Data
722 - Thoughts on Interactions in Distributed
713 - MSDTP -- Message Services Data Transmission
712 - A Distributed Capability Computing System
708 - Elements of a Distributed Programming
707 - A High-Level Framework for Network-Based Resource
684 - A Commentary on Procedure Calling as A Network
677 - The Maintenance of Duplicate
674 - Procedure Call Documents--Version 2
672 - A Multi-Site Data Collection
671 - A Note on Reconnection
645 - Network Standard Data Specification
615 - Proposed Network Standard Data Pathname
610 - Further Datalanguage Design
592 - Some Thoughts on System Design to Facilitate
578 - Using MIT-MATHLAB MACSYMA From MIT-DMS Muddle -
Experiment in Automated Resource
515 - Specifications for Datalanguage, Version 0/9
500 - The Integration of Data Management Systems on a
441 - Inter-Entity Communication - An
437 - Data Reconfiguration Service at
203 - Achieving Reliable
076 - Connection-by-Name: User-Oriented
062 - A System for Interprocess Communication in a
Sharing Computer
061 - A Note on Interprocess Communication in a
Sharing Computer
051 - Proposal for a Network Interchange
031 - Binary Message Forms in Computer
005 -
001 - Host
4d.
998, 969 - NETBLT: A Bulk Data Transfer
988 - Host Extensions for IP
979 - PSN End-to-End Functional
966 - A Multicast Extension to the Internet
869 - Host Monitoring
741 - Specifications for the Network Voice Protocol
643 - Cross Net
162 - NETBUGGER
Reynolds & Postel [Page 11]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
5. Application
5a. Telnet
854, 764 - Telnet Protocol
818 - The Remote User Telnet
801 - NCP/TCP Transition
782 - A Virtual Terminal Management
764 - Telnet Protocol
728 - A Minor Pitfall in the Telnet
688 - Tentative Schedule for the New Telnet Implementation
the
681 - Network
600 - Interfacing an Illinois Plasma Terminal to the
596 - Second Thoughts on Telnet Go-
595 - Some Thoughts in Defense of the Telnet Go-
593 - Telnet and FTP Implementation Schedule
576 - Proposal for Modifying
570 - Experimental Input Mapping Between NVT ASCII and
Online
562 - Modifications to the Telnet
559 - Comments on the New Telnet Protocol and
529 - A Note on Protocol Synch
513 - Comments on the New Telnet
495 - Telnet Protocol
466 - Telnet Logger/Server for Host LL-67
461 - Telnet Meeting
452 - Telnet Command at Host
435 - Telnet
426 - Reconnection
393 - Comments on Telnet Protocol
377 - Using TSO Via ARPA Network Virtual
357 - An Echoing Strategy for Satellite
355, 346 - Satellite
340 - Proposed Telnet
339 - MLTNET - A "Multi-Telnet" Subsystem for
328 - Suggested Telnet Protocol
318 - Ad Hoc Telnet
216 - Telnet Access to UCSB's On-Line
215 - NCP, ICP, and Telnet: The Terminal IMP
206 - A User Telnet Description of an Initial
205 - NETCRT - A Character Display
190 - DEC PDP-10 - IMLAC Communication
158 - Proposed Telnet
139 - Discussion of Telnet
137 - Telnet Protocol - A Proposed
135, 110 - Conventions for Using an IBM 2741 Terminal as a
Console for Access to Network Server
Reynolds & Postel [Page 12]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
103 - Implementation of Interrupt
097 - A First Cut at a Proposed Telnet
091 - A Proposed User-User
015 - Network Subsystem for Time Sharing
5b. Telnet
946 - Telnet Terminal Location Number
933 - Output Marking Telnet
930 - Telnet Terminal Type
927 - TACACS User Identification Telnet
885 - Telnet End of Record
884 - Telnet Terminal Type
861 - Telnet Extended Options - List
860 - Telnet Timing Mark
859 - Telnet Status
858 - Telnet Suppress Go Ahead
857 - Telnet Echo
856 - Telnet Binary
855 - Telnet Option
854 - Telnet Protocol
779 - Telnet Send-Location
749 - Telnet SUPDUP-OUTPUT
748 - Telnet Randomly-Lose
736 - Telnet SUPDUP
735 - Revised Telnet Byte Macro
734 - SUPDUP
747 - Recent Extensions to the SUPDUP
746 - The SUPDUP Graphics
732 - Telnet Data Entry Terminal
731 - Telnet Data Entry Terminal
729 - Telnet Byte Macro
727 - Telnet Logout
726 - Remote Controlled Transmission and Echoing Telnet
719 - Discussion on
718 - Comments on RCTE from the Tenex Implementation
703, 702, 701 - Survey of New-Protocol Telnet
698 - Telnet Extended ASCII
679 - February, 1975, Survey of New-Protocol Telnet
669 - November 1974, Survey of New-Protocol Telnet
659 - Announcing Additional Telnet
658 - Telnet Output Line Feed
657 - Telnet Output Vertical Tab Disposition
656 - Telnet Output Vertical Tab Stops
655 - Telnet Output Form Feed Disposition
654 - Telnet Output Horizontal Tab Disposition
653 - Telnet Output Horizontal Tab Stops
652 - Telnet Output Carriage Return Disposition
651 - Revised Telnet Status
Reynolds & Postel [Page 13]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
587 - Announcing New Telnet
581 - Corrections to RFC 560 - Remote Controlled
and Echoing Telnet
563 - Comments on the RCTE Telnet
560 - Remote Controlled Transmission and Echoing Telnet
5c. File Transfer
987 - Mapping Between X.400 and RFC 822
959, 542, 354, 265, 172, 114 - The File Transfer
949 - FTP Unique-Named Store
913 - Simple File Transfer
906 - Bootstrap Loading Using
822 - Standard for the Format of ARPA Internet Text
821, 788 - Simple Mail Transfer
783, 768, 764 - The TFTP Protocol Revision 2
775 - Directory Oriented FTP
743 - FTP Extension: XRSQ/
737 - FTP Extension:
697 - CWD Command of
691 - One More Try on the
686 - Leaving Well Enough
683 - FTPSRV -- Tenex Extension for Paged
678 - Document File Format
662 - Performance Improvement in ARPANET File Transfers
640 - Revised FTP Reply
630 - FTP Error Code Usage for More Reliable Mail
624 - Comments on the File Transfer
614 - Response to RFC 607 - Comments on the
607 - NIC-21255 Comments on the File Transfer
573 - Data and File Transfer - Some Measurement
571 - Tenex FTP
535 - Comments on File Access
532 - The UCSD-CC Server-FTP
520 - Memo to FTP Group (Proposal for File Access Protocol
506 - An FTP Command Naming
505 - Two Solutions to a File Transfer Access
501 - Un-Muddling "Free File Transfer
487 - Host-Dependent FTP
486 - Data Transfer
480 - Host-Dependent FTP
479 - Use of FTP by the NIC
478 - FTP Server-Server Interaction -
475 - FTP and the Network Mail
468 - FTP Data
463 - FTP Comments and Response to RFC 430
458 - Mail Retrieval via
Reynolds & Postel [Page 14]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
454 - File Transfer Protocol - Meeting Announcement and a
Proposed
448 - Print Files in
438 - FTP Server-Server
430 - Comments on File Transfer
418 - Server File Transfer Under TSS/360 at NASA/Ames
414 - File Transfer Protocols (FTP): Status and
412 - User FTP
385 - Comments on the File Transfer Protocol (RFC 354)
310 - Another Look at Data and File Transfer
294 - The Use of "Set Data Type" Transaction in the
Transfer
281 - A Suggested Addition to File Transfer
269 - Some Experience with File
264, 171 - The Data Transfer
250 - Some Thoughts on File
242 - Data Descriptive Language for Shared
238 - Comments on DTP and FTP
163 - Data Transfer
141 - Comments on RFC 114 (A File Transfer Protocol
133 - File Transfer and Error
5d. Domain Name
974 - Mail Routing and the Domain
973 - Domain System Changes and
953, 811, 810 - HOSTNAME
921, 897 - Domain Name System Implementation
920 - Domain
883 - Domain Names - Implementation and
882 - Domain Names - Concepts and
881 - The Domain Names Plan and
830 - A Distributed System for Internet Name
819 - The Domain Naming Convention for Internet
799 - Internet Name
756 - The NIC Name Server -- A Datagram-Based
752 - A Universal Host
5e. Mail and Message
994, 983 - PCMAIL: A Distributed Mail
977 - Network News Transfer
976 - UUCP Mail Interchange Format
974 - Mail Routing and the Domain
934 - Proposed Standard for Message
Reynolds & Postel [Page 15]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
915 - Network Mail Path
886 - Proposed Standard for Message Header
850 - Standard for Interchange of USENET
841 - Specification for Message Format for Computer
Message
822 - Standard for the Format of ARPA Internet Text
821 - Simple Mail Transfer
806 - Specification for Message Format for Computer
Message
780, 772 - Mail Transfer
786 - Mail Transfer Protocol - ISI TOPS-20 MTP-NIMAIL
785 - Mail Transfer Protocol - ISI TOPS-20 File
784 - Mail Transfer Protocol - ISI TOPS-20
771 - Mail Transition
763 - Role
757 - A Suggested Solution to the Naming, Addressing,
Delivery Problem for ARPANET Message
754 - Out-of-Net Host Addresses for
753 - Internet Message
751 - Survey of FTP Mail and
733 - Standard for the Format of ARPA Network Text
724 - Proposed Official Standard for the Format of ARPA
720 - Address Specification Syntax for Network
706 - On the Junk Mail
680 - Message Transmission
644 - On the Problem of Signature Authentication for
577 - Mail
574 - Announcement of a Mail Facility at
561 - Standardizing Network Mail
555 - Responses to Critiques of the Proposed Mail
539, 524 - A Proposed Mail
498 - On Mail Service to
491 - What is "Free"?
475 - On FTP and the Network Mail
458 - Mail Retrieval via
333 - A Proposed Experiment with a Message Switching
278, 224, 221, 196 - A Mail Box
5f. Facsimile and
809 - UCL Facsimile
804 - Facsimile
803 - Dacom 450/500 Facsimile Date
798 - Decoding Facsimile Data From the Rapicom 450
797 - Bitmap
769 - Rapicom 450 Facimile File
Reynolds & Postel [Page 16]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
5g.
965 - A Format for a Graphical Communication
553 - Draft Design for a Text/Graphics
493 - Graphics
401 - Conversion of NGP-0 Coordinates to Device
398 - UCSB Online
387 - Some Experiences in Implementing Network
Protocol Level 0
351 - Information Form for the ARPANET Graphics
336 - Level 0 Graphics Input
296 - DS-1 Display
292 - Graphics Protocol - Level 0
285 - Network
268 - Graphics Facilities
199 - Suggestions for a Network Data-Telnet Graphics
192 - Some Factors Which a Network Graphics Protocol
191 - Graphics Implementation and Conceptualization at
186 - A Network Graphics
184 - Proposed Graphic Display
181, 177 - A Device Independent Graphical Display
178 - Network Graphics Attention
125, 086 - Proposal for a Network Standard Format for a
Stream to Control Graphics
094 - Some Thoughts on Network
5h. Data
304 - A Data Management System Proposal for the ARPA
195 - Data Computers - Data Descriptions and Access
194 - The Data Reconfiguration Service - Compiler/
Implementation
166 - Data Reconfiguration Service - An
144 - Data Sharing on Computer
138 - Status Report on Proposed Data Reconfiguration
083 - Language-Machine for Data
5i. Remote Job
740, 599, 589, 325, 189, 088 - CCN Network Remote Job
Program -
725 - An RJE Protocol for a Resource Sharing
499 - Harvard's Network
490 - Surrogate RJS for UCLA-
477, 436 - Remote Job Service at
Reynolds & Postel [Page 17]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
407 - Remote Job
368 - Comments on "Proposed Remote Job Entry Protocol
360 - Proposed Remote Job Entry
338 - EBCDIC/ASCII Mapping for Network
307 - Using Network Remote Job
283 - NETRJT - Remote Job Service Protocol for
105 - Network Specification for Remote Job Entry and Remote
Output Retrieval at
5j.
958, 957, 956 - Network Time
868 - Time Server
867 - Daytime
778 - DCNET Time Server
738 - Time
685 - Response Time in Cross-network
034 - Some Brief Preliminary Notes on the ARC
032 - Some Thoughts on SRI's Proposed Real Time
028 - Time
5k.
978 - Voice File Interchange Protocol (VFIP
972 - Password Generator
954, 812 - Whois
951 - Bootstrap
937, 918 - Post Office
931, 912 - Authentication
913 - Simple File Transfer
909 - Loader Debugger
891 - DCN Local Net
887 - Resource Location
866 - Active Users
865 - Quote of the Day
864 - Character Generator
863, 361, 348 - Discard
862, 361, 347 - Echo
821, 822 - Simple Mail Transfer
783 - Trivial File Transfer
767 - Document
759 - Internet Message
742 - Finger
734 - SUPDUP
726 - Remote Controlled Transmission and Echoing Telnet
666 - Specification of the Unified User-Level
621 - NIC User Directories at SRI-
569 - Network Standard Text
470 - Change in Socket for TIP News
Reynolds & Postel [Page 18]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
451 - Tentative Proposal for a Unified User Level
098, 079 - Logger
029 - Note in Response to Bill English's Request for
6. Program
6a.
496 - A TNLS Quick Reference Card is
494 - Availability of MIX and MIXAL in the
488 - NLS Classes at Network
485 - MIS and MIXAL at
431 - Update on SMFS Login and
411 - New Multics Network Software
409 - TENEX Interface to UCSB's Simple-Minded File
399 - SMFS Login and
390 - TSO Scenario Batch Compilation and Foreground
382 - Mathematical Software on the ARPA
379 - Using TSO at
373 - Arbitrary Character
350 - User Accounts for UCSB On-Line
345 - Interest Mixed Integer Programming (MPSX on 360/91
CCN
321 - CBI Networking Activity at
317 - Official Host-Host Protocol Modification: Assigned
311 - New Console Attachments to the UCSB
251 - Weather
223 - Network Information Center Schedule for Network
217 - Specification Changes for OLS, RJE/RJOR, and
174 - UCLA-Computer Science Graphics
122 - Network Specifications for UCSB's Simple-Minded
121 - Network On-Line
120 - Network PL1
119 - Network FORTRAN
074 - Specifications for Network Use of the UCSB On-Line
7. Network
7a.
878, 851, 802 - The ARPANET 1822L Host Access
852 - The ARPANET Short Blocking
789 - Vulnerabilities of Network Control Protocols: An
716 - Interim Revision to Appendix F of BBN 1822
704 - IMP/Host and Host/IMP Protocol
696 - Comments on the IMP/HOST and HOST/IMP Protocol
695 - Official Change in Host-Host
Reynolds & Postel [Page 19]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
692 - Comments on IMP/Host Protocol
690 - Comments on the Proposed Host/IMP Protocol
687 - IMP/Host and Host/IMP
667 - BBN Host
660 - Some Changes to the IMP and the IMP/Host
642 - Ready Line Philosophy and
638, 633 - IMP/TIP Preventive Maintenance
632 - Throughput Degradation for Single Packet
627 - ASCII Text File of
626 - On a possible Lockup Condition in IMP Subnet due
Message
625 - On Line Hostnames
623 - Comments on On-line Host Name
622 - Scheduling IMP/TIP Down
620 - Request for Monitor Host Table
619 - Mean Round-Trip Times in the
613 - Network Connectivity: A Response to RFC 603
611 - Two Changes to the IMP/Host
606 - Host Names On-
594 - Speedup of Host-IMP
591 - Addition to the Very Distant Host
568, 567 - Cross-Country Network
548 - Hosts Using the IMP Going Down Message
547 - Change to the Very Distant Host
533 - Message-ID
534 - Lost Message
528 - Software Checksumming in the IMP and Network
521 - Restricted Use of IMP
508 - Real-Time Data Transmission on the
476, 434 - IMP/TIP Memory Retrofit
449, 442 - The Current Flow-Control Scheme for
447, 445 - IMP/TIP Preventive Maintenance
417 - LINK Usage
410 - Removal of the 30-second Delay When Hosts Come
406 - Scheduled IMP Software
395 - Switch Settings on IMPs and
394 - Two Proposed Changes to the IMP-HOST
369 - Evaluation of ARPANET Services (January through March
1972)
335 - New Interface-IMP/360
312 - Proposed Change in IMP-to-Host
297 - TIP Message
280 - A Draft Set of Host
274 - Establishing a Local Guide for Network
271 - IMP System Change
270 - Correction to the BBN Report No. 1822
263 - "Very Distant" Host
254 - Scenarios for Using ARPANET
247 - Proffered Set of Standard Host
Reynolds & Postel [Page 20]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
241 - Connecting Computers to NLC
239 - Host Mnemonics Proposed in RFC 226
237 - The NIC's View of Standard Host
236 - Standard Host
233 - Standardization of Host Call
230 - Toward Reliable Operation of Minicomputer-based
on a
229 - Standard Host
228 -
226 - Standardization of Host
218 - Changing the IMP Status
213 - IMP System Change
209 - Host/IMP Interface
208 - Address
073, 067 - Proposed Change to Host/IMP Spec to
071 - Reallocation in Case of Input
070 - A Note On
064 - Getting Rid of
041 - IMP/IMP Teletype
025 - No High Link
019 - Two Protocol Suggestions to Reduce Congestion
Swap-Bound
017a, 017 - Some Questions Re: HOST-IMP
012 - IMP-HOST Interface Flow
007 - HOST-IMP
006 - Conversation with Bob
7b. Internet Protocol On
948 - Two Methods for the Transmission of IP Datagrams
IEEE 802.3
907 - Host Access
903 - A Reverse Address Resolution
895 - A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams
Experimental Ethernet
894 - A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams
Ethernet
893 - Trailer
891 - Internet Protocol on DC
877 - A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams
Public Data
826 - Address Resolution
796 - Address
795 - Service
7c. Host Front End
929, 928, 705, 647 - Host-Front End
Reynolds & Postel [Page 21]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
7d.
935 - Reliable Link Layer
916 - Reliable Asynchronous Transfer
914 - Thinwire
824 - The Cronus Virtual Local
8.
8a.
573 - Data and File Transfer - Some Measurement
557 - Revelations in Network Host
546 - Tenex Load Averages for July 1973
462 - Responding to User
415 - TENEX
392 - Measurement of Host Costs for Transmitting Network
352 - TIP Site Information
308 - ARPANET Host Availability
286 - Network Library Information
274 - Establishing a Local Guide for Network
214, 193 - Network
198 - Site Certification - Lincoln
182 - Compilation of List of Revelant Site
180 - File System
156 - Status of the Illinois Site (Response to RFC 116)
153 - SRI ARC-NIC
152 - SRI Artificial Intelligence Status
126 - Ames Graphics Facilities at Ames Research
112 - User/Server Site Protocol Network HOST
104 - Link 191
106 - USER/SERVER Site Protocol Network Host
8b.
971 - A Survey of Data Representation
876 - Survey of SMTP
848 - Who Provides the "Little" TCP Services
847 - Summary of Smallberg
844 - Who Talks ICMP, too? Survey of 18 February 1983
846, 845, 843, 842, 839, 838, 837, 836, 835, 834, 833, 832 -
Who Talks TCP
787 - Connectionless Data Transmission Survey/
703, 702, 701, 679, 669 - Survey of New-Protocol Telnet
565 - Storing Network Survey Data at the
545 - Of What Quality be the UCSB Resource Evaluators
530 - A Report on the SURVEY
523 - SURVEY is in Operation
519 - Resource
Reynolds & Postel [Page 22]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
514 - Network Make-
464 - Resource Notebook
460 - NCP
459 - Network
450 - Multics Sampling Timeout
446 - Proposal to Consider a Network Program Resource
096 - An Interactive Network Experiment to Study Modes
Access to the Network Information
090 - CCN as a Network Service
081 - Request for Reference
078 - NCP Status Report: UCSB/
8c.
996 - Statistics
618 - A Few Observations on NCP
612, 601, 586, 579, 566, 556, 538, 522, 509, 497, 482, 455,
443, 422, 413, 400, 391, 378 - Traffic
603, 597, 376, 370, 367, 366, 362, 352, 344, 342, 332, 330,
326, 319, 315, 306, 298, 293, 288, 287, 267, 266 -
Network Host
550 - NIC NCP
388 - NCP
255, 252, 240, 235 - Site
9. Network Experience and
9a.
968 - 'Twas the Night Before Start-
967 - All Victims
573 - Data and File Transfer - Some Measurement
527 -
525 - MIT-Mathlab Meets UCSB-
439 - PARRY Encounters the
420 - CCA ICC Weather
372 - Notes on a Conversation with Bob Kahn on the
364 - Serving Remote Users on the
302 - Excercising the
231 - Service Center Standards for Remote Usage - A User's
227 - Data Transfer Rates (RAND/UCLA
113 - Network Activity Report: UCSB and
089 - Some Historic Moments in
004 - Network
Reynolds & Postel [Page 23]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
10. Site
10a.
30, 27, 24, 16, 10, 3 - Documentation
11. Other
11a.
570 - Experimental Input Mapping Between NVT ASCII and
Online
183 - The EBCDIC Codes and Their Mapping to
020 - ASCII Format for Network
11b.
987 - Mapping Between X.400 and RFC 822
874 - A Critique of X.25
11c.
942 - Transport Protocols for Department of Defense
939 - Executive Summary of the NRC Report on
Protocols for Department of Defense Data
11d.
995 - End System to Intermediate System Routing
Protocol for Use in Conjunction with ISO 8473
994 - Final Text of DIS 8473, Protocol for Providing
Connectionless Mode Network
982 - Guidelines for the Specification of the Structure of
Domain Specific Part (DSP) of the ISO Standard
941 - Addendum to the Network Service Definition
Network Layer
926 - Protocol for Providing the Connectionless-Mode
905 - ISO Transport Protocol Specification (ISO DP 8073)
892 - ISO Transport
873 - The Illusion of Vendor
Reynolds & Postel [Page 24]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
12. Never
12a. Never
014, 026, 092, 159, 201, 220, 244, 248, 257, 258, 259, 260,
261, 262, 272, 275, 277, 279, 284, 337, 341, 358, 375, 380,
383, 397, 424, 427, 428, 444, 465, 481, 484, 502, 507, 517,
536, 540, 541, 554, 558, 564, 572, 575, 583, 605, 639, 641,
646, 648, 649, 650, 664, 665, 668, 670, 673, 676, 682, 693,
709, 710, 711, 715, 723, 853.
Reynolds & Postel [Page 25]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS LIST WITH
RFC Author Date
--- ------ ---- -----
999 Westine Mar 87 Requests For Comments
A summary of the Request for Comments Documents from RFC 900-999.
998 Lambert Mar 87 NETBLT: A Bulk Data
This document is a description of and a specification for
NETBLT protocol. It is a revision of the specification
in RFC-969. NETBLT (NETwork BLock Transfer) is a transport
protocol intended for the rapid transfer of a large quantity
data between computers. It provides a transfer that is
and flow controlled, and is designed to provide maximum
over a wide variety of networks. Although NETBLT currently
on top of the Internet Protocol (IP), it should be able to
on top of any datagram protocol similar in function to IP
This document is published for discussion and comment, and
not constitute a standard. The proposal may change and
parts of the protocol have not yet been specified;
of this document is therefore not advised
997 Reynolds Mar 87 Internet
This memo is an official status report on the network numbers
in the Internet community. As of 1-Mar-87 the Network
Center (NIC) at SRI International has assumed responsibility
assignment of Network Numbers and Autonomous System Numbers.
RFC documents the current assignments of these numbers at the
of this transfer of responsibility
996 Mills Feb 87 Statistics
This RFC specifies a standard for the ARPA Internet community
Hosts and gateways on the DARPA Internet that choose to
a remote statistics monitoring facility may use this protocol
send statistics data upon request to a monitoring center
debugging host
995 ANSI Apr 86 End System to Intermediate
Routing Exchange Protocol for use
conjunction with ISO 8473.
This Protocol is one of a set of International Standards
Reynolds & Postel [Page 26]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
to facilitate the interconnection of open systems. The set
standards covers the services and protocols required to
such interconnection
This Protocol is positioned with respect to other
standards by the layers defined in the Reference Model for
Systems Interconnection (ISO 7498) and by the structure defined
the Internal Organization of the Network Layer (DIS 8648).
particular, it is a protocol of the Network Layer. This
permits End Systems and Intermediate Systems to
configuration and routing information to facilitate the
of the routing and relaying functions of the Network Layer
994 ANSI Mar 86 Final Text of DIS 8473, Protocol
Providing the Connectionless
Network
This Protocol Standard is one of a set of International
produced to facilitate the interconnection of open systems.
set of standards covers the services and protocols required
achieve such interconnection
This Protocol Standard is positioned with respect to other
standards by the layers defined in the Reference Model for
Systems Interconnection (ISO 7498). In particular, it is
protocol of the Network Layer. This Protocol may be used
network-entities in end systems or in Network Layer relay
(or both). It provides the Connectionless-mode Network Service
defined in Addendum 1 to the Network Service Definition
Connectionless-mode Transmission (ISO 8348/AD1).
993 Clark Dec 86 PCMAIL: A Distributed Mail
for Personal
This document is a discussion of the PCMAIL workstation-
distributed mail system. It is a revision of the design
in NIC RFC 984. The revision is based on discussion and
from a variety of sources, as well as further research into
design of interactive PCMAIL clients and the use of client code
machines other than IBM PCs. As this design may change
implementation of this document is not advised
992 Birman Nov 86 On Communication Support
Fault-Tolerant Process
This memo describes a collection of multicast
primitives integrated with a mechanism for handling
failure and recovery. These primitives facilitate
implementation of fault-tolerant process groups, which can be
Reynolds & Postel [Page 27]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
to provide distributed services in an environment subject
non-malicious crash failures
Here, we argue that the form of "best effort" reliability
by host groups may not address the requirements of
researchers who are building fault tolerant software. Our
premise is that reliable handling of failures, recoveries,
dynamic process migration are important aspects of programming
distributed environments, and that communication support
provides unpredictable behavior in the presence of such
places an unacceptable burden of complexity on higher
application software. This complexity does not arise when
the fault-tolerant process group alternative
991 Reynolds Nov 86 Official ARPA-Internet
This RFC identifies the documents specifying the
protocols used in the Internet. Comments indicate any
or changes planned. This memo is an official status report on
numbers used in protocols in the ARPA-Internet community.
memo obsoletes RFCs 961, 944, 924, 901, 880, 840, 694, 661, 617,
582, 580, 552.
990 Reynolds Nov 86 Assigned
This Network Working Group Request for Comments documents
currently assigned values from several series of numbers used
network protocol implementations. This memo is an official
report on the numbers used in protocols in the ARPA-
community. This memo obsoletes RFCs 960, 943, 923, 900, 870, 820,
790, 776, 770, 762, 758, 755, 750, 739, 717, 604, 503, 433, 349,
322, 317, 204, 179, 175, 167.
989 Linn Feb 87 Privacy Enhancement for
Electronic Mail: Part I:
Encipherment and
This RFC suggests a proposed protocol for the Internet
and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
RFC is the outgrowth of a series of IAB Privacy Task
meetings and of internal working papers distributed for
meetings. This RFC defines message encipherment
authentication procedures, as the initial phase of an effort
provide privacy enhancement services for electronic mail
in the Internet. It is intended that the procedures defined
be compatible with a wide range of key management approaches
including both conventional (symmetric) and public-
(asymmetric) approaches for encryption of data encrypting keys
Reynolds & Postel [Page 28]
RFC 1000 - Request for Comments Reference Guide August 1987
Use of conventional cryptography for message text
and/or authentication is anticipated
Privacy enhancement services (confidentiality, authentication,
message integrity assurance) are offered through the use
end-to- end cryptography between originator and recipient
Agent processes, with no special processing requirements
on the Message Transfer System at endpoints or at
relay sites. This approach allows privacy enhancement
to be incorporated on a site-by-site or user-by-user basis
impact on other Internet entities. Interoperability
heterogeneous components and mail transport facilities
supported
988 Deering Jul 86 Host Extensions for IP
This memo specifies the extensions required of a
implementation of the Internet Protocol (IP) to
internetwork multicasting. This specification supersedes
given in RFC 966, and constitutes a proposed protocol standard
IP multicasting in the ARPA-Internet. The reader is directed
RFC 966 for a discussion of the motivation and rationale
the multicasting extension specified here
987 Kille Jun 86 Mapping Between X.400 and RFC 822
The X.400 series of protocols have been defined by CCITT
provide an Interpersonal Messaging Service (IPMS), making use of
store and forward Message Transfer Service. It is expected
this standard will be implemented very widely. This
describes a set of mappings which will enable interworking
systems operating the X.400 protocols and systems using RFC 822
mail protocol or protocols derived from RFC 822. This
suggests a proposed protocol for the ARPA-Internet community,
requests discussion and suggestions for improvements
986 Callon Jun 86 Working Draft -- Guidelines for
Use of Internet-IP addressing in
ISO Connectionless-Mode
This RFC suggests a method to allow the existing IP addressing
including the IP protocol field, to be used for the
Connectionless Network Protocol (CLNP). This is a draft
to one of the problems inherent in the use of "ISO-grams" in
DoD Internet. Related issues will be discussed in
RFCs. This RFC suggests a proposed protocol for the ARPA-
community, and 