欢迎来到虫虫下载站 | 资源下载 资源专辑 关于我们
虫虫下载站

rfc1540.txt

著名的RFC文档,其中有一些文档是已经翻译成中文的的.
TXT
第 1 页 / 共 5 页
字号:
   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 (4) 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 change 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 may move from one state to another along the track   only on the recommendation of the IESG.  That is, it takes action by   the IESG 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 Architecture Board                                    [Page 12]RFC 1540                   Internet Standards               October 1993         |         +<----------------------------------------------+         |                                               ^         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 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 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   IESG 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 Architecture Board                                    [Page 13]RFC 1540                   Internet Standards               October 19936.  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 Changes6.1.1.  New RFCs:      1540 - This memo.      1539 - The Tao of IETF - A Guide for New Attendees of the Internet             Engineering Task Force             This is an information document and does not specify any             level of standard.      1538 - Advanced SNA/IP : A Simple SNA Transport Protocol             This is an information document and does not specify any             level of standard.      1537 - Common DNS Data File Configuration Error             This is an information document and does not specify any             level of standard.      1536 - Common DNS Implementation Errors and Suggested Fixes             This is an information document and does not specify any             level of standard.      1535 - A Security Problem and Proposed Correction With Widely             Deployed             DNS Software             This is an information document and does not specify any             level of standard.      1534 - Interoperation Between DHCP and BOOTP             A Proposed Standard protocol.      1533 - DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions             A Proposed Standard protocol.Internet Architecture Board                                    [Page 14]RFC 1540                   Internet Standards               October 1993      1532 - Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol             A Proposed Standard protocol.      1531 - Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol             A Proposed Standard protocol.      1530 - Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT             Subdomain: General Principles and Policy             This is an information document and does not specify any             level of standard.      1529 - Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain:             Remote Printing -- Administrative Policies             This is an information document and does not specify any             level of standard.      1528 - Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain Remote             Printing -- Technical Procedures             An Experimental protocol.      1527 - What Should We Plan Given the Dilemma of the Network?             This is an information document and does not specify any             level of standard.      1526 - Assignment of System Identifiers for TUBA/CLNP Hosts             This is an information document and does not specify any             level of standard.      1525 - Definitions of Managed Objects for Source Routing Bridges             A Proposed Standard protocol.      1524 - A User Agent Configuration Mechanism For Multimedia Mail             Format Information             This is an information document and does not specify any             level of standard.Internet Architecture Board                                    [Page 15]RFC 1540                   Internet Standards               October 1993      1523 - The text/enriched MIME Content-type             This is an information document and does not specify any             level of standard.      1522 - MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part Two:             Message Header Extensions for Non-ASCII Text             A Draft Standard protocol.      1521 - MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part One:             Mechanisms for Specifying and Describing the Format of             Internet Message Bodies             A Draft Standard protocol.      1520 - Exchanging Routing Information Across Provider Boundaries             in the CIDR Environment             This is an information document and does not specify any             level of standard.      1519 - Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR): an Address             Assignment and Aggregation Strategy             A Proposed Standard protocol.      1518 - An Architecture for IP Address Allocation with CIDR             A Proposed Standard protocol.      1517 - Applicability Statement for the Implementation of Classless             Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR)             A Proposed Standard protocol.      1516 - 802.3 Repeater MIB             A Draft Standard protocol.      1515 - Definitions of Managed Objects for IEEE 802.3 Medium             Attachment Units (MAUs)             A Proposed Standard protocol.      1514 - Host Resources MIB             A Proposed Standard protocol.Internet Architecture Board                                    [Page 16]RFC 1540                   Internet Standards               October 1993      1513 - Token Ring Extensions to the Remote Network Monitoring MIB             A Proposed Standard protocol.      1512 - FDDI Management Information Base             A Proposed Standard protocol.      1511 - Common Authentication Technology Overview             This is an information document and does not specify any             level of standard.      1510 - The Kerberos Network Authentication Service (V5)             A Proposed Standard protocol.      1509 - Generic Security Service API : C-bindings             A Proposed Standard protocol.      1508 - Generic Security Service Application Program Interface             A Proposed Standard protocol.      1507 - DASS - Distributed Authentication Security Service             An Experimental protocol.      1506 - A Tutorial on Gatewaying between X.400 and Internet Mail

⌨️ 快捷键说明

复制代码 Ctrl + C
搜索代码 Ctrl + F
全屏模式 F11
切换主题 Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键 ?
增大字号 Ctrl + =
减小字号 Ctrl + -