19. Routing
19.1 Summary
The RFC's which were categorized into this group were Routing Information Protocol (RIP), the Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) protocol, Classless InterDomain Routing (CIDR),the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP), and the InterDomain Routing Protocol (IDRP). After careful examination both BGP and RIP have been found Year 2000 compliant. There is a small Year 2000 issue in RFC 1786 on the Representation of IP Routing Policies in the ripe-81++ Routing Registry. In Appendices C the "changed" object parameter defines a format of <email-address> YYMMDD, and similarly in Appendix D "withdrawn" object identifier has he format of YYMMDD. Since these are only identifiers there should be little operational impact. Some application software may need to be modified. IDPR suffers from the classic Year 2038 problem, by having a timestamp counter which rolls over at that time.19.2 Specifics
RFC 2091 on Extensions to RIP to Support Demand Circuits defines three required and one optional timers in section 6. The Database Timer (6.1), the Hold down Timer (6.2), the Retransmission Time (6.3)
and the Over-Subscription Timer (6.4) are all counters, which have no millennium, issues. RFC 2081 on the applicability of RIPng discusses deletion of routes for a variety of issues, one of which is the garbage- collection timer exceeds 120 seconds. There are no Year 2000 issues. RFC 2080 on RIPng for IPv6, discusses various times in section 2.6, none of which have any millennium problems. RFC 1987 on Ipsilon's General Switch Management protocol there is a Duration field defined in section 4, which has no relevant problems. Section 8.2 defines the procedure for dealing with timers. RFC 1953 on Ipsilon's Flow Management Specification for IPv4 defines the same procedure in section 3.2, as well as a lifetime field in the Redirect Message (Section 4.1). There are no millennium issues in either case. There is a small Year 2000 issue in RFC 1786 on the Representation of IP Routing Policies in the ripe-81++ Routing Registry. In Appendices C the "changed" object parameter defines a format of <email-address> YYMMDD, and similarly in Appendix D "withdrawn" object identifier has he format of YYMMDD. Since these are only identifiers there should be little operational impact. Some application software may need to be modified. RFC 1771 defines the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP). BGP does not have knowledge of absolute time, only relative time. There are five timers defined: Hold Timer, ConnectRetry Timer, KeepAlive Timer, MinRoueAdvertisementInterval and MinASOriginationInterval. There are no known issues regarding BGP and the millennium. In RFC 1584, which defines Multicast Extensions to OSPF, three timers are defined in section 8.2: IGMPPollingInterval, IGMPTimeout, and IGMP polling timer. Section 8.4 defines an age parameter for the local groups database and section 9.3 outlines how to implement that age parameter. It is not expected that any connections lifetime will be long enough to cause any issues with these timers. RFC 1583, OSPF, there are two types of timers defined in section 4.4, single-shot timers and interval timers. There are a number of timers defined in Section 9 including: HelloInterval, RouterDeadInterval, InfTransDelay, Hello Timer, Wait Timer and RxmtInterval. Section 10 also defines the Inactivity Timer. No millennium problem exists for any of these timers. RFC 1582 is an earlier version of RFC 2091. Section 7 documents the same timers as noted above, with the same lack of a millennium issue. RFC 1504 on Appletalk Update-Based Routing Protocol defines a 10- second period in Section 3, and hence has no relevant issues.
RFC 1479 which specifies IDPR Version 1, defines a timestamp field in section 1.5.1, which is a 32 bit unsigned integer number of seconds since January 1, 1970. The authors recognize the problem of timestamp exhaustion in 2038, but feel that the protocol will not be in use for that period. Sections 1.7, 2.1, and 4.3.1 also discuss the timestamp field. RFC 1478 on the IDPR Architecture, also discusses the same timestamp field in section 3.3.4. RFC 1477 again refers to the IDPR timestamp in section 4.2. Thus IDPR has no Year 2000 issue, but does have a period problem in the year 2038. RFC 1075 on Distance Vector Multicast Routing Protocol devotes section 7 to time values. None of the timers have any millennium issues. RFC 1074, on the NFSNET backbone SPF IGP defines several hardcoded timers values in section 5. RFC 1058 on RIP discusses the 30-second timers in section 3.3. There is no millennium issues related to RIP. RFC 995 on the Requirements for Internet Gateways has extensive discussions of timers in section 7.1 and throughout A.1 and A.2. None of these timers suffer from the millennium problem. RFC 911 on EGP on Berkeley Unix recommend timer values of 30 and 120 seconds. RFC 904 which defines the Exterior Gateway Protocol (EGP). There are a number of timers discussed in sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.4. None of these timers suffer from any relevant problems. RFCs 2103, 2092, 2073, 2072, 2042, 2008, 1998, 1997, 1992, 1966, 1955, 1940, 1930, 1925, 1923, 1863, 1817, 1812, 1793, 1787, 1774, 1773, 1772, 1765, 1753, 1745, 1723, 1722, 1721, 1716, 1702, 1701, 1668, 1656, 1655, 1654, 1587, 1586, 1585, 1581, 1520, 1519, 1517, 1482, 1476, 1439, 1403, 1397, 1388, 1387, 1383, 1380, 1371, 1370, 1364, 1338, 1322, 1268, 1267, 1266, 1265, 1264, 1254, 1246, 1245, 1222, 1195, 1164, 1163, 1142, 1136, 1133, 1126, 1125, 1124,1104, 1102, 1092, 1009, 985, 981, 975, 950, 898, 890, 888, 875, and 823 contain no date or time references.20. Security
20.1 Summary
The RFC's which were categorized into this group were kerberos authentication protocol, Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS), One Time Password System (OTP), Privacy Enhanced Mail (PEM), security extensions to a variety of protocols including (but not limited to) RIPv2, HTTP, MIME, PPP, IP, Telnet and FTP.
Encryption and authentication algorithms are also examined. RFC 1507 on Distributed Authentication Security Services (DASS) discusses time and secure time in an expository manner in Sections 1.2.2, 1.4.4 and 2.1. Section 3.6 defines absolute time as an UTC time with a precision of 1 second, and Section 4.1 discusses ANS.1 encoding of time values. Because of the imprecision of the UTC time definition there could be problems with this protocol. RFCs 1421-1424 specifies that PEM uses UTC time formats which could have a Millennium issue since the year specification only provides the last two digits of the year.20.2 Specifics
RFC 2082 on RIP-2 MD5 Authentication requires storage of security keys for a specified lifetime in sections 4.1 and 4.2. There are no millennium issues in this protocol. RFC 2078 on the GSSAPI Version 2 defines numerous calls that use timers for inputs and outputs. Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 2.1.5, 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.2.5 and 2.2.6 all use the lifetime_rec field, which is defined as an integer counter in seconds. There should be no relevant problems with this protocol. RFC 2069 on Digest Authentication for HTTP, defines a 'date' and a 1123 formats which is not subject to millennium issues. Section 3.2 discusses dates and times in the context of thwarting replay attacks, but have no relevant issues. RFC 2065 on DNS Security extensions first discusses time in section 2.3.3. The SIG RDATA format is defined in Section 4.1 discusses "time signed" field and defines it to be a 32 bit unsigned integer number of seconds since January 1, 1970. There will be a period problem in 2038 because of rollover. Section 4.5 on the file representations of SIG RRs specifies the time field is expressed as YYYYMMDDHHMMSS which is clearly Year 2000 compliant. RFC 2059 on RADIUS account formats defines a "time" attribute, which is optional which is a 32 bit unsigned integer number of seconds since January 1, 1970. Likewise RFC 2058 on RADIUS also defines this optional attribute in the same way. There will be a potential period problem that occurs on 2038. RFC 2035 on the Simple Public Key GSSAPI Mechanism talks about secure timestamps in the background and overview sections only in an expository manner.
RFC 1969 on the PPP DES Encryption Protocol uses time as an example in Section 4 when discussing how to encrypt the first packet of a stream. It is suggested that the first 32 bits be used for the number of seconds since January 1, 1970. There could thus be a potential operations problem in 2038. RFC 1898 on the CyberCash Credit Card Protocol provides an example message in Section 2.7 which uses a date field of the form YYYYMMDDHHMM that is clearly Y2K compliant. RFC 1510, which defines Kerberos Version 5, makes extensive use of times in the security model. There are discussions in the Introduction, as well as Sections 1.2, and 3.1.3. Kerberos uses ASN.1 definitions to abstract values, and hence defines a base definition for KerberosTime which is a generalized time format in Section 5.2. >From the text: "Example: The only valid format for UTC time 6 minutes, 27 seconds after 9 p.m. on 6 November 1985 is 19851106210627Z." A side note is that the MIT reference implementation of the Kerberos, by default set the expiration of tickets to December 31, 1999. This is not protocol related but could have some operational impacts. RFC 1509 on GSSAPI C-bindings makes a single reference that all counters are in seconds and assigned as 32 bit unsigned integers. Hence GSSAPI mechanisms may have problems in 2038. RFC 1507 on Distributed Authentication Security Services (DASS) discusses time and secure time in an expository manner in Sections 1.2.2, 1.4.4 and 2.1. Section 3.6 defines absolute time as an UTC time with a precision of 1 second, and Section 4.1 discusses ANS.1 encoding of time values. Because of the imprecision of the UTC time definition there could be problems with this protocol. RFC 1424 on PEM Part IV defines a self-signed certificate request in Section 3.1. The validity period start and end times are both suggested to be January 1, 1970. RFC 1422 on PEM Part II defines the validity period for a certificate in Section 3.3.6. It is recommended that UTC Time formats are used, and notes the lack of a century so that comparisons between different centuries must be done with care. No suggestions on how to do this are included. Sections 3.5.2 also discusses validity period in PEM CRLs. RFC 1421 on PEM Part I discusses validity periods in an expository way. PEM as a whole could have problems after December 31, 1999 based on its use of UTC Time. RFCs 1113, 1114, and 1115 specify the original version of PEM and have been obsoleted bye 1421, 1422, 1423, & 1424.
RFCs 2104, 2085, 2084, 2057, 2040, 2015, 1984, 1968, 1964, 1961, 1949, 1948, 1938, 1929, 1928, 1858, 1852, 1851, 1829, 1828, 1827, 1826, 1825, 1824, 1760, 1751, 1750, 1704, 1675, 1579, 1535, 1511, 1492, 1457, 1455, 1423, 1416, 1412, 1411, 1409, 1408, 1321, 1320, 1319, 1281, 1244, 1186, 1170, 1156, 1108, 1004, 972, 931, 927, 912, and 644 contain no date or time references.21. Virtual Terminal
21.1 Summary
The RFC's which were categorized into this group were Telnet and its many extensions, as well as the Secure SHell (SSH) protocol. The X window system was not considered since it is not an IETF protocol. Official acknowledgement by the trustee's of the X window system was given that they will examine the protocol. Unencrypted Telnet and TN3270 have both been found to be Year 2000 Compliant. The SSH protocols are also Year 2000 compliant. 21.2 Specifics RFC 1013 on the X Windows version 11 alpha protocol defines are 32 bit unsigned integer timestamp in Section 4. RFCs 2066, 1647, 1576, 1572, 1571, 1372, 1282, 1258, 1221, 1205, 1184, 1143, 1116, 1097, 1096, 1091, 1080, 1079, 1073, 1053, 1043, 1041, 1005, 946, 933, 930, 929, 907, 885, 884, 878, 861, 860, 859, 858, 857, 856, 855, 854, 851, 818, 802, 782, 779, 764, 749, 748, 747, 746, 736, 735, 734, 732, 731, 729, 728, 727, 726, 721, 719, 718, 701, 698, 658, 657, 656, 655, 654, 653, 652, 651, 647, 636, 431, 399, 393, 386, 365, 352, 340, 339, 328, 311, 297, 231, and 215 contain no date or time references. RFCs 703, 702, 688, 679, 669, 659, 600, 596, 595, 587, 563, 562, 560, 559, 513, 495, 470, 466, 461, 447, 435, 377, 364, 318, 296, 216, 206, 205, 177, 158, 139, 137, 110, 97 were unavailable.22. Other
22.1 Summary
This grouping was a hodge-podge of informational RFCs, April Fool's Jokes, IANA lists, and experimental RFCs. None were found to have any millennium issues.
22.2 Specifics
RFCs 2123, 2036, 2014, 2000, 1999, 1958, 1935, 1900, 1879, 1855, 1822, 1814, 1810, 1799, 1776, 1718, 1715, 1700, 1699, 1640, 1627, 1610, 1607, 1601, 1600, 1599, 1594, 1580, 1578, 1574, 1550, 1540, 1539, 1527, 1499, 1463, 1462, 1438, 1410, 1402, 1401, 1391, 1367, 1366, 1360, 1359, 1358, 1349, 1340, 1336, 1325, 1324, 1300, 1291, 1287, 1261, 1250, 1249, 1206, 1200, 1199, 1177, 1175, 1174, 1152, 1149, 1140, 1135, 1127, 1118, 1111, 1100, 1099, 1077, 1060, 1039, 1020, 1019, 999, 997, 992, 990, 980, 960, 945, 944, 943, 939, 909, 902, 900, 899, 873, 869, 846, 845, 844, 843, 842, 840, 839, 838, 837, 836, 835, 834, 833, 832, 831, 820, 817, 800, 776, 774, 770, 766, 762, 758, 755, 750, 745, 717, 637, 603, 602, 590, 581, 578, 529, 527, 526, 523, 519, 518, 496, 491, 432, 404, 403, 401, 372, 363, 356, 345, 330, 329, 327, 317, 316, 313, 295, 282, 263, 242, 239, 234, 232, 225, 223, 213, 209, 204, 198, 195, 173, 170, 169, 167, 154, 149, 148, 147, 140, 138, 132, 131, 130, 129, 126, 121, 112, 109, 107, 100, 95, 90, 68, 64, 57, 52, 51, 46, 43, 37, 27, 25, 21, 15, 10, and 9 were examined and none were found to have any date or time references, let alone millennium or Year 2000 issues.23. Security Considerations
Although this document does consider the implications of various security protocols, there is no need for additional security considerations. The effect of a potential year 2000 problem may cause some security problems, but those problems are more of specific applications rather than protocol deficiencies introduced in this document.24. References
Because of the exhaustive nature of this investigation, the reader is referred to the list of published RFC's available from the IETF Secretariat or the RFC Editor, rather than republishing them here.25. Editors' Address
Philip J. Nesser II Nesser & Nesser Consulting 13501 100th Ave N.E. Suite 5202 Kirkland, WA 98052 Phone: 425-481-4303 EMail: pjnesser@nesser.com pjnesser@martigny.ai.mit.edu
Appendix A: List of RFC's for each Area
The following list contains the RFC's grouped by area that were searched for year 2000 problems. Each line contains three fields are separated by '::'. The first filed is the RFC number, the second field is the type of RFC (S = Standard, DS = Draft Standard, PS = Proposed Standard, E = Experimental, H = Historical, I = Informational, BC = Best Current Practice, '' = No Type), and the third field is the Title.A.1 Autoconfiguration
1971:: PS:: IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration 1970:: PS:: Neighbor Discovery for IP Version 6 (IPv6) 1542:: PS:: Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol 1541:: PS:: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol 1534:: PS:: Interoperation Between DHCP and BOOTP 1533:: PS:: DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions 1532:: PS:: Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol 1531:: PS:: Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol 1497:: DS:: BOOTP Vendor Information Extensions 1395:: DS:: BOOTP Vendor Information Extensions 1084:: DS:: BOOTP vendor information extensions 1048:: DS:: BOOTP vendor information extensions 951:: DS:: Bootstrap Protocol 906:: :: Bootstrap loading using TFTPA.2 Directory Services
2120:: E :: Managing the X.500 Root Naming Context 2079:: PS:: Definition of X.500 Attribute Types and an Object Class to Hold Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) 1943:: I:: Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US 1914:: PS:: How to interact with a Whois++ mesh 1913:: PS:: Architecture of the Whois++ Index Service 1838:: E:: Use of the X.500 Directory to support mapping between X.400 and RFC 822 Addresses 1837:: E:: Representing Tables and Subtrees in the X.500 Directory 1836:: E:: Representing the O/R Address hierarchy in the X.500 Directory Information Tree 1835:: PS:: Architecture of the WHOIS++ service 1834:: I:: Whois and Network Information Lookup Service Whois++ 1781:: PS:: Using the OSI Directory to Achieve User Friendly Naming 1714:: I:: Referral Whois Protocol (RWhois) 1684:: I:: Introduction to White Pages services based on X.500 1637:: E:: DNS NSAP Resource Records 1632:: I:: A Revised Catalog of Available X.500 Implementations
1617:: I:: Naming and Structuring Guidelines for X.500 Directory Pilots 1609:: E:: Charting Networks in the X.500 Directory 1608:: E:: Representing IP Information in the X.500 Directory 1588:: I:: WHITE PAGES MEETING REPORT 1562:: I:: Naming Guidelines for the AARNet X.500 Directory Service 1491:: I:: A Survey of Advanced Usages of X.500 1488:: PS:: The X.500 String Representation of Standard Attribute Syntaxes 1487:: PS:: X.500 Lightweight Directory Access Protocol 1485:: PS:: A String Representation of Distinguished Names 1484:: E:: Using the OSI Directory to achieve User Friendly Naming 1430:: I:: A Strategic Plan for Deploying an Internet X.500 Directory Service 1400:: I:: Transition and Modernization of the Internet Registration Service 1384:: I:: Naming Guidelines for Directory Pilots 1355:: I:: Privacy and Accuracy Issues in Network Information Center Databases 1330:: I:: Recommendations for the Phase I Deployment of OSI Directory Services (X.500) and OSI Message Handling Services (X.400) within the ESnet Community 1309:: I:: Technical Overview of Directory Services Using the X.500 Protocol 1308:: I:: Executive Introduction to Directory Services Using the X.500 Protocol 1292:: I:: A Catalog of Available X.500 Implementations 1279:: :: X.500 and Domains 1276:: PS:: Replication and Distributed Operations extensions to provide an Internet Directory using X.500 1275:: I:: Replication Requirements to provide an Internet Directory using X.500 1274:: PS:: The COSINE and Internet X.500 Schema 1255:: I:: A Naming Scheme for c=US 1218:: :: A Naming Scheme for c=US 1202:: I:: Directory Assistance Service 1107:: :: Plan for Internet directory services 954:: DS:: NICNAME/WHOIS 953:: H:: Hostname Server 812:: :: NICNAME/WHOIS 756:: :: NIC name server - a datagram-based information utility 752:: :: Universal host table ============ ========================================================== Disk Sharing 1813:: I:: NFS Version 3 Protocol Specification 1094:: H:: NFS: Network File System Protocol specification ============ ========================================================== Games and Chat 1459:: E:: Internet Relay Chat Protocol
====================================================================== Information Services & File Transfer 2122:: PS:: VEMMI URL Specification 2070:: PS:: Internationalization of the Hypertext Markup Language 2068:: PS:: Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1 2056:: PS:: Uniform Resource Locators for Z39.50 2055:: I:: WebNFS Server Specification 2054:: I:: WebNFS Client Specification 2044:: I:: UTF-8, a transformation format of Unicode and ISO 10646 2016:: E:: Uniform Resource Agents (URAs) 1986:: E:: Experiments with a Simple File Transfer Protocol for Radio Links using Enhanced Trivial File Transfer Protocol (ETFTP) 1980:: I:: A Proposed Extension to HTML: Client-Side Image Maps 1960:: PS:: A String Representation of LDAP Search Filters 1959:: PS:: An LDAP URL Format 1945:: I:: Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.0 1942:: E:: HTML Tables 1874:: E:: SGML Media Types 1867:: E:: Form-based File Upload in HTML 1866:: PS:: Hypertext Markup Language - 2.0 1865:: I:: EDI Meets the Internet: Frequently Asked Questions about Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) on the Internet 1862:: I:: Report of the IAB Workshop on Internet Information Infrastructure, October 12-14, 1994 1843:: I:: HZ - A Data Format for Exchanging Files of Arbitrarily Mixed Chinese and ASCII characters 1842:: I:: ASCII Printable Characters-Based Chinese Character Encoding for Internet Messages 1823:: I:: The LDAP Application Program Interface 1815:: I:: Character Sets ISO-10646 and ISO-10646-J-1 1808:: PS:: Relative Uniform Resource Locators 1807:: I:: A Format for Bibliographic Records 1798:: PS:: Connection-less Lightweight Directory Access Protocol 1788:: E:: ICMP Domain Name Messages 1785:: I:: TFTP Option Negotiation Analysis 1784:: PS:: TFTP Timeout Interval and Transfer Size Options 1783:: PS:: TFTP Blocksize Option 1782:: PS:: TFTP Option Extension 1779:: DS:: A String Representation of Distinguished Names 1778:: DS:: The String Representation of Standard Attribute Syntaxes 1777:: DS:: Lightweight Directory Access Protocol 1766:: PS:: Tags for the Identification of Languages 1738:: PS:: Uniform Resource Locators (URL) 1737:: I:: Functional Requirements for Uniform Resource Names 1736:: I:: Functional Requirements for Internet Resource Locators 1729:: I:: Using the Z39.50 Information Retrieval Protocol in the Internet Environment
1728:: I:: Resource Transponders 1727:: I:: A Vision of an Integrated Internet Information Service 1639:: E:: FTP Operation Over Big Address Records (FOOBAR) 1633:: I:: Integrated Services in the Internet Architecture 1630:: I:: Universal Resource Identifiers in WWW 1625:: I:: WAIS over Z39.50-1988 1558:: I:: A String Representation of LDAP Search Filters 1554:: I:: ISO-2022-JP-2: Multilingual Extension of ISO-2022-JP 1545:: E:: FTP Operation Over Big Address Records (FOOBAR) 1530:: I:: Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain: General Principles and Policy 1529:: I:: Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain: Remote Printing -- Administrative Policies 1528:: E:: Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain: Remote Printing -- Technical Procedures 1489:: I:: Registration of a Cyrillic Character Set 1486:: E:: An Experiment in Remote Printing 1440:: E:: SIFT/UFT: Sender-Initiated/Unsolicited File Transfer 1436:: I:: The Internet Gopher Protocol (a distributed document search and retrieval protocol) 1415:: PS:: FTP-FTAM Gateway Specification 1413:: PS:: Identification Protocol 1350:: S:: THE TFTP PROTOCOL (REVISION 2) 1345:: I:: Character Mnemonics & Character Sets 1312:: E:: Message Send Protocol 1302:: I:: Building a Network Information Services Infrastructure 1288:: DS:: The Finger User Information Protocol 1278:: I:: A String Encoding of Presentation Address 1241:: E:: A Scheme for an Internet Encapsulation Protocol: Version 1 1235:: E:: The Coherent File Distribution Protocol 1196:: DS:: The Finger User Information Protocol 1194:: DS:: The Finger User Information Protocol 1179:: I:: Line Printer Daemon Protocol 1123:: S:: Requirements for Internet hosts - application and support 1068:: :: Background File Transfer Program BFTP 1037:: H:: NFILE - a file access protocol 1003:: :: Issues in defining an equations representation standard 998:: E:: NETBLT: A bulk data transfer protocol 978:: :: Voice File Interchange Protocol VFIP 971:: :: Survey of data representation standards 969:: :: NETBLT: A bulk data transfer protocol 965:: :: Format for a graphical communication protocol 959:: S:: File Transfer Protocol 949:: :: FTP unique-named store command 916:: H:: Reliable Asynchronous Transfer Protocol RATP 913:: H:: Simple File Transfer Protocol 887:: E:: Resource Location Protocol 866:: S:: Active users
865:: S:: Quote of the Day Protocol 864:: S:: Character Generator Protocol 863:: S:: Discard Protocol 862:: S:: Echo Protocol 797:: :: Format for Bitmap files 795:: :: Service mappings 783:: DS:: TFTP Protocol revision 2 775:: :: Directory oriented FTP commands 765:: :: File Transfer Protocol specification 751:: :: Survey of FTP mail and MLFL 743:: :: FTP extension: XRSQ/XRCP 742:: PS:: NAME/FINGER Protocol 740:: H:: NETRJS Protocol 737:: :: FTP extension: XSEN 725:: :: RJE protocol for a resource sharing network 722:: :: Thoughts on interactions in distributed services 712:: :: Distributed Capability Computing System DCCS 707:: :: High-level framework for network-based resource sharing 697:: :: CWD command of FTP 691:: :: One more try on the FTP 683:: :: FTPSRV - Tenex extension for paged files 662:: :: Performance improvement in ARPANET file transfers from Multics 640:: :: Revised FTP reply codes 633:: :: IMP/TIP preventive maintenance schedule 630:: :: FTP error code usage for more reliable mail service 624:: :: Comments on the File Transfer Protocol 622:: :: Scheduling IMP/TIP down time 614:: :: Response to RFC 607: "Comments on the File Transfer Protocol" 610:: :: Further datalanguage design concepts 607:: :: Comments on the File Transfer Protocol 599:: :: Update on NETRJS 593:: :: Telnet and FTP implementation schedule change 592:: :: Some thoughts on system design to facilitate resource sharing 589:: :: CCN NETRJS server messages to remote user 573:: :: Data and file transfer: Some measurement results 571:: :: Tenex FTP problem 570:: :: Experimental input mapping between NVT ASCII and UCSB On Line System 553:: :: Draft design for a text/graphics protocol 551:: :: [Letter from Feinroth re: NYU, ANL, and LBL entering the net, and FTP protocol] 549:: :: Minutes of Network Graphics Group meeting, 15-17 July 1973 543:: :: Network journal submission and delivery 542:: :: File Transfer Protocol
535:: :: Comments on File Access Protocol 532:: :: UCSD-CC Server-FTP facility 525:: :: MIT-MATHLAB meets UCSB-OLS -an example of resource sharing 520:: :: Memo to FTP group: Proposal for File Access Protocol 514:: :: Network make-work 506:: :: FTP command naming problem 505:: :: Two solutions to a file transfer access problem 504:: :: Distributed resources workshop announcement 501:: :: Un-muddling "free file transfer" 499:: :: Harvard's network RJE 493:: :: E.W., Jr Graphics Protocol 490:: :: Surrogate RJS for UCLA-CCN 487:: :: Free file transfer 486:: :: Data transfer revisited 485:: :: MIX and MIXAL at UCSB 480:: :: Host-dependent FTP parameters 479:: :: Use of FTP by the NIC Journal 478:: :: FTP server-server interaction - II 477:: :: Remote Job Service at UCSB 472:: :: Illinois' reply to Maxwell's request for graphics information NIC 14925 468:: :: FTP data compression 467:: :: Proposed change to Host-Host Protocol:Resynchronization of connection status 463:: :: FTP comments and response to RFC 430 454:: :: File Transfer Protocol - meeting announcement and a new proposed document 451:: :: Tentative proposal for a Unified User Level Protocol 448:: :: Print files in FTP 446:: :: Proposal to consider a network program resource notebook 438:: :: FTP server-server interaction 437:: :: Data Reconfiguration Service at UCSB 436:: :: Announcement of RJS at UCSB 430:: :: Comments on File Transfer Protocol 429:: :: Character generator process 418:: :: Server file transfer under TSS/360 at NASA Ames 414:: :: File Transfer Protocol FTP status and further comments 412:: :: User FTP documentation 411:: :: New MULTICS network software features 410:: :: Removal of the 30-second delay when hosts come up 409:: :: Tenex interface to UCSB's Simple-Minded File System 407:: H:: Remote Job Entry Protocol 406:: :: Scheduled IMP software releases 396:: :: Network Graphics Working Group meeting - second iteration 387:: :: Some experiences in implementing Network Graphics Protocol Level 0 385:: :: Comments on the File Transfer Protocol 382:: :: Mathematical software on the ARPA Network
374:: :: IMP system announcement 373:: :: Arbitrary character sets 368:: :: Comments on "Proposed Remote Job Entry Protocol" 367:: :: Network host status 366:: :: Network host status 361:: :: Deamon processes on host 106 360:: :: Proposed Remote Job Entry Protocol 354:: :: File Transfer Protocol 351:: :: Graphics information form for the ARPANET graphics resources notebook 342:: :: Network host status 338:: :: EBCDIC/ASCII mapping for network RJE 336:: :: Level 0 Graphic Input Protocol 335:: :: New interface - IMP/360 332:: :: Network host status 325:: :: Network Remote Job Entry program - NETRJS 324:: :: RJE Protocol meeting 314:: :: Network Graphics Working Group meeting 310:: :: Another look at Data and File Transfer Protocols 309:: :: Data and File Transfer workshop announcement 307:: :: Using network Remote Job Entry 306:: :: Network host status 299:: :: Information management system 298:: :: Network host status 294:: :: On the use of "set data type" transaction in File Transfer Protocol 293:: :: Network host status 292:: :: E.W., Jr Graphics Protocol: Level 0 only 288:: :: Network host status 287:: :: Status of network hosts 286:: :: Network library information system 285:: :: Network graphics 283:: :: NETRJT: Remote Job Service Protocol for TIPS 281:: :: Suggested addition to File Transfer Protocol 268:: :: Graphics facilities information 267:: :: Network host status 266:: :: Network host status 265:: :: File Transfer Protocol 264:: :: Data Transfer Protocol 255:: :: Status of network hosts 252:: :: Network host status 250:: :: Some thoughts on file transfer 238:: :: Comments on DTP and FTP proposals 217:: :: Specifications changes for OLS, RJE/RJOR, and SMFS 199:: :: Suggestions for a network data-tablet graphics protocol 192:: :: Some factors which a Network Graphics Protocol must consider 191:: :: Graphics implementation and conceptualization at
Augmentation Research Center 189:: :: Interim NETRJS specifications 184:: :: Proposed graphic display modes 183:: :: EBCDIC codes and their mapping to ASCII 181:: :: Modifications to RFC 177 174:: :: UCLA - computer science graphics overview 172:: :: File Transfer Protocol 163:: :: Data transfer protocols 141:: :: Comments on RFC 114: A File Transfer Protocol 134:: :: Network Graphics meeting 133:: :: File transfer and recovery 125:: :: Response to RFC 86: Proposal for network standard format for a graphics data stream 114:: :: File Transfer Protocol 105:: :: Network specifications for Remote Job Entry and Remote Job Output Retrieval at UCSB 98:: :: Logger Protocol proposal 94:: :: Some thoughts on network graphics 88:: :: NETRJS: A third level protocol for Remote JobEntry 86:: :: Proposal for a network standard format for a data stream to control graphics display 83:: :: Language-machine for data reconfiguration ========== ============================================================ Internet & Network Layer 2126:: PS:: ISO Transport Service on top of TCP (ITOT) 2125:: PS:: The PPP Bandwidth Allocation Protocol (BAP) The PPP Bandwidth Allocation Control Protocol (BACP) 2118:: I:: Microsoft Point-To-Point Compression (MPPC) Protocol 2114:: I:: Data Link Switching Client Access Protocol 2113:: PS:: IP Router Alert Option 2107:: I:: Ascend Tunnel Management Protocol - ATMP 2106:: I:: Data Link Switching Remote Access Protocol 2105:: I:: Cisco Systems' Tag Switching Architecture Overview 2098:: I:: Toshiba's Router Architecture Extensions for ATM:Overview 2097:: PS:: The PPP NetBIOS Frames Control Protocol (NBFCP) 2075:: I:: IP Echo Host Service 2067:: DS:: IP over HIPPI 2043:: PS:: The PPP SNA Control Protocol (SNACP) 2023:: PS:: IP Version 6 over PPP 2019:: PS:: Transmission of IPv6 Packets Over FDDI 2018:: PS:: TCP Selective Acknowledgment Options 2009:: E:: GPS-Based Addressing and Routing 2005:: PS:: Applicability Statement for IP Mobility Support 2004:: PS:: Minimal Encapsulation within IP 2003:: PS:: IP Encapsulation within IP 2002:: PS:: IP Mobility Support 2001:: PS:: TCP Slow Start, Congestion Avoidance, Fast Retransmit, and Fast Recovery Algorithms
1994:: DS:: PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication Protocol (CHAP) 1993:: I:: PPP Gandalf FZA Compression Protocol 1990:: DS:: The PPP Multilink Protocol (MP) 1989:: DS:: PPP Link Quality Monitoring 1981:: PS:: Path MTU Discovery for IP version 6 1979:: I:: PPP Deflate Protocol 1978:: I:: PPP Predictor Compression Protocol 1977:: I:: PPP BSD Compression Protocol 1976:: I:: PPP for Data Compression in Data Circuit-Terminating Equipment (DCE) 1975:: I:: PPP Magnalink Variable Resource Compression 1974:: I:: PPP Stac LZS Compression Protocol 1973:: PS:: PPP in Frame Relay 1972:: PS:: A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks 1967:: I:: PPP LZS-DCP Compression Protocol (LZS-DCP) 1963:: I:: PPP Serial Data Transport Protocol (SDTP) 1962:: PS:: The PPP Compression Control Protocol (CCP) 1954:: I:: Transmission of Flow Labelled IPv4 on ATM Data Links Ipsilon Version 1.0 1946:: I:: Native ATM Support for ST2+ 1937:: I:: Local/Remote Forwarding Decision in Switched Data Link Subnetworks 1936:: I:: Implementing the Internet Checksum in Hardware 1934:: I:: Ascend's Multilink Protocol Plus (MP+) 1933:: PS:: Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers 1932:: I:: IP over ATM: A Framework Document 1931:: I:: Dynamic RARP Extensions and Administrative Support for Automatic Network Address Allocation 1926:: I:: An Experimental Encapsulation of IP Datagrams on Top of ATM 1924:: I:: A Compact Representation of IPv6 Addresses 1919:: I:: Classical versus Transparent IP Proxies 1918:: BC:: Address Allocation for Private Internets 1917:: BC:: An Appeal to the Internet Community to Return Unused IP Networks (Prefixes) to the IANA 1916:: I:: Enterprise Renumbering 1915:: BC:: Variance for The PPP Connection Control Protocol and The PPP Encryption Control Protocol 1897:: E:: IPv6 Testing Address Allocation 1888:: E:: OSI NSAPs and IPv6 1887:: I:: An Architecture for IPv6 Unicast Address Allocation 1885:: PS:: Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) 1884:: PS:: IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture 1883:: PS:: Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification 1881:: I:: IPv6 Address Allocation Management 1878:: I:: Variable Length Subnet Table For IPv4
1877:: I:: PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol Extensions for Name Server Addresses 1868:: E:: ARP Extension - UNARP 1860:: I:: Variable Length Subnet Table For IPv4 1859:: I:: ISO Transport Class 2 Non-use of Explicit Flow Control over TCP RFC1006 extension 1853:: I:: IP in IP Tunneling 1841:: I:: PPP Network Control Protocol for LAN Extension 1833:: PS:: Binding Protocols for ONC RPC Version 2 1832:: PS:: XDR 1831:: PS:: RPC 1809:: I:: Using the Flow Label Field in IPv6 1795:: I:: Data Link Switching 1791:: E:: TCP And UDP Over IPX Networks With Fixed Path MTU 1770:: I:: IPv4 Option for Sender Directed Multi-Destination Delivery 1764:: PS:: The PPP XNS IDP Control Protocol (XNSCP) 1763:: PS:: The PPP Banyan Vines Control Protocol (BVCP) 1762:: DS:: The PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol (DNCP) 1761:: I:: Snoop Version 2 Packet Capture File Format 1756:: E:: REMOTE WRITE PROTOCOL - VERSION 1.0 1755:: PS:: ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM 1754:: I:: IP over ATM Working Group's Recommendations for the ATM Forum's Multiprotocol BOF Version 1 1752:: PS:: The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation Protocol 1744:: I:: Observations on the Management of the Internet Address Space 1735:: E:: NBMA Address Resolution Protocol (NARP) 1726:: I:: Technical Criteria for Choosing IP 1719:: I:: A Direction for IPng 1717:: PS:: The PPP Multilink Protocol (MP) 1710:: I:: Simple Internet Protocol Plus White Paper 1707:: I:: CATNIP 1705:: I:: Six Virtual Inches to the Left 1698:: I:: Octet Sequences for Upper-Layer OSI to Support Basic Communications Applications 1693:: E:: An Extension to TCP 1692:: PS:: Transport Multiplexing Protocol (TMux) 1688:: I:: IPng Mobility Considerations 1687:: I:: A Large Corporate User's View of IPng 1686:: I:: IPng Requirements 1683:: I:: Multiprotocol Interoperability In IPng 1682:: I:: IPng BSD Host Implementation Analysis 1681:: I:: On Many Addresses per Host 1680:: I:: IPng Support for ATM Services 1679:: I:: HPN Working Group Input to the IPng Requirements Solicitation 1678:: I:: IPng Requirements of Large Corporate Networks 1677:: I:: Tactical Radio Frequency Communication Requirements
for IPng 1676:: I:: INFN Requirements for an IPng 1674:: I:: A Cellular Industry View of IPng 1673:: I:: Electric Power Research Institute Comments on IPng 1672:: I:: Accounting Requirements for IPng 1671:: I:: IPng White Paper on Transition and Other Considerations 1670:: I:: Input to IPng Engineering Considerations 1669:: I:: Market Viability as a IPng Criteria 1667:: I:: Modeling and Simulation Requirements for IPng 1663:: PS:: PPP Reliable Transmission 1662:: S:: PPP in HDLC-like Framing 1661:: S:: The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) 1644:: E:: T/TCP -- TCP Extensions for Transactions Functional Specification 1638:: PS:: PPP Bridging Control Protocol (BCP) 1634:: I:: Novell IPX Over Various WAN Media (IPXWAN) 1631:: I:: The IP Network Address Translator (Nat) 1629:: DS:: Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation in the Internet 1626:: PS:: Default IP MTU for use over ATM AAL5 1624:: I:: Computation of the Internet Checksum via Incremental Update 1622:: I:: Pip Header Processing 1621:: I:: Pip Near-term Architecture 1620:: I:: Internet Architecture Extensions for Shared Media 1619:: PS:: PPP over SONET/SDH 1618:: PS:: PPP over ISDN 1613:: I:: cisco Systems X.25 over TCP (XOT) 1605:: I:: SONET to Sonnet Translation 1604:: PS:: Definitions of Managed Objects for Frame Relay Service 1598:: PS:: PPP in X.25 1590:: I:: Media Type Registration Procedure 1577:: PS:: Classical IP and ARP over ATM 1575:: DS:: An Echo Function for CLNP (ISO 8473) 1570:: PS:: PPP LCP Extensions 1561:: E:: Use of ISO CLNP in TUBA Environments 1560:: I:: The MultiProtocol Internet 1553:: PS:: Compressing IPX Headers Over WAN Media (CIPX) 1552:: PS:: The PPP Internetwork Packet Exchange Control Protocol (IPXCP) 1551:: I:: Novell IPX Over Various WAN Media (IPXWAN) 1549:: DS:: PPP in HDLC Framing 1548:: DS:: The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) 1547:: I:: Requirements for an Internet Standard Point-to-Point Protocol 1538:: I:: Advanced SNA/IP 1526:: I:: Assignment of System Identifiers for TUBA/CLNP Hosts 1518:: PS:: An Architecture for IP Address Allocation with CIDR 1498:: I:: On the Naming and Binding of Network Destinations
1490:: DS:: Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame Relay 1483:: PS:: Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM Adaptation Layer 5 1475:: E:: TP/IX 1466:: I:: Guidelines for Management of IP Address Space 1454:: I:: Comparison of Proposals for Next Version of IP 1435:: I:: IESG Advice from Experience with Path MTU Discovery 1434:: I:: Data Link Switching 1433:: E:: Directed ARP 1393:: E:: Traceroute Using an IP Option 1390:: S:: Transmission of IP and ARP over FDDI Networks 1385:: I:: EIP 1379:: I:: Extending TCP for Transactions -- Concepts 1378:: PS:: The PPP AppleTalk Control Protocol (ATCP) 1377:: PS:: The PPP OSI Network Layer Control Protocol (OSINLCP) 1376:: PS:: The PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol (DNCP) 1375:: I:: Suggestion for New Classes of IP Addresses 1374:: PS:: IP and ARP on HIPPI 1365:: I:: An IP Address Extension Proposal 1363:: E:: A Proposed Flow Specification 1362:: I:: Novell IPX Over Various WAN Media (IPXWAN) 1356:: PS:: Multiprotocol Interconnect on X.25 and ISDN in the Packet Mode 1347:: I:: TCP and UDP with Bigger Addresses (TUBA), A Simple Proposal for Internet Addressing and Routing 1337:: I:: TIME-WAIT Assassination Hazards in TCP 1335:: :: A Two-Tier Address Structure for the Internet 1334:: PS:: PPP Authentication Protocols 1333:: PS:: PPP Link Quality Monitoring 1332:: PS:: The PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol (IPCP) 1331:: PS:: The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) for the Transmission of Multi-protocol Datagrams over Point-to-Point Links 1329:: I:: Thoughts on Address Resolution for Dual MAC FDDI Networks 1326:: I:: Mutual Encapsulation Considered Dangerous 1323:: PS:: TCP Extensions for High Performance 1314:: PS:: A File Format for the Exchange of Images in the Internet 1307:: E:: Dynamically Switched Link Control Protocol 1306:: I:: Experiences Supporting By-Request Circuit-Switched T3 Networks 1294:: PS:: Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame Relay 1293:: PS:: Inverse Address Resolution Protocol 1277:: PS:: Encoding Network Addresses to Support Operation Over Non-OSI Lower Layers 1263:: I:: TCP Extensions Considered Harmful 1256:: PS:: ICMP Router Discovery Messages 1240:: PS:: OSI Connectionless Transport Services on top of UDP 1237:: PS:: Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation in the Internet 1236:: :: IP to X.121 Address Mapping for DDN 1234:: PS:: Tunneling IPX Traffic through IP Networks
1226:: E:: Internet Protocol Encapsulation of AX.25 Frames 1223:: :: OSI CLNS and LLC1 Protocols on Network Systems HYPERchannel 1220:: PS:: Point-to-Point Protocol Extensions for Bridging 1219:: :: On the Assignment of Subnet Numbers 1210:: :: Network and Infrastructure User Requirements for Transatlantic Research Collaboration - Brussels, July 16-18, and Washington July 24-25, 1990 1209:: DS:: The Transmission of IP Datagrams over the SMDS Service 1201:: H:: Transmitting IP Traffic over ARCNET Networks 1191:: DS:: Path MTU Discovery 1188:: DS:: A Proposed Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams over FDDI Networks 1185:: E:: TCP Extension for High-Speed Paths 1172:: PS:: The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) Initial Configuration Options 1171:: DS:: The Point-to-Point Protocol for the Transmission of Multi-Protocol Datagrams Over Point-to-Point Links 1166:: :: Internet Numbers 1162:: :: Connectionless Network Protocol (ISO 8473) and End System to Intermediate System (ISO 9542) Management Information Base 1151:: E:: Version 2 of the Reliable Data Protocol (RDP) 1146:: E:: TCP Alternate Checksum Options 1145:: E:: TCP Alternate Checksum Options 1144:: PS:: Compressing TCP/IP headers for low-speed serial links 1141:: :: Incremental Updating of the Internet Checksum 1139:: PS:: Echo function for ISO 8473 1134:: PS:: Point-to-Point Protocol 1132:: S:: Standard for the transmission of 802.2 packets over IPX networks 1122:: S:: Requirements for Internet hosts - communication layers 1110:: :: Problem with the TCP big window option 1106:: :: TCP big window and NAK options 1103:: PS:: Proposed standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over FDDI Networks 1088:: S:: Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over NetBIOS networks 1086:: :: ISO-TP0 bridge between TCP and X.25 1085:: :: ISO presentation services on top of TCP/IP based internets 1078:: :: TCP port service Multiplexer TCPMUX 1072:: E:: TCP extensions for long-delay paths 1071:: :: Computing the Internet checksum 1070:: :: Use of the Internet as a subnetwork for experimentation with the OSI network layer 1069:: :: Guidelines for the use of Internet-IP addressesin the ISO Connectionless-Mode Network Protocol 1063:: :: IP MTU Discovery options 1062:: :: Internet numbers
1057:: I:: RPC 1055:: S:: Nonstandard for transmission of IP datagrams over serial lines 1051:: S:: Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams and ARP packets over ARCNET networks 1050:: H:: RPC 1046:: :: Queuing algorithm to provide type-of-service for IP links 1045:: E:: VMTP 1044:: S:: Internet Protocol on Network System's HYPERchannel 1042:: S:: Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over IEEE 802 networks 1030:: :: On testing the NETBLT Protocol over divers networks 1029:: :: More fault tolerant approach to address resolution for a Multi-LAN system of Ethernets 1027:: :: Using ARP to implement transparent subnet gateways 1025:: :: TCP and IP bake off 1016:: :: Something a host could do with source quench 1008:: :: Implementation guide for the ISO Transport Protocol 1007:: :: Military supplement to the ISO Transport Protocol 1006:: S:: ISO transport services on top of the TCP 1002:: S:: Protocol standard for a NetBIOS service on a TCP/UDP transport 1001:: S:: Protocol standard for a NetBIOS service on a TCP/UDP transport 994:: :: Final text of DIS 8473,Protocol for Providing the Connectionless-mode Network Service 986:: :: Guidelines for the use of Internet-IP addressesin the ISO Connectionless-Mode Network Protocol [Working draft] 983:: :: ISO transport arrives on top of the TCP 982:: :: Guidelines for the specification of the structure of the Domain Specific Part DSP of the ISO standard NSAP address 970:: :: On packet switches with infinite storage 964:: :: Some problems with the specification of the Military Standard Transmission Control Protocol 963:: :: Some problems with the specification of the Military Standard Internet Protocol 962:: :: TCP-4 prime 955:: :: Towards a transport service for transaction processing applications 948:: :: Two methods for the transmission of IP datagrams over IEEE 802.3 networks 942:: :: Transport protocols for Department of Defense data networks 941:: :: Addendum to the networkservice definition covering network layer addressing 940:: :: Toward an Internet standard scheme for subnetting 936:: :: Another Internet subnet addressing scheme 935:: :: Reliable link layer protocols
932:: :: Subnetwork addressing scheme 926:: :: Protocol for providing the connectionless mode network services 925:: :: Multi-LAN address resolution 924:: :: Official ARPA-Internet protocols for connecting personal computers to the Internet 922:: S:: Broadcasting Internet datagrams in the presence of subnets 919:: S:: Broadcasting Internet datagrams 917:: :: Internet subnets 914:: H:: Thinwire protocol for connecting personal computers to the Internet 905:: :: ISO Transport Protocol specification ISO DP 8073 903:: S:: Reverse Address Resolution Protocol 896:: :: Congestion control in IP/TCP internetworks 895:: S:: Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over experimental Ethernet networks 894:: S:: Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over Ethernet networks 893:: :: Trailer encapsulations 892:: :: ISO Transport Protocol specification [Draft] 891:: S:: DCN local-network protocols 889:: :: Internet delay experiments 879:: :: TCP maximum segment size and related topics 877:: S:: Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over public data networks 874:: :: Critique of X.25 872:: :: TCP-on-a-LAN 871:: :: Perspective on the ARPANET reference model 848:: :: Who provides the "little" TCP services? 829:: :: Packet satellite technology reference sources 826:: S:: Ethernet Address Resolution Protocol 824:: :: CRONUS Virtual Local Network 815:: :: IP datagram reassembly algorithms 814:: :: Name, addresses, ports, and routes 813:: :: Window and acknowlegement strategy in TCP 801:: :: NCP/TCP transition plan 793:: S:: Transmission Control Protocol 792:: S:: Internet Control Message Protocol 791:: S:: Internet Protocol 789:: :: Vulnerabilities of network control protocols 787:: :: Connectionless data transmission survey/tutorial 781:: :: Specification of the Internet Protocol IP timestamp option 777:: :: Internet Control Message Protocol 768:: S:: User Datagram Protocol 761:: :: DOD Standard Transmission Control Protocol 760:: :: DoD standard Internet Protocol 759:: H:: Internet Message Protocol 730:: :: Extensible field addressing
704:: :: IMP/Host and Host/IMP Protocol change 696:: :: Comments on the IMP/Host and Host/IMP Protocol changes 695:: :: Official change in Host-Host Protocol 692:: :: Comments on IMP/Host Protocol changes RFCs 687 and 690 690:: :: Comments on the proposed Host/IMP Protocol changes 689:: :: Tenex NCP finite state machine for connections 687:: :: IMP/Host and Host/IMP Protocol changes 685:: :: Response time in cross network debugging 680:: :: Message Transmission Protocol 675:: :: Specification of Internet Transmission Control Program 674:: :: Procedure call documents - version 2 660:: :: Some changes to the IMP and the IMP/Host interface 632:: :: Throughput degradations for single packet messages 626:: :: On a possible lockup condition in IMP subnet due to message sequencing 613:: :: Network connectivity 611:: :: Two changes to the IMP/Host Protocol to improve user/network communications 594:: :: Speedup of Host-IMP interface 591:: :: Addition to the Very Distant Host specifications 576:: :: Proposal for modifying linking 550:: :: NIC NCP experiment 548:: :: Hosts using the IMP Going Down message 528:: :: Software checksumming in the IMP and network reliability 521:: :: Restricted use of IMP DDT 489:: :: Comment on resynchronization of connection status proposal 488:: :: NLS classes at network sites 476:: :: IMP/TIP memory retrofit schedule rev. 2 473:: :: MIX and MIXAL? 460:: :: NCP survey 459:: :: Network questionnaires 450:: :: MULTICS sampling timeout change 449:: :: Current flow-control scheme for IMPSYS 445:: :: IMP/TIP preventive maintenance schedule 442:: :: Current flow-control scheme for IMPSYS 434:: :: IMP/TIP memory retrofit schedule 426:: :: Reconnection Protocol 417:: :: Link usage violation 398:: :: ICP sockets 395:: :: Switch settings on IMPs and TIPs 394:: :: Two proposed changes to the IMP-Host Protocol 359:: :: Status of the release of the new IMP System 357:: :: Echoing strategy for satellite links 348:: :: Discard process 347:: :: Echo process 346:: :: Satellite considerations 343:: :: IMP System change notification 312:: :: Proposed change in IMP-to-Host Protocol
301:: :: BBN IMP #5 and NCC schedule March 4, 1971 300:: :: ARPA Network mailing lists 271:: :: IMP System change notifications 241:: :: Connecting computers to MLC ports 210:: :: Improvement of flow control 203:: :: Achieving reliable communication 202:: :: Possible deadlock in ICP 197:: :: Initial Connection Protocol - Reviewed 190:: :: DEC PDP-10-IMLAC communications system 178:: :: Network graphic attention handling 176:: :: Comments on "Byte size for connections" 175:: :: Comments on "Socket conventions reconsidered" 166:: :: Data Reconfiguration Service 165:: :: Proffered official Initial Connection Protocol 161:: :: Solution to the race condition in the ICP 151:: :: Comments on a proffered official ICP 150:: :: Use of IPC facilities 146:: :: Views on issues relevant to data sharing on computer networks 145:: :: Initial Connection Protocol control commands 143:: :: Regarding proffered official ICP 142:: :: Time-out mechanism in the Host-Host Protocol 128:: :: Bytes 127:: :: Comments on RFC 123 123:: :: Proffered official ICP 122:: :: Network specifications for UCSB's Simple-Minded File System 93:: :: Initial Connection Protocol 91:: :: Proposed User-User Protocol 80:: :: Protocols and data formats 79:: :: Logger Protocol error 70:: :: Note on padding 67:: :: Proposed change to Host/IMP spec to eliminate marking 65:: :: Comments on Host/Host Protocol document #1 62:: :: Systems for interprocess communication in a resource sharing computer network 60:: :: Simplified NCP Protocol 59:: :: Flow control - fixed versus demand allocation 56:: :: Third level protocol 55:: :: Prototypical implementation of the NCP 54:: :: Official protocol proffering 53:: :: Official protocol mechanism 41:: :: IMP-IMP teletype communication 38:: :: Comments on network protocol from NWG/RFC #36 33:: :: New Host-Host Protocol 23:: :: Transmission of multiple control messages 22:: :: Host-host control message formats 20:: :: ASCII format for network interchange
19:: :: Two protocol suggestions to reduce congestion at swap bound nodes 17:: :: Some questions re 12:: :: IMP-Host interface flow diagrams ===================================================================== Mail 2112:: PS:: The MIME Multipart/Related Content-type 2111:: PS:: Content-ID and Message-ID Uniform Resource Locators 2110:: PS:: MIME E-mail Encapsulation of Aggregate Documents, such as HTML (MHTML) 2109:: PS:: HTTP State Management Mechanism 2095:: PS:: IMAP/POP AUTHorize Extension for Simple Challenge/Response 2088:: PS:: IMAP4 non-synchroniziong literals 2087:: PS:: IMAP4 QUOTA extension 2086:: PS:: IMAP4 ACL extension 2077:: PS:: The Model Primary Content Type for Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions 2076:: I:: Common Internet Message Headers 2062:: I:: Internet Message Access Protocol - Obsolete Syntax 2061:: I:: IMAP4 COMPATIBILITY WITH IMAP2BIS 2060:: PS:: INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - VERSION 4rev1 2049:: DS:: Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Five 2048:: BC:: Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four 2047:: DS:: MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part Three 2046:: DS:: Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two 2045:: DS:: Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One 2034:: PS:: SMTP Service Extension for Returning Enhanced Error Codes 2033:: I:: Local Mail Transfer Protocol 2017:: PS:: Definition of the URL MIME External-Body Access-Type 1991:: I:: PGP Message Exchange Formats 1985:: PS:: SMTP Service Extension for Remote Message Queue Starting 1957:: I:: Some Observations on Implementations of the Post Office Protocol (POP3) 1947:: I:: Greek Character Encoding for Electronic Mail Messages 1939:: S:: Post Office Protocol - Version 3 1927:: I:: Suggested Additional MIME Types for Associating Documents 1922:: I:: Chinese Character Encoding for Internet Messages 1911:: E:: Voice Profile for Internet Mail 1896:: I:: The text/enriched MIME Content-type 1895:: I:: The Application/CALS-1840 Content-type 1894:: PS:: An Extensible Message Format for Delivery Status Notifications 1893:: PS:: Enhanced Mail System Status Codes 1892:: PS:: The Multipart/Report Content Type for the Reporting of Mail System Administrative Messages 1891:: PS:: SMTP Service Extension for Delivery Status Notifications 1873:: E:: Message/External-Body Content-ID Access Type 1872:: E:: The MIME Multipart/Related Content-type
1870:: S:: SMTP Service Extension for Message Size Declaration 1869:: S:: SMTP Service Extensions 1864:: DS:: The Content-MD5 Header Field 1854:: PS:: SMTP Service Extension for Command Pipelining 1848:: PS:: MIME Object Security Services 1847:: PS:: Security Multiparts for MIME 1846:: E:: SMTP 521 reply code 1845:: E:: SMTP Service Extension for Checkpoint/Restart 1844:: I:: Multimedia E-mail (MIME) User Agent checklist 1830:: E:: SMTP Service Extensions for Transmission of Large and Binary MIME Messages 1820:: I:: Multimedia E-mail (MIME) User Agent Checklist 1806:: E:: Communicating Presentation Information in Internet Messages 1804:: E:: Schema Publishing in X.500 Directory 1803:: I:: Recommendations for an X.500 Production Directory Service 1801:: E:: MHS use of the X.500 Directory to support MHS Routing 1767:: PS:: MIME Encapsulation of EDI Objects 1741:: I:: MIME Content Type for BinHex Encoded Files 1740:: PS:: MIME Encapsulation of Macintosh files - MacMIME 1734:: PS:: POP3 AUTHentication command 1733:: I:: DISTRIBUTED ELECTRONIC MAIL MODELS IN IMAP4 1732:: I:: IMAP4 COMPATIBILITY WITH IMAP2 AND IMAP2BIS 1731:: PS:: IMAP4 Authentication mechanisms 1730:: PS:: INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - VERSION 4 1725:: DS:: Post Office Protocol - Version 3 1711:: I:: Classifications in E-mail Routing 1685:: I:: Writing X.400 O/R Names 1653:: DS:: SMTP Service Extension for Message Size Declaration 1652:: DS:: SMTP Service Extension for 8bit-MIMEtransport 1651:: DS:: SMTP Service Extensions 1649:: I:: Operational Requirements for X.400 Management Domains in the GO-MHS Community 1648:: PS:: Postmaster Convention for X.400 Operations 1642:: E:: UTF-7 - A Mail-Safe Transformation Format of Unicode 1641:: E:: Using Unicode with MIME 1616:: I:: X.400(1988) for the Academic and Research Community in Europe 1615:: I:: Migrating from X.400(84) to X.400(88) 1563:: I:: The text/enriched MIME Content-type 1557:: I:: Korean Character Encoding for Internet Messages 1556:: I:: Handling of Bi-directional Texts in MIME 1555:: I:: Hebrew Character Encoding for Internet Messages 1544:: PS:: The Content-MD5 Header Field 1524:: I:: A User Agent Configuration Mechanism For Multimedia Mail Format Information 1523:: I:: The text/enriched MIME Content-type 1522:: DS:: MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part Two
1521:: DS:: MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part One 1506:: I:: A tutorial on gatewaying between X.400 and Internet mail 1505:: E:: Encoding Header Field for Internet Messages 1502:: PS:: X.400 Use of Extended Character Sets 1496:: PS:: Rules for downgrading messages from X.400/88 to X.400/84 when MIME content-types are present in the messages 1495:: PS:: Mapping between X.400 and RFC-822 Message Bodies 1494:: PS:: Equivalences between 1988 X.400 and RFC-822 Message Bodies 1468:: I:: Japanese Character Encoding for Internet Messages 1465:: E:: Routing coordination for X.400 MHS services within a multi protocol / multi network environment Table Format V3 for static routing 1460:: DS:: Post Office Protocol - Version 3 1456:: I:: Conventions for Encoding the Vietnamese Language VISCII 1437:: I:: The Extension of MIME Content-Types to a New Medium 1429:: I:: Listserv Distribute Protocol 1428:: I:: Transition of Internet Mail from Just-Send-8 to 8Bit-SMTP/MIME 1427:: PS:: SMTP Service Extension for Message Size Declaration 1426:: PS:: SMTP Service Extension for 8bit-MIMEtransport 1425:: PS:: SMTP Service Extensions 1405:: E:: Mapping between X.400(1984/1988) and Mail-11 (DECnet mail) 1357:: I:: A Format for E-mailing Bibliographic Records 1344:: I:: Implications of MIME for Internet Mail Gateways 1343:: I:: A User Agent Configuration Mechanism For Multimedia Mail Format Information 1342:: PS:: Representation of Non-ASCII Text in Internet Message Headers 1341:: PS:: MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) 1339:: E:: Remote Mail Checking Protocol 1328:: PS:: X.400 1988 to 1984 downgrading 1327:: PS:: Mapping between X.400(1988) / ISO 10021 and RFC 822 1225:: DS:: Post Office Protocol - Version 3 1211:: :: Problems with the Maintenance of Large Mailing Lists 1204:: E:: Message Posting Protocol (MPP) 1203:: H:: Interactive Mail Access Protocol - Version 3 1176:: E:: Interactive Mail Access Protocol - Version 2 1168:: :: Intermail and Commercial Mail Relay Services 1159:: E:: Message Send Protocol 1154:: E:: Encoding Header Field for Internet Messages 1153:: E:: Digest Message Format 1148:: E:: Mapping between X.400 (1988) / ISO 10021 and RFC 822 1138:: I:: Mapping between X.400(1988) / ISO 10021 and RFC 822 1137:: E:: Mapping between full RFC 822 and RFC 822 with restricted encoding 1090:: :: SMTP on X.25 1082:: H:: Post Office Protocol - version 3 1081:: PS:: Post Office Protocol - version 3
1064:: H:: Interactive Mail Access Protocol 1056:: I:: PCMAIL 1049:: S:: Content-type header field for Internet messages 1047:: :: Duplicate messages and SMTP 1026:: PS:: Addendum to RFC 987 993:: :: PCMAIL 987:: PS:: Mapping between X.400 and RFC 822 984:: :: PCMAIL 976:: :: UUCP mail interchange format standard 974:: S:: Mail routing and the domain system 937:: H:: Post Office Protocol - version 2 934:: :: Proposed standard for message encapsulation 918:: :: Post Office Protocol 915:: :: Network mail path service 910:: :: Multimedia mail meeting notes 886:: :: Proposed standard for message header munging 876:: :: Survey of SMTP implementations 841:: :: Specification for message format for Computer Based Message Systems 822:: S:: Standard for the format of ARPA Internet text messages 821:: S:: Simple Mail Transfer Protocol 808:: :: Summary of computer mail services meeting held at BBN on 10 January 1979 807:: :: Multimedia mail meeting notes 805:: :: Computer mail meeting notes 788:: :: Simple Mail Transfer Protocol 786:: :: Mail Transfer Protocol 785:: :: Mail Transfer Protocol 784:: :: Mail Transfer Protocol 780:: :: Mail Transfer Protocol 773:: :: Comments on NCP/TCP mail service transition strategy 772:: :: Mail Transfer Protocol 771:: :: Mail transition plan 767:: :: Structured format for transmission of multi-media documents 763:: :: Role mailboxes 757:: :: Suggested solution to the naming, addressing, and delivery problem for ARPANET message systems 754:: :: Out-of-net host addresses for mail 753:: :: Internet Message Protocol 744:: :: MARS - a Message Archiving and Retrieval Service 733:: :: Standard for theformat of ARPA network text messages 724:: :: Proposed official standard for the format of ARPA Network messages 720:: :: Address specification syntax for network mail 714:: :: Host-Host Protocol for an ARPANET-type network 713:: :: MSDTP-Message Services Data Transmission Protocol 706:: :: On the junk mail problem