Free Redacted Document - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:04-cv-01199-SLR Document 356-18 Filed 06/30/2006 Page 1 013

Case 1:04-cv-01199-SLR Document 356-18 Filed 06/30/2006 Page 2 ot 3
are ovsavisw
//‘ //e
¤/. =/· .- . ’/‘
RFCs and the RFC Editor
The Requests for Comments (RF Cs) form a series of notes, started in l969, about the internet (originally the ARPANET).
The notes discuss many aspects of computer communication, focusing on networking protocols, procedures, programs,
and concepts but also including meeting notes, opinion, and sometimes humor. For more information on the history of the
RF C series, see "30 Years of RFCs", The early Ri? Cs include a trove of history about the early development of computer
communication protocols, from which modern lnternet technology was derived.
A recent tutoriai for RFC authors contains an overview ofthe RFC Editor and the RFC series.
T he function of the RPC Editor is primarily to publish and archive RFCs. The RFC Editor is responsible for the final
editorial review ofthe documents and attempts to maintain the standards ofthe series. The RF C Editor maintains a master
repositom of all RFCs, which can be retrieved in segments. The RFC Editor also maintains a master RFC index that can
be searched online.
The RPC Editor is funded by the Internet Society.
RFC Categories
Each RF C has a "category" or "status" designation. The possible categories (see RFC 2026 "The internet Standards
Process -— Revision 3") are:
• STANDARD, DRAFT STANDARD, PROPOSED STANDARD
These are stcmdarolsdmck documents, official specifications ofthe internet protocoi suite defined by the Internet
Engineering Taslt Force {IETF Q and its steering group the {ESG.
• BEST CURRENT PRACTICE
These are official guideiines and recommendations, but not standards, from the lETF.
• INFORMATIONAL, EXPERIMENTAL
These non—standards documents may originate in the IETF or may be independent submissions.
• HISTORIC
ltttpzffwvrw.ri"c—editorlorgfoverview.html (l of Z}6/lo/200o 9:30:36 AM

_, Case 1 :04-cv-01 199-SLR Document 356-18 Filed 06/30/2006 Page 3 of 3
are ovaavnsw
These are fewer standards that have been actively deprecated.
Copyrights
RFC documents are governed by very liberal copyright ruies, which are essentially meant oniy to prevent the blatant
misuse of RFC text.
Publication Language
Like the internet itseif, the {ETF and the ISOC are international organizations with representation from all areas ofthe
world. However, English is the primary language in which IETF business is conducted, and English is the official
pubiication language for RFCs.
RFC 2026 ""Ehe Internet Standards Process —- Revision 3" specificaiiy aliows RFCs to be translated into other Eanguages
than English, and repositories may exist for RF Cs that have been translated into particular languages. This is highly
desirable and useful, and the RFC Editor encourages it. However, it is not possible for the RFC Editor to certify that such
translations are accurate. Therefore, the function of the RFC Editor with respect to non—Englisn RFCs is limited to
providing pointers to such non-English ianguage RFC repositories. Upon request, the RF C Editor will Eist any such
repository on this Web page.
Publication Process
References
• "`lnstructions to RF C Authors" (formeriy RPC 2223).
• RFC 2026 "'Fhe internet Standards Process —— Revision 3**.
This page was last updated on i.4.lu1y04.
http:/fwww.1‘fc~editororgfovnzrview.hint} (2 ol`2}6fl6f2UU6 9130:36 AN}