Scribd
Upload
9 views5 pages

Understanding RFC Standards in CS144

The document discusses the history and process of Request for Comments (RFC) documents. It notes that RFC 1 established the informal nature of the notes and dialog around technical standards. It then outlines the standardization of the RFC format, including the different types of RFCs like proposed standard, informational, and best current practice. The process is summarized as starting with a draft, going through revisions and acceptance by a working group, then IETF last call, IESG review, and approval as an RFC. Terminology for language like MUST, SHOULD, and MAY is also defined.

Uploaded by

him92
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
9 views5 pages

Understanding RFC Standards in CS144

The document discusses the history and process of Request for Comments (RFC) documents. It notes that RFC 1 established the informal nature of the notes and dialog around technical standards. It then outlines the standardization of the RFC format, including the different types of RFCs like proposed standard, informational, and best current practice. The process is summarized as starting with a draft, going through revisions and acceptance by a working group, then IETF last call, IESG review, and approval as an RFC. Terminology for language like MUST, SHOULD, and MAY is also defined.

Uploaded by

him92
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Reading an RFC

CS144, Stanford University

History (RFC 2555)



RFC 1: Host Software

Mindful that our group was informal, junior and unchartered, I wanted to emphasize these notes were the beginning of a dialog and not an assertion of control. Structure, intellectual property rights, terminology (RFC 2119) Security, IANA

Standardization of format

Kinds of RFCs: proposed standard, standards-track, informational, experimental, best current practice (BCP)

CS144, Stanford University

RFC Process (simplied)



Start with a draft: draft-levis-roll-trickle-00 Revisions: draft-levis-roll-trickle-XX Accepted by working group: draft-ietf-roll-trickle-00 Revisions: draft-ietf-roll-trickle-XX Accepted by working group chair for publication Working group, IETF last call IESG review Approved as an RFC

CS144, Stanford University

Terminology

MUST, REQUIRED, SHALL: absolute requirement. SHOULD, RECOMMENDED: mean that there may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore a particular item, but the full implications must be understood and carefully weighed before choosing a different course. MAY, OPTIONAL: mean that an item is truly optional.

CS144, Stanford University

Example: RFC5681

CS144, Stanford University

You might also like