rfc1280.txt

来自「RFC 的详细文档！」· 文本 代码 · 共 1,529 行 · 第 1/5 页

      (6) RFC Editor's discretion.  The RFC Editor decides if a review



Internet Activities Board                                      [Page 11]

RFC 1280                     IAB Standards                    March 1992


          is needed and if so by whom.  RFC Editor decides to publish or
          not.

   Of course, in all cases the RFC Editor can request or make minor
   changes for style, format, and presentation purposes.

   The IESG has designated the IESG Secretary as its agent for
   forwarding documents with IESG approval and for registering concerns
   in response to notifications (5) to the RFC Editor.  Documents from
   Area Directors or Working Group Chairs may be considered in the same
   way as documents from "other".

5.2.  The Standards Track Diagram

   There is a part of the STATUS and STATE categorization that is called
   the standards track.  Actually, only the changes of state are
   significant to the progression along the standards track, though the
   status assignments may be changed as well.

   The states illustrated by single line boxes are temporary states,
   those illustrated by double line boxes are long term states.  A
   protocol will normally be expected to remain in a temporary state for
   several months (minimum six months for proposed standard, minimum
   four months for draft standard).  A protocol may be in a long term
   state for many years.

   A protocol may enter the standards track only on the recommendation
   of the IESG and by action of the IAB; and may move from one state to
   another along the track only on the recommendation of the IESG and by
   action of the IAB.  That is, it takes both the IESG and the IAB to
   either start a protocol on the track or to move it along.

   Generally, as the protocol enters the standards track a decision is
   made as to the eventual STATUS, requirement level or applicability
   (elective, recommended, or required) the protocol will have, although
   a somewhat less stringent current status may be assigned, and it then
   is placed in the the proposed standard STATE with that status.  So
   the initial placement of a protocol is into state 1.  At any time the
   STATUS decision may be revisited.












Internet Activities Board                                      [Page 12]

RFC 1280                     IAB Standards                    March 1992


         |
         +<----------------------------------------------+
         |                                               ^
         V    0                                          |    4
   +-----------+                                   +===========+
   |   enter   |-->----------------+-------------->|experiment |
   +-----------+                   |               +=====+=====+
                                   |                     |
                                   V    1                |
                             +-----------+               V
                             | proposed  |-------------->+
                        +--->+-----+-----+               |
                        |          |                     |
                        |          V    2                |
                        +<---+-----+-----+               V
                             | draft std |-------------->+
                        +--->+-----+-----+               |
                        |          |                     |
                        |          V    3                |
                        +<---+=====+=====+               V
                             | standard  |-------------->+
                             +=====+=====+               |
                                                         |
                                                         V    5
                                                   +=====+=====+
                                                   | historic  |
                                                   +===========+

   The transition from proposed standard (1) to draft standard (2) can
   only be by action of the IAB on the recommendation of the IESG and
   only after the protocol has been proposed standard (1) for at least
   six months.

   The transition from draft standard (2) to standard (3) can only be by
   action of the IAB on the recommendation of the IESG and only after
   the protocol has been draft standard (2) for at least four months.

   Occasionally, the decision may be that the protocol is not ready for
   standardization and will be assigned to the experimental state (4).
   This is off the standards track, and the protocol may be resubmitted
   to enter the standards track after further work.  There are other
   paths into the experimental and historic states that do not involve
   IAB action.

   Sometimes one protocol is replaced by another and thus becomes
   historic, or it may happen that a protocol on the standards track is
   in a sense overtaken by another protocol (or other events) and
   becomes historic (state 5).



Internet Activities Board                                      [Page 13]

RFC 1280                     IAB Standards                    March 1992


6.  The Protocols

   Subsection 6.1 lists recent RFCs and other changes.  Subsections 6.2
   - 6.9 list the standards in groups by protocol state.

6.1.  Recent Changes

6.1.1.  New RFCs:

      1311 - Introduction to the STD Notes

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1310 - The Internet Standards Process

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1309 - Technical Overview of Directory Services
             Using the X.500 Protocol

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1308 - Executive Introduction to Directory Services
             Using the X.500 Protocol

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1307 - Dynamically Switched Link Control Protocol

             An Experimental Protocol.

      1306 - Experiences Supporting By-Request Circuit-Switched T3
             Networks

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1304 - Definitions of Managed Objects for the SIP Interface Type

             A Proposed Standard protocol.

      1303 - A Convention for Describing SNMP-based Agents

             This is an information document and does not specify any



Internet Activities Board                                      [Page 14]

RFC 1280                     IAB Standards                    March 1992


             level of standard.

      1302 - Building a Network Information Services Infrastructure

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1301 - Multicast Transport Protocol

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1300 - Remembrances of Things Past

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1298 - SNMP over IPX

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1297 - NOC Internal Integrated Trouble Ticket System Functional
             Specification Wishlist ("NOC TT REQUIREMENTS")

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1296 - Internet Growth (1981-1991)

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1295 - User Bill of Rights for entries
             and listings in the Public Directory

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1294 - Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame Relay

             A Proposed Standard protocol.

      1293 - Inverse Address Resolution Protocol

             A Proposed Standard protocol.





Internet Activities Board                                      [Page 15]

RFC 1280                     IAB Standards                    March 1992


      1292 - A Catalog of Available X.500 Implementations

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1291 - Mid-Level Networks - Potential Technical Services

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1290 - There's Gold in them thar Networks!  or
             Searching for Treasure in all the Wrong Places

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1289 - DECnet Phase IV MIB Extensions

             A Proposed Standard protocol.

      1288 - The Finger User Information Protocol

             A Draft Standard protocol.

      1287 - Towards the Future Internet Architecture

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1286 - Definitions of Managed Objects for Bridges

             A Proposed Standard protocol.

      1285 - FDDI Management Information Base

             A Proposed Standard protocol.

      1284 - Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like
             Interface Types

             A Proposed Standard protocol.

      1283 - SNMP over OSI

             An Experimental protocol.






Internet Activities Board                                      [Page 16]

RFC 1280                     IAB Standards                    March 1992


      1282 - BSD Rlogin

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1281 - Guidelines for the Secure Operation of the Internet

             This is an information document and does not specify any
             level of standard.

      1280 - This memo.

      1279 - X.500 and Domains

             An Experimental protocol.