Документ взят из кэша поисковой машины. Адрес оригинального документа : http://mirror.msu.net/pub/rfc-editor/rfc-ed-all/pdfrfc/rfc2626.txt.pdf
Дата изменения: Wed Mar 27 23:33:27 2002
Дата индексирования: Tue Oct 2 19:08:02 2012
Кодировка:

Поисковые слова: ic 2118
Network Working Group Request for Comments: 2626 Category: Informational

P. Nesser II Nesser & Nesser Consulting June 1999

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

Status of this Memo This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). Abstract The Year 2000 Working Group (WG) has conducted an investigation into the millennium problem as it regards Internet related protocols. This investigation only targeted the protocols as documented in the Request For Comments Series (RFCs). This investigation discovered little reason for concern with regards to the functionality of the protocols. A few minor cases of older implementations still using two digit years (ala RFC 850) were discovered, but almost all Internet protocols were given a clean bill of health. Several cases of "period" problems were discovered, where a time field would "roll over" as the size of field was reached. In particular, there are several protocols, which have 32 bit, signed integer representations of the number of seconds since January 1, 1970 which will turn negative at Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 GMT 2038. Areas whose protocols will be effected by such problems have been notified so that new revisions will remove this limitation. 1. Introduction According to the trade press billions of dollars will be spend the upcoming years on the year 2000 problem, also called the millennium problem (though the third millennium will really start in 2001). This problem consists of the fact that many software packages and some protocols use a two-digit field for the year in a date field. Most of the problems seem to be in administrative and financial programs, or in the hardcoded microcomputers found in electronic equipment. A lot of organizations are now starting to make an inventory of which software and tools they use will suffer from the millennium problem. All Rights Reserved.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 1]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

With the increasing popularity of the Internet, more and more organizations use the Internet as a serious business tool. This means that most organizations will want to analyze the millennium problems due to the use of Internet protocols and popular Internet software. In the trade press the first articles suggest that the Internet will collapse at midnight the 31st of December 1999. To counter these suggestions, and to avoid having countless companies redo the same investigation, this effort was undertaken by the IETF. The Year 2000 WG has made an inventory of all-important Internet protocols that have been documented in the Request for Comments (RFC) series. Only protocols directly related to the Internet will be considered. This document is divided into a number of sections. Section 1 is the Introduction which you are now reading. Section 2 is a disclaimer about the completeness of this effort. Section 3 describes areas in which millenium problems have been found, while Section 4 describes a few other "period" problems. Section 5 describes potential fixes to problems that have been identified. Section 6 describes the methodology used in the investigation. Sections 7 through 22 are devoted to the 15 different groupings of protocols and RFCs. Section 23 discusses security considerations, Section 24 is devoted to references, and Section 25 is the author contact information. Appendix A is the list of RFCs examined broken down by category. Appendix B is a PERL program used to make a first cut identification of problems, and Appendix C is the output of that PERL program. The editor of this document would like to acknowledge the critical contributions of the follow for direct performance of research and the provision of text: Alex Latzko, Robert Elz, Erik Huizer, Gillian Greenwood, Barbara Jennings, R.E. (Robert) Moore, David Mills, Lynn Kubinec, Michael Patton, Chris Newman, Erik-Jan Bos, Paul Hoffman, and Rick H. Wesson. The pace with which this group has operated has only been achievable by the intimate familiarity of the contributors with the protocols and ready access to the collective knowledge of the IETF. 2. Disclaimer This RFC is not complete. It is an effort to analyze the Y2K impact on hundreds of protocols but is likely to have missed some protocols and misunderstood others. Organizations should not attempt to claim any legitimacy or approval for any particular protocol based on this document. The efforts have concentrated on the identification of potential problems, rather than solutions to any of the problems that have been identified. Any proposed solutions are only that: proposed. A formal engineering review should take place before any solution is

Nesser

Informational

[Page 2]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

adopted. It should also be noted that the research was performd on RFCs 1 through 2128. At that time the IESG was charted with not allowing any new RFCs to be published that had any Year 2000 issues. Since that cutoff time there has been work to correct issues discovered by this Working Group. In particular, RWhois as documented by RFC 1714 has been updated to fix the problems found. RFC 2167 now documents a fixed version of the RWhois protocol. The work of this group was to look backwards, and hence new RFC's which supplant the old are expected to make the information in this RFC obsolete. The work of this group will truly be complete when this document is completely obsolete. A number of people have suggested looking into other "special" dates. For example, the first leap year, the first "double digit" day (January 10, 2000), January 1, 2001, etc. There is not one place where days have been used in the protocols defined by the RFC series so there is little reason to believe that any of these special dates will have any impact. 3. Summary of Year 2000 Problems Here is in the unclear specify should a brief description of all the Millennium issues discovered course of this research. Note that many of the RFCs are on the issue. They mandate the use of UTCTime but do not whether the two-digit or four-digit year representation be used.

3.1 "Directory Services" rfc1274.txt rfc1276.txt rfc1488.txt rfc1608.txt rfc1609.txt rfc1778.txt 3.2 References References References Refers to Refers to Refers to UTC date/time UTC date/time for version control. UTC Time as printable strings. uTCTimeSyntax uTCTimeSyntax uTCTimeSyntax

"Information Services and File Transfer" HTTP 1.1, as defined in RFC 2068, requires all newly generated date stamps to conform to RFC 1123 date formats which are Year 2000 compliant, but it also requires acceptance of the older non-compliant RFC850 formats. Some specific recommendations have been passed to the HTTP WG.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 3]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

HTML 2.0, as defined in RFC 1866, could allow a very subtle Year 2000 problem, but once again this recommendation has been passed on the HTML WG. RFC 1778 on String Representations of Standard Attribute Syntax's define UTC Time in Section 2.21 and uses that definition in Section 2.25 on User Certificates. Since UTC Time is being used, there is a potential millennium issue. RFC 1440 on SIFT/UFT: Sender-Initiated/Unsolicited File Transfer defines an optional DATE command in Section 5 of the form mm/dd/yy which is subject to millennium issues. 3.3 "Electronic Mail" After reviewing all mail-related RFCs, it was discovered that while some obsolete standards required two-digit years, all currently used standards require four-digit years and are thus not prone to typical Year 2000 problems. RFCs 821 and 822, the main basis for SMTP mail exchange and message format, originally required two-digit years. However, both of these RFCs were later modified by RFC 1123 in 1989, which strongly recommended 4-digit years. 3.4 "Name Serving" While not a protocol issue, there is a common habit of writing serial numbers for DNS zone files in the form YYXXXXXX. The only real requirement on the serial numbers is that they be increasing (see RFC 1982 for a complete description) and a change from 99XXXXXX to 00XXXXXX cause a failure. See the section on "Name Serving" for a complete description of the issues. 3.5 "Network Management" Version 2 of SNMP's MIB definition language (SMIv2) specifies the use of UCTTimes for time stamping MIB modules. Even though these time stamps do not flow in any network protocols, there could be as issue with management applications, depending on implementations. 3.6 "Network News" There does exist Message Format, A working group in general, and items. a problem in both NNTP, RFC RFC 10336. They both specify has been formed to update the addressing this problem is on 977, and the Usenet News two-digit year format. network news protocols their list of work

Nesser

Informational

[Page 4]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

3.7

"Real-Time Services" A Year 2000 problem does occur in the Simple Network Paging Protocol, versions 2 & 3. Both define a HOLDuntil option which uses a YYMMDDHHMMSS+/-GMT field. Version 3 also defines a MSTAtus command, which is required to store,dates and times as YYMMDDHHMMSS+/-GMT. There is a small Year IP Routing Policies in C the "changed" object YYMMDD, and similarly he format of YYMMDD. be little operational be modified. 2000 issue in RFC 1786 on the Representation of the ripe-81++ Routing Registry. In Appendices parameter defines a format of in Appendix D "withdrawn" object identifier has Since these are only identifiers there should impact. Some application software may need to

3.8 "Security" RFC 1507 on Distributed Authentication Security Services (DASS) use UTCTime. 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. 4. Summary of Other "Periodicity" Problems By far, the largest area of "period" problems occurs in the year 2038. Many protocols use a 32-bit field to record the number of seconds since January 1, 1970. 4.1 "Name Serivces" DNS Security uses 32-bit timestamps which will roll over in 2038. This issue has been refered to the appropriate Working Group so that the details of rollover can be established. 4.2 "Routing" IDPR suffers from the classic Year 2038 problem, by having a timestamp counter which rolls over at that time. 5. Suggested Solutions The real solution to the applications and hardware certain time (January 1, wrapping solution, or to 32-bits), or to make more problem is to use 4 digit year fields for systems. For counters that key off of a 1970 for example) need to either: define a define a larger number space (greater than efficient use of the 32-bit space. However,

Nesser

Informational

[Page 5]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

it will be impossible to completely replace currently deployed systems, so solutions for handling problems are in order. 5.1 Fixed Solution A number of organizations and groups to the problem of two digit years. is greater than or equal to 50, the 19YY; and where YY is less than 50, 20YY. While a simple and problem off 40 to 2050 problem needs and deploy, so it 5.2 Sliding Window Another solution is the "sliding window" approach. In this approach, some value N is selected, and any two digit year that is less than or equal to the current two digit year plus N is considered the future, while any other two digit year is considered in the past. For example, choosing N equal to 10, If and I get a two digit year that is any of 19, 20, 21 or 22, assume it is 20YY (i.e. consider it to be in the past(1923-1999, the current year is 2012, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, the future), otherwise 2000-2011). have suggested a fixed solution Given a two-digit year YY, if YY year shall be interpreted as the year shall be intrepreted as

straightforward solution, it only pushes the 50 years, until the artificially generated Year to be addressed. However, it is easy to implement might be the most commonly adopted solution.

This solution has two advantages. First, no new fixed year problems are introduced. Second, different applications and protocols could choose different values of N. The drawback is that this solution is harder to implement, and to work well the value of N will need to be constant across different implementations. 6. Methodology The first task was dividing the types of RFC's into logical groups rather than the strict numeric publishing order. Sixteen specific areas were identified. They are: "Autoconfiguration" , "Directory Services", "Disk Sharing", "Games and Chat" ,"Information Services & File Transfer", "Network & Transport Layer", "Electronic Mail", "NTP", Name Serving", "Network Management", "News", "Real Time Services", "Routing", "Security", "Virtual Terminal", and "Other". In addition to these categories, many hundreds of RFC's were immediately eliminated based on content. That is not to say that all Informational RFC's were not considered, many did contain some technical content or overview whichdemanded scrutiny.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 6]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

Each area was assigned to a team for investigation. Although each team used whatever additional investigation techniques which seemed appropriate (including completely reading each RFC, and in some cases the source code for the reference implementation) at minimum each team used an automatic scanning system to search for the following items (case insensitively) in each RFC: date GMT UTCTime year yy (that is not part of yyyy) two-digit, 2-digit, 2digit century 1900 & 2000

Note that all of these strings except "UTCTime" may occur in conjunction with a date format that accommodates the Year 2000 crossing, as well as with one that does not. So "hits" on these string do not necessarily indicate Year 2000 problems: they simply identify elements that need to be examined. After the documents were scanned, therefore, each "hit" was examined individually. Those that cause no Year 2000 problems (e.g., those that encode the year as a two-byte integer, or as a four-character display string) are not discussed here. Those that do cause Year 2000 problems are identified in this document, and the nature and impact of the problems they cause are described. 7. Autoconfiguration 7.1 Summary The RFC's which were categorized into this group were primarily the BOOT Protocol (BOOTP) and the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) for both IP version four and six. Examination of the BOOTP protocols and most popular implementations show no year 2000 problems. All times are references as 32 bit integers in seconds of UTC time. An investigation of all DHCP and the IPv6 Autoconfiguration mechanisms produced no year 2000 problems. All references to time, in particular lease lengths, are 32 bit integers in seconds, allowing lease times of well over 100 years.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 7]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

7.2 Specifics The following RFCs were examined for possible millennium problems: 906, 951, 1048, 1084, 1395, 1497, 1531, 1532, 1533, 1534, 1541, 1542, 1970, & 1971. RFC 951's only reference to time or dates is a twobyte field in the packet, which is number of second since the hosts, was booted. RFC's 1048, 1084, 1395, 1497, 1531, & 1532 have either no references to dates and time, or they are the same as the RFCs, which obsoleted them, discussed in the next paragraph. RFC 1533 enumerates all the known DHCP field types and a number of these have to do with time. Section 3.4 defines a "Time Offset" field which specifies the offset of the clients subnet in seconds from UTC. This 4 byte field has no millennium issues. Section 9.2 defines the IP Address Lease Time field which is used by clients to request a specific lease time. This four byte field is an unsigned integer containing a number of seconds. Section 9.9 defines a Renewal Time Value field, Section 9.10 defines a Rebinding Time Value, both of which are similarly 32 bit fields, which have no millennium issues. RFC 1534 has no references to times or dates. RFC 1541 has two mentions of times/dates. The first is the "secs" field which, similarly to RFC 951, is a 16-bit field for the number of seconds since the host has booted. There is also a discussion in section 3.3 about "Interpretation and Representation of Time Values" which while clearly states that there is no millennium or period problems. RFC 1542 also references the "secs" field mentioned previously. RFC 1970 mentions a number of variables, which are time related. In section 4.2 "Router Advertisement Message Format" the following fields are defined: Router Lifetime, Reachable Time, & Retrans Timer. In section 4.6.2 "Prefix Information" the following are defined: Valid Lifetime, & Preferred Lifetime. In section 6.2.1 "Router Configuration Variables the following are defined: MaxRtrAdvInterval, MinRtrAdvInterval, AdvReachableTime, AdvRetransTimer, AdvDefaultLifetime, AdvValidLifetime, & AdvPreferredLifetime. All of these fields specify counters of some sort which have no millennium or periodicity problems. RFC 1971 has some discussion of preferred lifetimes, depreciated lifetimes and valid lifetimes of leases, but only discusses them in an expository way.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 8]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

8. Directory Services 8.1 Summary The RFC's which were categorized into this group were primarily X.500 related RFC's, Whois, Rwhois, Whois++, and the Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (LDAP). Upon review of the Directory Services related RFC's, no serious year 2000 problems were discovered. Some minor issues were noted and explained below in the specific portion of this section. 8.2 Specifics RFCs that mentioned UTC Time or made reference to uTCTimeSyntax could fail to be Y2K compliant. These should be updated to specify the four year version of uTCTimeSyntax rather than giving the option of using a two-year date representation. The following RFCs fall into this category: rfc1274.txt rfc1276.txt rfc1488.txt rfc1608.txt rfc1609.txt rfc1778.txt References References References Refers to Refers to Refers to UTC date/time UTC date/time for version control. UTC Time as printable strings. uTCTimeSyntax uTCTimeSyntax uTCTimeSyntax

Two RFC's have unusual date specifications and specify their own date format. Both of these support Y2K compliant dates. RFC1714 (RWhois) specifies date formats that are not Y2K compliant, but it also supports dates that are. Implementers of the RWhois protocol should only use the %MY4 format RFC1834 (Whois++) requires the use of dates, but it didn't specify the format, syntax, or representation of the date string to be used. 9. Disk Sharing 9.1 Summary The RFC's which were categorized into this group were those related to the Network File System (NFS). Other popular disk sharing protocols like SMB and AFS were referred to their respective trustee's for review. After careful review, NFS has no year 2000 problems.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 9]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

9.2 Specifics The references to time in this protocol are the times of file data modification, file access, and file metadata change (mtime, atime, and time, respectively). These times are kept as 32 bit unsigned quantities in seconds since 1970-01-01, and so the NFS protocol will not experience an Epoch event until the year 2106. 10. Games and Chat 10.1 Summary The RFC's which were categorized into this group were related to the Internet Relay Chat Protocol (IRC). No millennium problems exist in the IRC protocol. 10.2 Specifics There is only a single instance of time or date related information in the IRC protocol as specified by RFC 1459. Section 4.3.4 defines a TIME message type which queries a server for its local time. No mention is made of the format of the reply or how it is parsed, the assumption being specific implementations will handle the reply and parse it appropriately. 11. Information Services & File Transfer 11.1 Summary The RFC's which were categorized into this group were divided among World Wide Web (WWW) protocols and File Transfer Protocols (FTP). WWW protocols include the Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP), a variety of Uniform Resource formats (URL, URAs, etc.) and the HyperText Markup Language(HTML). FTP protocols include the well known FTP protocol, the Trivial File Transfer Protocol (TFTP) and a variety of extensions to these protocols. Other information services includes the Finger Protocol and the LPD protocol. HTTP 1.1, as defined in RFC 2068, requires all newly generated date stamps to conform to RFC 1123 date formats which are Year 2000 compliant, but it also requires acceptance of the older non-compliant RFC850 formats. Some specific recommendations are listed below and have been passed to the HTTP WG. HTML 2.0, as defined in RFC 1866, could allow a very subtle Year 2000 problem, but once again this recommendation has been passed on the HTML WG.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 10]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

RFC 1778 on String Representations of Standard Attribute Syntax's define UTC Time in Section 2.21 and uses that definition in Section 2.25 on User Certificates. Since UTC Time is being used, there is a potential millennium issue. RFC 1440 on SIFT/UFT: Sender-Initiated/Unsolicited File Transfer defines an optional DATE command in Section 5 of the form mm/dd/yy which is subject to millennium issues. 11.2 Specifics The main RFC2068 formats field. generate IETF standards-track document on the HTTP protocol is on HTTP 1.1. It notes that historically three different date have been used, and that one of them uses a two-digit year In section 3.3.1 it requires HTTP 1.1 implementations to this RFC1123 format: ; RFC 822, updated by RFC 1123

Sun, 06 Nov 1994 08:49:37 GMT instead of this RFC850 format:

Sunday, 06-Nov-94 08:49:37 GMT ; RFC 850, obsoleted by RFC 1036 Unfortunately, many existing servers, serving on the order of one fifth of the current HTTP traffic, send dates in the ambiguous RFC850 format. Section 19.3 of the RFC2068 says this: o HTTP/1.1 clients and caches should assume that an RFC-850 date which appears to be more than 50 years in the future is in fact in the past (this helps solve the "year 2000" problem).

This avoids a "stale cache" problem, which would cause the user to see out-of-date data. RFC 1986 documents experiments with a simple file transfer program over radio links using Enhanced Trivial FTP (ETFTP). There are a number of timers defined which are all in seconds and have no year 2000 issues. In RFC 1866, on HTML 2.0,the tag allows the embedding of recommended values for some HTTP headers, including Expires. E.g. Servers should rewrite these dates into RFC1123 format if necessary.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 11]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

RFC 1807 defines a format for bibliographic records and it specifies a DATE format, which requires 4 digit year fields. RFC 1788 defines ICMP Domain Name messages. Section 3 defines a Domain Name Reply Packet, which contains a signed 32-bit integer. This timer is not Year 2000 reliant and is certainly large enough for it purposes. RFC 1784 on TFTP Timeout Intervals and Transfer Size Options uses a field for the number of seconds for the timeout. It is an ASCII value from 1 to 255 octets in length. There is no Y2K issue. RFC 1778 on String Representations of Standard Attribute Syntax's define UTC Time in Section 2.21 and uses that definition in Section 2.25 on User Certificates. Since UTC Time is being used, there is a potential millennium issue. RFC 1777 on LDAP defines a timelimit in Section 4.3 which is expressed in seconds, but does not define any limits. RFC 1440 on SIFT/UFT: Sender-Initiated/Unsolicited File Transfer defines an optional DATE command in Section 5 of the form mm/dd/yy, which is subject to millennium issues. RFC 1068 commands >From the protocol on the Background File in Sections B.2.12 and example usage's given will function correctly Transfer Protocol (BFTP) defines two B.2.13, the Submit and Time commands. in Appendix C it is clear that this though the year 9999.

RFC 1037 on NFILE (a file access protocol) discusses the a Date representation in Section 7.1 as the number of seconds since January 1, 1900, but does not limit the field size. There should be no Y2K issues. RFC 998 on NETBLT defines a Death time in Section 8, which is the sender's death time in seconds. RFC 978 on the Voice File Interchange Protocol defines the Total Time of a message to be a 32-bit number of deci-seconds. This limits the size of a message but has no millennium issues. RFC 969 was obsoleted by RFC 998. RFC 916 defines the Reliable Asynchronous Transfer Protocol (RATP). Three timers are discussed in an expository manner in Section 5.4 and its subsections. There are no relevant issues.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 12]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

RFCs 2122, 2056, 2055, 2054, 1843, 1842, 1823, 1815, 1808, 1738, 1737, 1736, 1729, 1728, 1545, 1530, 1529, 1528, 1489, 1312, 1302, 1288, 1278, 1241, 965, 959, 949, 913, 887, 866, 765, 751, 743, 742, 740, 737, 614, 607, 599, 412, 411, 410, references to dates or times, RFCs 712, 551, 549, 490, 487, 448, 446, available 697, 543, 486, 438, for 633, 630, 535, 532, 485, 480, 437, 436, review. 622, 525, 479, 430,

2044, 2016, 1960, 1959, 1874, 1865, 1798, 1785, 1783, 1782, 1779, 1766, 1727, 1639, 1633, 1630, 1625, 1554, 1486, 1436, 1415, 1413, 1350, 1345, 1235, 1196, 1194, 1179, 1123, 1003, 865, 864, 863, 862, 797, 795, 783, 725, 722, 707, 691, 683, 662, 640, 407, and 406 were found to have no and hence no millennium issues. 610, 520, 478, 429, 593, 514, 477, 418, 592, 506, 472, 414, 589, 505, 468, and

1862,

971, 775, 624,

573, 571, 570, 553, 504, 501, 499, 493, 467, 463, 454, 451, 409 were not

RFCS below 400 were considered too obsolete to even consider. 12. Network & Transport Layer 12.1 Summary The RFC's which were categorized into this group were the Internet Protocol (IP) versions four and six, the Transmission Control Protocol (TCP), the User Datagram Protocol (UDP), the Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) and its extensions, Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP), the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) and Remote Procedure Call (RPC) protocol. A variety of less known protocols were also examined. After careful review of the nearly 400 RFC's in this catagory, no millennium or year 2000 problems were found. 12.2 Specifics RFC 2125 on the PPP Bandwidth Allocation Protocol (BAP) in section 5.3 discusses the use if mandatory timers, but gives no mention as to how they are implemented. RFC 2114 on a Data Link Switching Client Access Protocol defines a retry timer of five seconds in Section 3.4.1. RFC 2097 on the PPP NetBIOS Frame Control Protocol discuesses several timer and timeouts in Section 2.1, none of which suffers from a year 2000 problem. RFC 2075 on the IP Echo Host Service discusses timestamps and has no millennium issues.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 13]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

RFC 2005 on the Applicability for Mobile IP discusses using timestamps as a security measure to avoid replay attacks (Section 3.), but does not quantify them. There are no expected issues. RFC 2002 on IP Mobility Support uses a 16-bit field for the lifetime of a connection and notes the 18.2 hour limitation that this imposes. Section 5.6.1 on replay protection requires the use of 64-bit time fields, of a similar format to NTP packets. RFC 1981 on Path MTU Discovery for IPv6 discusses timestamps and their potential use to purge stale information in section 5.3. There is no millennium issues in this use. RFC 1963 on the PPP Serial Data Transport Protocol defines a flow expiration time in section 4.9 which has no year 2000 issues. RFC 1833 on Binding Protocols for ONC RPC Version variable in Section 2.2.1 called RPCBPROC_GETTIME local time in seconds since 1/1/1970. Since this width dependent, it may or may not wrap around the depending on the operating system parameters. 2 defines a which returns the value is not fields 32-bit value

RFC 1762 on the PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol discusses a number of timers in Section 5 (General Considerations). None of these timers experience any millennium issues. RFC 1761 on Snoop Version 2 Packet Capture File Format discusses two 32-bit timestamp values on Section 4 on Packet Record Formats. The first of these may wrap in the year 2038, but should not effect anything of any import. RFC 1755 on ATM Signalling Support for IP Over ATM discusses timing issues in Section 3.4 on VC Teardown. These limited timers have no year 2000 issues. RFC 1692 on the Transport Multiplexing Protocol (TMux) defines a TTL in Section 2.3 and a timer in Section 3.3. Neither of these suffer from any millennium or year 2000 issues. RFC 1661 on PPP defines three timers in Section 4.6, none of which have any year 2000 issues. RFC 1644 on T/TCP (TCP Extensions for Transactions) mentions RFC 1323 and the extended timers recommended in it. RFC 1575 defines an echo function for CNLP discusses in the narrative the use of the Lifetime Field in Section 5.3. There is nothing to suggest that there is any year 2000 issues.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 14]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

RFC 1329 on Dual MAC FDDI Networks discusses ARP cache administration in Section 9.3 and 9.4 and various timers to expire entries. RFC 1256 on ICMP Router Discovery Messages talks about lifetime fields in Section 2 and defines three router configuration variables in Section 4.1. None of these have any millennium issues. RFC 792 on ICMP discusses Timestamps and Timestamp Reply messages which define a 32-bit timestamp which contains the number of milliseconds since midnight UT. RFC 791 on the Internet Protocol defines a packet type 68 which is an Internet Timestamp, which defines a 32-bit field which contains the number of milliseconds since midnght UT. RFC 781 was defines the same option which is codified in RFC 791 as a packet type 68. RFC's 2126, 2118, 2113, 2019, 2018, 2009, 2004, 1978, 1977, 1976, 1975, 1937, 1936, 1934, 1933, 1916, 1915, 1897, 1888, 1868, 1860, 1859, 1853, 1764, 1763, 1756, 1754, 1707, 1705, 1698, 1693, 1679, 1678, 1677, 1676, 1663, 1662, 1638, 1634, 1618, 1613, 1605, 1604, 1552, 1551, 1549, 1548, 1475, 1466, 1454, 1435, 1377, 1376, 1375, 1374, 1334, 1333, 1332, 1331, 1277, 1263, 1240, 1237, 1209, 1201, 1191, 1188, 1145, 1144, 1141, 1139, 1086, 1085, 1078, 1072, 1051, 1050, 1046, 1045, 1008, 1007, 1006, 1002, 955, 948, 942, 941, 940, 914, 905, 903, 896, 895, 871, 848, 829, 826, 824, 761, 760, 759, 730, 704, 674, 660, 632, 626, 613, millennium references. 2107, 2003, 1974, 1932, 1887, 1841, 1752, 1688, 1674, 1631, 1598, 1547, 1434, 1365, 1326, 1236, 1185, 1134, 1071, 1044, 1001, 936, 894, 815, 696, 611 2106, 2105, 2098, 2067, 2043, 2001, 1994, 1993, 1990, 1989, 1973, 1972, 1967, 1962, 1954, 1931, 1926, 1924, 1919, 1918, 1885, 1884, 1883, 1881, 1878, 1832, 1831, 1809, 1795, 1791, 1744, 1735, 1726, 1719, 1717, 1687, 1686, 1683, 1682, 1681, 1673, 1672, 1671, 1670, 1669, 1629, 1624, 1622, 1621, 1620, 1590, 1577, 1570, 1561, 1560, 1538, 1526, 1518, 1498, 1490, 1433, 1393, 1390, 1385, 1379, 1363, 1362, 1356, 1347, 1337, 1323, 1314, 1307, 1306, 1294, 1234, 1226, 1223, 1220, 1219, 1172, 1171, 1166, 1162, 1151, 1132, 1122, 1110, 1106, 1103, 1070, 1069, 1063, 1062, 1057, 1042, 1030, 1029, 1027, 1025, 994, 986, 983, 982, 970, 964, 935, 932, 926, 925, 924, 922, 893, 892, 891, 889, 879, 877, 814, 813, 801, 793, 789, 787, 695, 692, 690, 689, 687, 685, were reviewed but were found to 2023, 1979, 1946, 1917, 1877, 1770, 1710, 1680, 1667, 1619, 1553, 1483, 1378, 1335, 1293, 1210, 1146, 1088, 1055, 1016, 963, 919, 874, 777, 680, have

962, 917, 872, 768, 675, no

Nesser

Informational

[Page 15]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

RFC's 594, 591, 449, 445, 442, 343, 312, 301, 166, 165, 161, 91, 80, 79, 70, 22, 20, 19, 17, investigation.

576, 550, 548, 528, 434, 426, 417, 398, 300, 271, 241, 210, 151, 150, 146, 145, 67, 65, 62, 60, 59, 12 were deemed too

521, 489, 488, 473, 395, 394, 359, 357, 203, 202, 197, 190, 143, 142, 128, 127, 56, 55, 54, 53, 41, old to be considered

460, 348, 178, 123, 38, for

459, 450, 347, 346, 176, 175, 122, 93, 33, 23, millennium

13. Electronic Mail 13.1 Summary The RFC's which were categorized into this group were the Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP), Internet Mail Access Protocol (IMAP), Post Office Protocol (POP), Multipurpose Internet Mail Exchange (MIME), and X.400 to SMTP interaction. After reviewing all mail-related RFCs, it was discovered that while some obsolete standards required two-digit years, all currently used standards require four-digit years and are thus not prone to typical Year 2000 problems. 13.2 Specifics RFCs 821 and 822, the main basis for SMTP mail exchange and message format, originally required two-digit years. However, both of these RFCs were later modified by RFC 1123 in 1989, which strongly recommended 4-digit years. Although there might be a few very old SMTP systems using two-digit years, it is believed that almost all mail sent over the Internet today uses four-digit years. Mail that contains two-digit years in its SMTP headers will not "fail", but might be mis-sorted in message stores and mail user agents. This problem is avoided entirely by taking the RFC 1123 change as a requirement, rather than merely as a recommendation. IMAP versions 1, 2, and 3 used two-digit years, but IMAP version 4 (defined in RFCs 1730 and 1732 in 1994) requires four-digit years. There are still a few IMAP 2 servers and clients in use on the Internet today, but IMAP version 4 has already taken over almost all of the IMAP market. Mail stored on an IMAP server or client with two-digit years will not "fail", but could possibly be mis-sorted or prematurely expired. RFC 1153 describes a format for digests of mailing lists, and uses two-digit dates. This format is not widely used. The use of two-digit dates could possibly cause missorting of stored messages.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 16]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

RFC 1327, which describes mapping between X.400 mail and SMTP mail, uses the UTCTime format. RFC 1422 describes the structure of certificates that were used in PEM (and are expected to be used in many other mail and non-mail services). Those certificates use dates in UTCTime format. Poorly written software might prematurely expire or validate a certificate based on comparisons of the date with the current date, although no current software is known to do this. 14. Network Time Protocols 14.1 Summary The RFC's which were categorized into this group were the Network Time Protocol (NTP), and the Time Protocol. NTP has been certified year 2000 compliant, while the Time Protocol will "roll over" at Thu Feb 07 00:54:54 2036 GMT. Since NTP is the current defacto standard for network time this does not seem to be an issue. 14.2 Specifics There is no reference anywhere in the NTP specification or implementation to any reference epoch other than 1 January 1900. In short, NTP doesn't know anything about the millennium. >From the Time Protocol RFC (868): S: Send the time as a 32 bit binary number. ... The time is the number of seconds since 00:00 (midnight) 1 January 1900 GMT, such that the time 1 is 12:00:01 am on 1 January 1900 GMT; this base will serve until the year 2036. 15. Name Services 15.1 Summary The RFC's which were categorized into this group were the Domain Name System (DNS), it's advanced add on features (Incremental Zone Transfer, etc.). There have been no year 2000 relayed problems found with the DNS protocols, or common implementations of them.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 17]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

15.2 Specifics One is a common practice of writing serial numbers in zone files as if they represent a date, and using only two digits of the year. That practice cannot survive into the year 2000. This is not a protocol problem, the serial number is simply an integer, and any value is OK, provided it always increases (see rfc1982 for a definition of what that means). In any case, a change from 97abcd (or similar) to 00abcd would be a decrease and so is not permitted. Zone file maintainers have two choices, one easy (though irrational) one would be to continue from 99 to 100 and so on. The other, is simply to switch, at any time between now and when the serial number first needs updating after the year 2000, to use 4 digits to represent the year instead of 2. As long as there are no more than 6 digits in the "abcd" part, and this is done sometime before the year 2100, this is always an increase, and therefore always safe. Should any zone files be of the form yyabcdefg (with 7 digits after a 2digit year) then the procedures of section 7 of rfc2182 should be adopted to convert the serial number to some other value. The other item of note is related to timestamps in DNS security. Those are represented as 32 bit counts of seconds, based in 1970, and hence have no year 2000 problems. however, they do obviously have a natural end of life, and sometime before that time is reached, the definitions of those fields need to be corrected, perhaps to allow them to represent the number of seconds elapsed since the base, modulo 2^32, which is likely to be adequate for the purposes of DNS security (signatures and keys are unlikely to need to be valid for more than 70 years). In any case, more work is needed in this area in the not too far distant future. 16 Network Management 16.1 Summary The RFC's which were categorized into this group were the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP), a large number of Management Information Bases (MIBs) and the Common Management Information Protocol over TCP/IP (CMOT). Although a few discrepancies have been found and outlined below, none of them should have an impact on interoperability. 16.2 Specifics 16.2.1 Use of GeneralizedTime in CMOT as defined in RFCs 1095 and 1189.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 18]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

The standards for CMOT specify an unusual use for the GeneralizedTime type. (GeneralizedTime has a four-digit representation of the year.) If the system generating the does have the time since last to encode this information. to the base time "0001 Jan 1 calendar algorithm. PDU does not have the current time, yet boot, then GeneralizedTime can be used The time since last boot will be added 00:00:00.00" using the Gregorian

This is really a "Year 0" problem rather than a Year 2000 problem, and in any case, CMOT is not currently deployed. 16.2.2 UTCTime in SNMP Definitions UTCTime is an ASN.1 type that includes a the year. There are several options for in precision and in local versus GMT, but two-digit years. The standards for SNMP particular format: YYMMDDHHMMZ The first usage of UTCTime in all the way back to RFC 1303. the current specifications in definitions is to record the module itself, via two ASN.1 o o LAST-UPDATED REVISION the standards for SNMP definitions goes It has persisted unchanged up through RFC 1902. The role of UTCTime in SNMP history of an SNMP MIB module in the macros: two-digit representation of UTCTime in ASN.1, that vary these options all have definitions specify one

Management applications that store and use MIB modules need to be smart about interpreting these UTCTimes, by prepending a "19" or a "20" as appropriate. 16.2.3 Objects in the Printer MIB (RFC 1559)

There are two objects in the Printer MIB that allow use of a date as an object value with no explicit guidance for formatting the value. The objects are prtInterpreterLangVersion and prtInterpreterVersion. Both are defined with a syntax of OCTET STRING. The descriptions for the objects allow the object value to contain a date, version code or other product specific information to identify the interpreter or language. The descriptions do not include an explicit statement recommending use of a four-digit year when a date is used as the object value.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 19]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

16.2.4

Dates in Mobile Network Tracing Records (RFC 2041) trace headers and footers with date fields that are of size 32. While 32 characters certainly provide four-digit year, there's no explicit statement that be represented with four digits.

The RFC specifies character arrays enough room for a these years must 17 Network News 17.1 Summary

The RFC's which were categorized into this group were related to the Network News Protocol (NNTP). There does exist Message Format, A working group in general, and items. 17.2 Specifics The NNTP transfer protocols defined in RFC 977. Sections 3.7.1, the definition of the NEWGROUPS command, and 3.8.1, the NEWNEWS command, that dates must be specified in YYMMDD format. The format for USENET news messages is defined in RFC 1036. The Date line is defined in section 2.1.2 and it is specified in RFC-822 format. It specifically disallows the standard UNIX ctime(3) format, which would allow for four digit years. Section 2.2.4 on Expires also mandates the same two-digit year format. 18. Real Time Services 18.1 Summary The RFC's which were categorized into this group were related to IP Multicast, RTP, and Internet Stream Protocol. A Year 2000 problem does occur in the Simple Network Paging Protocol, versions 2 & 3. Both define a HOLDuntil option which uses a YYMMDDHHMMSS+/-GMT field. Version 3 also defines a MSTAtus command, which is required to store, dates and times as YYMMDDHHMMSS+/-GMT. 18.2 Specifics RFC 2102 discusses Multicast support for NIMROD and has no mention of dates or time. RFC 2090 on TFTP Multicast options is also free from any date/time references. a problem in both NNTP, RFC RFC 10336. They both specify has been formed to update the addressing this problem is on 977, and the Usenet News two-digit year format. network news protocols their list of work

Nesser

Informational

[Page 20]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

RFC 2038 on RTP MPEG formats has three references to time: a Presentation Time Stamp (PTS), a Decoding Time Stamp (DTS), and a System Clock (SC) reference time. Each RTP packet contains a timestamp derived from the sender 90 kHz clock reference. Each of the header fields are defined in section 2.1, 3, and 3.3 are 32 bit fields. No mention is made of a "zero" start time, so it is presumed that this format will be valid until at least 2038. Similarly RFC 2035 on the RTP JPEG format defines the same timestamp in section 3. RFC 2032 on RTP H.261 video streams uses a calculated time based on the original frame so once again there is no millennium issue. RFC 2029 on the RTP format for Sun's CellB video encoding mentions the RTP timestamp in section 2.1. RFC 2022 defines support for multicast over UNI 3.0/3.1 based ATM networks. Section 5. defines a timeout value for connections between one and twenty minutes. Section 5.1.1 discusses several timers that are bound between five and ten seconds, while 5.1.3 requires an inactivity timer, which should also run between one and twenty minutes. Sections 5.1.5, 5.1.5.1, 5.1.5.2, 5.2.2, 5.4, 5.4.1, 5.4.2, 5.4.3, 6.1.3 and Appendix E all defines numerous timers, none of which have any millennium issues. RFC 1890 on RTP profiles for audio and video conferences discusses a sampling frequency which has no issues. RFC 1889 on RTP discusses time formats in section 4, as the same 64 bit unsigned integer format that NTP uses. There is a "period" problem, which will occur in the year 2106. Section 5.1 is a more formalized discussion of the timestamp properties, while Section 6.3.1 discusses a variety of different timers all using the 64 bit field format, or a compressed 32-bit version of the inner octet of bytes. Section 8.2 discusses loop detection and how the various timers are used to determine if looping occurs. RFC 1861 on Version 3 of the Simple Network Paging Protocol does have a Year 2000 problem. The protocol defines a HOLDuntil command in section 4.5.6 and a MSTAtus command in section 4.6.10, both of which require dates/times to be stored as YYMMDDHHMMSS+/-GMT. Clearly this format will be invalid after the end of 1999. RFC 1821 has no date/time references. RFC 1819 on Version 2 of the Internet Stream Protocol defines a HELLO message format in section 6.1.2, which does contain a timer which is updated every millisecond. No year 2000 problems exist with this protocol. RFC 1645 on Version 2 of the Simple Network Paging Protocol contains the same HOLDuntil field problem as version 3. The definition is contained section 4.4.6.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 21]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

RFC 1458 on the Requirements of Multicast Protocols discusses a retransmission timer in section 4.23. and a general discussion of timer expiration in section 5, neither of which have any millennium concerns. RFC 1301 on the Multicast Transport Protocol defines a heartbeat interval of time in section 2.1, as well as retention and windows. Formal definitions for each are contained in sections 2.2.7, 2.2.8 and 2.2.9. The heartbeat is a 32 bit unsigned field, while the Window and Retention are both 16 bit unsigned fields. Section 3.4.2 gives examples values for these fields, which indicate no millennium issues. RFC 1193 on Client Requirements for Real Time Services talks about time in section 4.4, but there are no Year 2000 issues. RFC 1190 have been obsoleted by RFC 1819, but the hello timer issues are similar. RFCs 1789, 1768, 1703, 1614, 1569, 1568, 1546, 1469, 1453, 1313, 1257, 1197, 1112, 1054, 988, 966, 947, 809, 804, 803, 798, 769, 741, 511, 508, 420, 408 and 251 contain no date or time references. 19. Routing 19.1 Summary The RFC's which were Information Protocol protocol, Classless Protocol (BGP), and categorized into this group were Routing (RIP), the Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) InterDomain Routing (CIDR),the Border Gateway the InterDomain Routing Protocol (IDRP).

After careful examination both BGP and RIP have been found Year 2000 compliant. There is a small Year IP Routing Policies in C the "changed" object YYMMDD, and similarly he format of YYMMDD. be little operational be modified. 2000 issue in RFC 1786 on the Representation of the ripe-81++ Routing Registry. In Appendices parameter defines a format of in Appendix D "withdrawn" object identifier has Since these are only identifiers there should impact. Some application software may need to

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)

Nesser

Informational

[Page 22]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

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 IP Routing Policies in C the "changed" object YYMMDD, and similarly he format of YYMMDD. be little operational be modified. 2000 issue in RFC 1786 on the Representation of the ripe-81++ Routing Registry. In Appendices parameter defines a format of in Appendix D "withdrawn" object identifier has Since these are only identifiers there should impact. Some application software may need to

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 10second period in Section 3, and hence has no relevant issues.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 23]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

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 section 7 issues. hardcoded on Distance Vector Multicast Routing Protocol devotes to time values. None of the timers have any millennium RFC 1074, on the NFSNET backbone SPF IGP defines several timers values in section 5. There

RFC 1058 on RIP discusses the 30-second timers in section 3.3. 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, 1940, 1930, 1925, 1923, 1863, 1817, 1772, 1765, 1753, 1745, 1723, 1722, 1656, 1655, 1654, 1587, 1586, 1585, 1476, 1439, 1403, 1397, 1388, 1387, 1338, 1322, 1268, 1267, 1266, 1265, 1195, 1164, 1163, 1142, 1136, 1133, 1009, 985, 981, 975, 950, 898, 890, 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. 2008, 1812, 1721, 1581, 1383, 1264, 1126, 888, 1998, 1997, 1992, 1966, 1955, 1793, 1787, 1774, 1773, 1716, 1702, 1701, 1668, 1520, 1519, 1517, 1482, 1380, 1371, 1370, 1364, 1254, 1246, 1245, 1222, 1125, 1124,1104, 1102, 1092, 875, and 823 contain no date

Nesser

Informational

[Page 24]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

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 timers for inputs and outputs. Sections 2.1.1, 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 2.2.1, 2.2.2, 2.2.5 and 2.2.6 all use the lifetime_rec field, is defined as an integer counter in seconds. There should be relevant problems with this protocol. use 2.1.5, which no

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.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 25]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

RFC 1969 on the PPP DES Encryption Protocol uses in Section 4 when discussing how to encrypt the stream. It is suggested that the first 32 bits number of seconds since January 1, 1970. There potential operations problem in 2038.

time as an example first packet of a be used for the could thus be a

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.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 26]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

RFCs 2104, 1948, 1938, 1825, 1824, 1457, 1455, 1281, 1244, contain no

2085, 2084, 1929, 1928, 1760, 1751, 1423, 1416, 1186, 1170, date or time

2057, 2040, 1858, 1852, 1750, 1704, 1412, 1411, 1156, 1108, references.

2015, 1851, 1675, 1409, 1004,

1984, 1829, 1579, 1408, 972,

1968, 1964, 1961, 1949, 1828, 1827, 1826, 1535, 1511, 1492, 1321, 1320, 1319, 931, 927, 912, and 644

21. Virtual Terminal 21.1 Summary The RFC's which were categorized many extensions, as well as the window system was not considered Official acknowledgement by the given that they will examine the into this group were Telnet and its Secure SHell (SSH) protocol. The X since it is not an IETF protocol. trustee's of the X window system was 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, 1143, 1116, 1097, 1096, 1091, 1080, 1005, 946, 933, 930, 929, 907, 885, 856, 855, 854, 851, 818, 802, 782, 735, 734, 732, 731, 729, 728, 727, 657, 656, 655, 654, 653, 652, 651, 352, 340, 339, 328, 311, 297, 231, references. 1372, 1282, 1258, 1221, 1205, 1184, 1079, 1073, 1053, 1043, 1041, 884, 878, 861, 860, 859, 858, 857, 779, 764, 749, 748, 747, 746, 736, 726, 721, 719, 718, 701, 698, 658, 647, 636, 431, 399, 393, 386, 365, and 215 contain no date or time

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.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 27]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

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

Nesser

Informational

[Page 28]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

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:: 1970:: 1542:: 1541:: 1534:: 1533:: 1532:: 1531:: 1497:: 1395:: 1084:: 1048:: 951:: 906:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: DS:: DS:: DS:: DS:: DS:: :: IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration Neighbor Discovery for IP Version 6 (IPv6) Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Interoperation Between DHCP and BOOTP DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol BOOTP Vendor Information Extensions BOOTP Vendor Information Extensions BOOTP vendor information extensions BOOTP vendor information extensions Bootstrap Protocol Bootstrap loading using TFTP

A.2 Directory Services 2120:: E :: 2079:: PS:: 1943:: I:: 1914:: PS:: 1913:: PS:: 1838:: E:: 1837:: 1836:: E:: E:: Managing the X.500 Root Naming Context Definition of X.500 Attribute Types and an Object Class to Hold Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) Building an X.500 Directory Service in the US How to interact with a Whois++ mesh Architecture of the Whois++ Index Service Use of the X.500 Directory to support mapping between X.400 and RFC 822 Addresses Representing Tables and Subtrees in the X.500 Directory Representing the O/R Address hierarchy in the X.500 Directory Information Tree Architecture of the WHOIS++ service Whois and Network Information Lookup Service Whois++ Using the OSI Directory to Achieve User Friendly Naming Referral Whois Protocol (RWhois) Introduction to White Pages services based on X.500 DNS NSAP Resource Records A Revised Catalog of Available X.500 Implementations

1835:: PS:: 1834:: I:: 1781:: PS:: 1714:: I:: 1684:: I:: 1637:: E:: 1632:: I::

Nesser

Informational

[Page 29]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1617:: I:: 1609:: E:: 1608:: E:: 1588:: I:: 1562:: I:: 1491:: I:: 1488:: PS::

Naming and Structuring Guidelines for X.500 Directory Pilots Charting Networks in the X.500 Directory Representing IP Information in the X.500 Directory WHITE PAGES MEETING REPORT Naming Guidelines for the AARNet X.500 Directory Service A Survey of Advanced Usages of X.500 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

Nesser

Informational

[Page 30]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

====================================================================== 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

Nesser

Informational

[Page 31]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1728:: 1727:: 1639:: 1633:: 1630:: 1625:: 1558:: 1554:: 1545:: 1530:: 1529:: 1528:: 1489:: 1486:: 1440:: 1436:: 1415:: 1413:: 1350:: 1345:: 1312:: 1302:: 1288:: 1278:: 1241:: 1235:: 1196:: 1194:: 1179:: 1123:: 1068:: 1037:: 1003:: 998:: 978:: 971:: 969:: 965:: 959:: 949:: 916:: 913:: 887:: 866::

I:: I:: E:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: E:: I:: I:: E:: I:: E:: E:: I:: PS:: PS:: S:: I:: E:: I:: DS:: I:: E:: E:: DS:: DS:: I:: S:: :: H:: :: E:: :: :: :: :: S:: :: H:: H:: E:: S::

Resource Transponders A Vision of an Integrated Internet Information Service FTP Operation Over Big Address Records (FOOBAR) Integrated Services in the Internet Architecture Universal Resource Identifiers in WWW WAIS over Z39.50-1988 A String Representation of LDAP Search Filters ISO-2022-JP-2: Multilingual Extension of ISO-2022-JP FTP Operation Over Big Address Records (FOOBAR) Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain: General Principles and Policy Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain: Remote Printing -- Administrative Policies Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain: Remote Printing -- Technical Procedures Registration of a Cyrillic Character Set An Experiment in Remote Printing SIFT/UFT: Sender-Initiated/Unsolicited File Transfer The Internet Gopher Protocol (a distributed document search and retrieval protocol) FTP-FTAM Gateway Specification Identification Protocol THE TFTP PROTOCOL (REVISION 2) Character Mnemonics & Character Sets Message Send Protocol Building a Network Information Services Infrastructure The Finger User Information Protocol A String Encoding of Presentation Address A Scheme for an Internet Encapsulation Protocol: Version 1 The Coherent File Distribution Protocol The Finger User Information Protocol The Finger User Information Protocol Line Printer Daemon Protocol Requirements for Internet hosts - application and support Background File Transfer Program BFTP NFILE - a file access protocol Issues in defining an equations representation standard NETBLT: A bulk data transfer protocol Voice File Interchange Protocol VFIP Survey of data representation standards NETBLT: A bulk data transfer protocol Format for a graphical communication protocol File Transfer Protocol FTP unique-named store command Reliable Asynchronous Transfer Protocol RATP Simple File Transfer Protocol Resource Location Protocol Active users

Nesser

Informational

[Page 32]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

865:: S:: 864:: S:: 863:: S:: 862:: S:: 797:: :: 795:: :: 783:: DS:: 775:: :: 765:: :: 751:: :: 743:: :: 742:: PS:: 740:: H:: 737:: :: 725:: :: 722:: :: 712:: :: 707:: :: 697:: :: 691:: :: 683:: :: 662:: :: 640:: 633:: 630:: 624:: 622:: 614:: 610:: 607:: 599:: 593:: 592:: 589:: 573:: 571:: 570:: 553:: 551:: 549:: 543:: 542:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Quote of the Day Protocol Character Generator Protocol Discard Protocol Echo Protocol Format for Bitmap files Service mappings TFTP Protocol revision 2 Directory oriented FTP commands File Transfer Protocol specification Survey of FTP mail and MLFL FTP extension: XRSQ/XRCP NAME/FINGER Protocol NETRJS Protocol FTP extension: XSEN RJE protocol for a resource sharing network Thoughts on interactions in distributed services Distributed Capability Computing System DCCS High-level framework for network-based resource sharing CWD command of FTP One more try on the FTP FTPSRV - Tenex extension for paged files Performance improvement in ARPANET file transfers from Multics Revised FTP reply codes IMP/TIP preventive maintenance schedule FTP error code usage for more reliable mail service Comments on the File Transfer Protocol Scheduling IMP/TIP down time Response to RFC 607: "Comments on the File Transfer Protocol" Further datalanguage design concepts Comments on the File Transfer Protocol Update on NETRJS Telnet and FTP implementation schedule change Some thoughts on system design to facilitate resource sharing CCN NETRJS server messages to remote user Data and file transfer: Some measurement results Tenex FTP problem Experimental input mapping between NVT ASCII and UCSB On Line System Draft design for a text/graphics protocol [Letter from Feinroth re: NYU, ANL, and LBL entering the net, and FTP protocol] Minutes of Network Graphics Group meeting, 15-17 July 1973 Network journal submission and delivery File Transfer Protocol

Nesser

Informational

[Page 33]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

535:: 532:: 525:: 520:: 514:: 506:: 505:: 504:: 501:: 499:: 493:: 490:: 487:: 486:: 485:: 480:: 479:: 478:: 477:: 472:: 468:: 467:: 463:: 454:: 451:: 448:: 446:: 438:: 437:: 436:: 430:: 429:: 418:: 414:: 412:: 411:: 410:: 409:: 407:: 406:: 396:: 387:: 385:: 382::

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: H:: :: :: :: :: ::

Comments on File Access Protocol UCSD-CC Server-FTP facility MIT-MATHLAB meets UCSB-OLS -an example of resource sharing Memo to FTP group: Proposal for File Access Protocol Network make-work FTP command naming problem Two solutions to a file transfer access problem Distributed resources workshop announcement Un-muddling "free file transfer" Harvard's network RJE E.W., Jr Graphics Protocol Surrogate RJS for UCLA-CCN Free file transfer Data transfer revisited MIX and MIXAL at UCSB Host-dependent FTP parameters Use of FTP by the NIC Journal FTP server-server interaction - II Remote Job Service at UCSB Illinois' reply to Maxwell's request for graphics information NIC 14925 FTP data compression Proposed change to Host-Host Protocol:Resynchronization of connection status FTP comments and response to RFC 430 File Transfer Protocol - meeting announcement and a new proposed document Tentative proposal for a Unified User Level Protocol Print files in FTP Proposal to consider a network program resource notebook FTP server-server interaction Data Reconfiguration Service at UCSB Announcement of RJS at UCSB Comments on File Transfer Protocol Character generator process Server file transfer under TSS/360 at NASA Ames File Transfer Protocol FTP status and further comments User FTP documentation New MULTICS network software features Removal of the 30-second delay when hosts come up Tenex interface to UCSB's Simple-Minded File System Remote Job Entry Protocol Scheduled IMP software releases Network Graphics Working Group meeting - second iteration Some experiences in implementing Network Graphics Protocol Level 0 Comments on the File Transfer Protocol Mathematical software on the ARPA Network

Nesser

Informational

[Page 34]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

374:: 373:: 368:: 367:: 366:: 361:: 360:: 354:: 351:: 342:: 338:: 336:: 335:: 332:: 325:: 324:: 314:: 310:: 309:: 307:: 306:: 299:: 298:: 294:: 293:: 292:: 288:: 287:: 286:: 285:: 283:: 281:: 268:: 267:: 266:: 265:: 264:: 255:: 252:: 250:: 238:: 217:: 199:: 192:: 191::

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

IMP system announcement Arbitrary character sets Comments on "Proposed Remote Job Entry Protocol" Network host status Network host status Deamon processes on host 106 Proposed Remote Job Entry Protocol File Transfer Protocol Graphics information form for the ARPANET graphics resources notebook Network host status EBCDIC/ASCII mapping for network RJE Level 0 Graphic Input Protocol New interface - IMP/360 Network host status Network Remote Job Entry program - NETRJS RJE Protocol meeting Network Graphics Working Group meeting Another look at Data and File Transfer Protocols Data and File Transfer workshop announcement Using network Remote Job Entry Network host status Information management system Network host status On the use of "set data type" transaction in File Transfer Protocol Network host status E.W., Jr Graphics Protocol: Level 0 only Network host status Status of network hosts Network library information system Network graphics NETRJT: Remote Job Service Protocol for TIPS Suggested addition to File Transfer Protocol Graphics facilities information Network host status Network host status File Transfer Protocol Data Transfer Protocol Status of network hosts Network host status Some thoughts on file transfer Comments on DTP and FTP proposals Specifications changes for OLS, RJE/RJOR, and SMFS Suggestions for a network data-tablet graphics protocol Some factors which a Network Graphics Protocol must consider Graphics implementation and conceptualization at

Nesser

Informational

[Page 35]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

189:: 184:: 183:: 181:: 174:: 172:: 163:: 141:: 134:: 133:: 125:: 114:: 105:: 98:: 94:: 88:: 86::

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

83:: :: ========== Internet & 2126:: PS:: 2125:: PS:: 2118:: 2114:: 2113:: 2107:: 2106:: 2105:: 2098:: 2097:: 2075:: 2067:: 2043:: 2023:: 2019:: 2018:: 2009:: 2005:: 2004:: 2003:: 2002:: 2001:: I:: I:: PS:: I:: I:: I:: I:: PS:: I:: DS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: E:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS::

Augmentation Research Center Interim NETRJS specifications Proposed graphic display modes EBCDIC codes and their mapping to ASCII Modifications to RFC 177 UCLA - computer science graphics overview File Transfer Protocol Data transfer protocols Comments on RFC 114: A File Transfer Protocol Network Graphics meeting File transfer and recovery Response to RFC 86: Proposal for network standard format for a graphics data stream File Transfer Protocol Network specifications for Remote Job Entry and Remote Job Output Retrieval at UCSB Logger Protocol proposal Some thoughts on network graphics NETRJS: A third level protocol for Remote JobEntry Proposal for a network standard format for a data stream to control graphics display Language-machine for data reconfiguration ============================================================ Network Layer ISO Transport Service on top of TCP (ITOT) The PPP Bandwidth Allocation Protocol (BAP) The PPP Bandwidth Allocation Control Protocol (BACP) Microsoft Point-To-Point Compression (MPPC) Protocol Data Link Switching Client Access Protocol IP Router Alert Option Ascend Tunnel Management Protocol - ATMP Data Link Switching Remote Access Protocol Cisco Systems' Tag Switching Architecture Overview Toshiba's Router Architecture Extensions for ATM:Overview The PPP NetBIOS Frames Control Protocol (NBFCP) IP Echo Host Service IP over HIPPI The PPP SNA Control Protocol (SNACP) IP Version 6 over PPP Transmission of IPv6 Packets Over FDDI TCP Selective Acknowledgment Options GPS-Based Addressing and Routing Applicability Statement for IP Mobility Support Minimal Encapsulation within IP IP Encapsulation within IP IP Mobility Support TCP Slow Start, Congestion Avoidance, Fast Retransmit, and Fast Recovery Algorithms

Nesser

Informational

[Page 36]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1994:: 1993:: 1990:: 1989:: 1981:: 1979:: 1978:: 1977:: 1976::

DS:: I:: DS:: DS:: PS:: I:: I:: I:: I::

1975:: I:: 1974:: I:: 1973:: PS:: 1972:: PS:: 1967:: I:: 1963:: I:: 1962:: PS:: 1954:: I:: 1946:: 1937:: I:: I::

1936:: I:: 1934:: I:: 1933:: PS:: 1932:: I:: 1931:: I:: 1926:: I::

1924:: I:: 1919:: I:: 1918:: BC:: 1917:: BC:: 1916:: I:: 1915:: BC:: 1897:: E:: 1888:: E:: 1887:: I:: 1885:: PS:: 1884:: PS:: 1883:: PS:: 1881:: I:: 1878:: I::

PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication Protocol (CHAP) PPP Gandalf FZA Compression Protocol The PPP Multilink Protocol (MP) PPP Link Quality Monitoring Path MTU Discovery for IP version 6 PPP Deflate Protocol PPP Predictor Compression Protocol PPP BSD Compression Protocol PPP for Data Compression in Data Circuit-Terminating Equipment (DCE) PPP Magnalink Variable Resource Compression PPP Stac LZS Compression Protocol PPP in Frame Relay A Method for the Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks PPP LZS-DCP Compression Protocol (LZS-DCP) PPP Serial Data Transport Protocol (SDTP) The PPP Compression Control Protocol (CCP) Transmission of Flow Labelled IPv4 on ATM Data Links Ipsilon Version 1.0 Native ATM Support for ST2+ Local/Remote Forwarding Decision in Switched Data Link Subnetworks Implementing the Internet Checksum in Hardware Ascend's Multilink Protocol Plus (MP+) Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers IP over ATM: A Framework Document Dynamic RARP Extensions and Administrative Support for Automatic Network Address Allocation An Experimental Encapsulation of IP Datagrams on Top of ATM A Compact Representation of IPv6 Addresses Classical versus Transparent IP Proxies Address Allocation for Private Internets An Appeal to the Internet Community to Return Unused IP Networks (Prefixes) to the IANA Enterprise Renumbering Variance for The PPP Connection Control Protocol and The PPP Encryption Control Protocol IPv6 Testing Address Allocation OSI NSAPs and IPv6 An Architecture for IPv6 Unicast Address Allocation Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification IPv6 Address Allocation Management Variable Length Subnet Table For IPv4

Nesser

Informational

[Page 37]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1877:: 1868:: 1860:: 1859:: 1853:: 1841:: 1833:: 1832:: 1831:: 1809:: 1795:: 1791:: 1770:: 1764:: 1763:: 1762:: 1761:: 1756:: 1755:: 1754::

I:: E:: I:: I:: I:: I:: PS:: PS:: PS:: I:: I:: E:: I:: PS:: PS:: DS:: I:: E:: PS:: I::

1752:: PS:: 1744:: I:: 1735:: E:: 1726:: I:: 1719:: I:: 1717:: PS:: 1710:: I:: 1707:: I:: 1705:: I:: 1698:: I:: 1693:: E:: 1692:: PS:: 1688:: I:: 1687:: I:: 1686:: I:: 1683:: I:: 1682:: I:: 1681:: I:: 1680:: I:: 1679:: I:: 1678:: 1677:: I:: I::

PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol Extensions for Name Server Addresses ARP Extension - UNARP Variable Length Subnet Table For IPv4 ISO Transport Class 2 Non-use of Explicit Flow Control over TCP RFC1006 extension IP in IP Tunneling PPP Network Control Protocol for LAN Extension Binding Protocols for ONC RPC Version 2 XDR RPC Using the Flow Label Field in IPv6 Data Link Switching TCP And UDP Over IPX Networks With Fixed Path MTU IPv4 Option for Sender Directed Multi-Destination Delivery The PPP XNS IDP Control Protocol (XNSCP) The PPP Banyan Vines Control Protocol (BVCP) The PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol (DNCP) Snoop Version 2 Packet Capture File Format REMOTE WRITE PROTOCOL - VERSION 1.0 ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM IP over ATM Working Group's Recommendations for the ATM Forum's Multiprotocol BOF Version 1 The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation Protocol Observations on the Management of the Internet Address Space NBMA Address Resolution Protocol (NARP) Technical Criteria for Choosing IP A Direction for IPng The PPP Multilink Protocol (MP) Simple Internet Protocol Plus White Paper CATNIP Six Virtual Inches to the Left Octet Sequences for Upper-Layer OSI to Support Basic Communications Applications An Extension to TCP Transport Multiplexing Protocol (TMux) IPng Mobility Considerations A Large Corporate User's View of IPng IPng Requirements Multiprotocol Interoperability In IPng IPng BSD Host Implementation Analysis On Many Addresses per Host IPng Support for ATM Services HPN Working Group Input to the IPng Requirements Solicitation IPng Requirements of Large Corporate Networks Tactical Radio Frequency Communication Requirements

Nesser

Informational

[Page 38]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1676:: I:: 1674:: I:: 1673:: I:: 1672:: I:: 1671:: I:: 1670:: I:: 1669:: I:: 1667:: I:: 1663:: PS:: 1662:: S:: 1661:: S:: 1644:: E:: 1638:: PS:: 1634:: I:: 1631:: I:: 1629:: DS:: 1626:: PS:: 1624:: I:: 1622:: 1621:: 1620:: 1619:: 1618:: 1613:: 1605:: 1604:: 1598:: 1590:: 1577:: 1575:: 1570:: 1561:: 1560:: 1553:: 1552:: I:: I:: I:: PS:: PS:: I:: I:: PS:: PS:: I:: PS:: DS:: PS:: E:: I:: PS:: PS::

1551:: I:: 1549:: DS:: 1548:: DS:: 1547:: I:: 1538:: I:: 1526:: I:: 1518:: PS:: 1498:: I::

for IPng INFN Requirements for an IPng A Cellular Industry View of IPng Electric Power Research Institute Comments on IPng Accounting Requirements for IPng IPng White Paper on Transition and Other Considerations Input to IPng Engineering Considerations Market Viability as a IPng Criteria Modeling and Simulation Requirements for IPng PPP Reliable Transmission PPP in HDLC-like Framing The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) T/TCP -- TCP Extensions for Transactions Functional Specification PPP Bridging Control Protocol (BCP) Novell IPX Over Various WAN Media (IPXWAN) The IP Network Address Translator (Nat) Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation in the Internet Default IP MTU for use over ATM AAL5 Computation of the Internet Checksum via Incremental Update Pip Header Processing Pip Near-term Architecture Internet Architecture Extensions for Shared Media PPP over SONET/SDH PPP over ISDN cisco Systems X.25 over TCP (XOT) SONET to Sonnet Translation Definitions of Managed Objects for Frame Relay Service PPP in X.25 Media Type Registration Procedure Classical IP and ARP over ATM An Echo Function for CLNP (ISO 8473) PPP LCP Extensions Use of ISO CLNP in TUBA Environments The MultiProtocol Internet Compressing IPX Headers Over WAN Media (CIPX) The PPP Internetwork Packet Exchange Control Protocol (IPXCP) Novell IPX Over Various WAN Media (IPXWAN) PPP in HDLC Framing The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) Requirements for an Internet Standard Point-to-Point Protocol Advanced SNA/IP Assignment of System Identifiers for TUBA/CLNP Hosts An Architecture for IP Address Allocation with CIDR On the Naming and Binding of Network Destinations

Nesser

Informational

[Page 39]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1490:: 1483:: 1475:: 1466:: 1454:: 1435:: 1434:: 1433:: 1393:: 1390:: 1385:: 1379:: 1378:: 1377:: 1376:: 1375:: 1374:: 1365:: 1363:: 1362:: 1356:: 1347:: 1337:: 1335:: 1334:: 1333:: 1332:: 1331::

DS:: PS:: E:: I:: I:: I:: I:: E:: E:: S:: I:: I:: PS:: PS:: PS:: I:: PS:: I:: E:: I:: PS:: I:: I:: :: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS::

1329:: I:: 1326:: I:: 1323:: PS:: 1314:: PS:: 1307:: E:: 1306:: I:: 1294:: PS:: 1293:: PS:: 1277:: PS:: 1263:: 1256:: 1240:: 1237:: 1236:: 1234:: I:: PS:: PS:: PS:: :: PS::

Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame Relay Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM Adaptation Layer 5 TP/IX Guidelines for Management of IP Address Space Comparison of Proposals for Next Version of IP IESG Advice from Experience with Path MTU Discovery Data Link Switching Directed ARP Traceroute Using an IP Option Transmission of IP and ARP over FDDI Networks EIP Extending TCP for Transactions -- Concepts The PPP AppleTalk Control Protocol (ATCP) The PPP OSI Network Layer Control Protocol (OSINLCP) The PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol (DNCP) Suggestion for New Classes of IP Addresses IP and ARP on HIPPI An IP Address Extension Proposal A Proposed Flow Specification Novell IPX Over Various WAN Media (IPXWAN) Multiprotocol Interconnect on X.25 and ISDN in the Packet Mode TCP and UDP with Bigger Addresses (TUBA), A Simple Proposal for Internet Addressing and Routing TIME-WAIT Assassination Hazards in TCP A Two-Tier Address Structure for the Internet PPP Authentication Protocols PPP Link Quality Monitoring The PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol (IPCP) The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) for the Transmission of Multi-protocol Datagrams over Point-to-Point Links Thoughts on Address Resolution for Dual MAC FDDI Networks Mutual Encapsulation Considered Dangerous TCP Extensions for High Performance A File Format for the Exchange of Images in the Internet Dynamically Switched Link Control Protocol Experiences Supporting By-Request Circuit-Switched T3 Networks Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame Relay Inverse Address Resolution Protocol Encoding Network Addresses to Support Operation Over Non-OSI Lower Layers TCP Extensions Considered Harmful ICMP Router Discovery Messages OSI Connectionless Transport Services on top of UDP Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation in the Internet IP to X.121 Address Mapping for DDN Tunneling IPX Traffic through IP Networks

Nesser

Informational

[Page 40]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1226:: E:: 1223:: :: 1220:: PS:: 1219:: :: 1210:: ::

1209:: DS:: 1201:: H:: 1191:: DS:: 1188:: DS:: 1185:: E:: 1172:: PS:: 1171:: DS:: 1166:: 1162:: :: ::

1151:: E:: 1146:: E:: 1145:: E:: 1144:: PS:: 1141:: :: 1139:: PS:: 1134:: PS:: 1132:: S:: 1122:: S:: 1110:: :: 1106:: :: 1103:: PS:: 1088:: 1086:: 1085:: 1078:: 1072:: 1071:: 1070:: 1069:: 1063:: 1062:: S:: :: :: :: E:: :: :: :: :: ::

Internet Protocol Encapsulation of AX.25 Frames OSI CLNS and LLC1 Protocols on Network Systems HYPERchannel Point-to-Point Protocol Extensions for Bridging On the Assignment of Subnet Numbers Network and Infrastructure User Requirements for Transatlantic Research Collaboration - Brussels, July 16-18, and Washington July 24-25, 1990 The Transmission of IP Datagrams over the SMDS Service Transmitting IP Traffic over ARCNET Networks Path MTU Discovery A Proposed Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams over FDDI Networks TCP Extension for High-Speed Paths The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) Initial Configuration Options The Point-to-Point Protocol for the Transmission of Multi-Protocol Datagrams Over Point-to-Point Links Internet Numbers Connectionless Network Protocol (ISO 8473) and End System to Intermediate System (ISO 9542) Management Information Base Version 2 of the Reliable Data Protocol (RDP) TCP Alternate Checksum Options TCP Alternate Checksum Options Compressing TCP/IP headers for low-speed serial links Incremental Updating of the Internet Checksum Echo function for ISO 8473 Point-to-Point Protocol Standard for the transmission of 802.2 packets over IPX networks Requirements for Internet hosts - communication layers Problem with the TCP big window option TCP big window and NAK options Proposed standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over FDDI Networks Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over NetBIOS networks ISO-TP0 bridge between TCP and X.25 ISO presentation services on top of TCP/IP based internets TCP port service Multiplexer TCPMUX TCP extensions for long-delay paths Computing the Internet checksum Use of the Internet as a subnetwork for experimentation with the OSI network layer Guidelines for the use of Internet-IP addressesin the ISO Connectionless-Mode Network Protocol IP MTU Discovery options Internet numbers

Nesser

Informational

[Page 41]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1057:: 1055:: 1051:: 1050:: 1046:: 1045:: 1044:: 1042:: 1030:: 1029:: 1027:: 1025:: 1016:: 1008:: 1007:: 1006:: 1002:: 1001:: 994:: 986:: 983:: 982:: 970:: 964:: 963:: 962:: 955:: 948:: 942:: 941:: 940:: 936:: 935::

I:: S:: S:: H:: :: E:: S:: S:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: S:: S:: S:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

RPC Nonstandard for transmission of IP datagrams over serial lines Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams and ARP packets over ARCNET networks RPC Queuing algorithm to provide type-of-service for IP links VMTP Internet Protocol on Network System's HYPERchannel Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over IEEE 802 networks On testing the NETBLT Protocol over divers networks More fault tolerant approach to address resolution for a Multi-LAN system of Ethernets Using ARP to implement transparent subnet gateways TCP and IP bake off Something a host could do with source quench Implementation guide for the ISO Transport Protocol Military supplement to the ISO Transport Protocol ISO transport services on top of the TCP Protocol standard for a NetBIOS service on a TCP/UDP transport Protocol standard for a NetBIOS service on a TCP/UDP transport Final text of DIS 8473,Protocol for Providing the Connectionless-mode Network Service Guidelines for the use of Internet-IP addressesin the ISO Connectionless-Mode Network Protocol [Working draft] ISO transport arrives on top of the TCP Guidelines for the specification of the structure of the Domain Specific Part DSP of the ISO standard NSAP address On packet switches with infinite storage Some problems with the specification of the Military Standard Transmission Control Protocol Some problems with the specification of the Military Standard Internet Protocol TCP-4 prime Towards a transport service for transaction processing applications Two methods for the transmission of IP datagrams over IEEE 802.3 networks Transport protocols for Department of Defense data networks Addendum to the networkservice definition covering network layer addressing Toward an Internet standard scheme for subnetting Another Internet subnet addressing scheme Reliable link layer protocols

Nesser

Informational

[Page 42]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

932:: 926:: 925:: 924:: 922:: 919:: 917:: 914:: 905:: 903:: 896:: 895:: 894:: 893:: 892:: 891:: 889:: 879:: 877:: 874:: 872:: 871:: 848:: 829:: 826:: 824:: 815:: 814:: 813:: 801:: 793:: 792:: 791:: 789:: 787:: 781:: 777:: 768:: 761:: 760:: 759:: 730::

:: :: :: :: S:: S:: :: H:: :: S:: :: S:: S:: :: :: S:: :: :: S:: :: :: :: :: :: S:: :: :: :: :: :: S:: S:: S:: :: :: :: :: S:: :: :: H:: ::

Subnetwork addressing scheme Protocol for providing the connectionless mode network services Multi-LAN address resolution Official ARPA-Internet protocols for connecting personal computers to the Internet Broadcasting Internet datagrams in the presence of subnets Broadcasting Internet datagrams Internet subnets Thinwire protocol for connecting personal computers to the Internet ISO Transport Protocol specification ISO DP 8073 Reverse Address Resolution Protocol Congestion control in IP/TCP internetworks Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over experimental Ethernet networks Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over Ethernet networks Trailer encapsulations ISO Transport Protocol specification [Draft] DCN local-network protocols Internet delay experiments TCP maximum segment size and related topics Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over public data networks Critique of X.25 TCP-on-a-LAN Perspective on the ARPANET reference model Who provides the "little" TCP services? Packet satellite technology reference sources Ethernet Address Resolution Protocol CRONUS Virtual Local Network IP datagram reassembly algorithms Name, addresses, ports, and routes Window and acknowlegement strategy in TCP NCP/TCP transition plan Transmission Control Protocol Internet Control Message Protocol Internet Protocol Vulnerabilities of network control protocols Connectionless data transmission survey/tutorial Specification of the Internet Protocol IP timestamp option Internet Control Message Protocol User Datagram Protocol DOD Standard Transmission Control Protocol DoD standard Internet Protocol Internet Message Protocol Extensible field addressing

Nesser

Informational

[Page 43]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

704:: 696:: 695:: 692:: 690:: 689:: 687:: 685:: 680:: 675:: 674:: 660:: 632:: 626:: 613:: 611:: 594:: 591:: 576:: 550:: 548:: 528:: 521:: 489:: 488:: 476:: 473:: 460:: 459:: 450:: 449:: 445:: 442:: 434:: 426:: 417:: 398:: 395:: 394:: 359:: 357:: 348:: 347:: 346:: 343:: 312::

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

IMP/Host and Host/IMP Protocol change Comments on the IMP/Host and Host/IMP Protocol changes Official change in Host-Host Protocol Comments on IMP/Host Protocol changes RFCs 687 and 690 Comments on the proposed Host/IMP Protocol changes Tenex NCP finite state machine for connections IMP/Host and Host/IMP Protocol changes Response time in cross network debugging Message Transmission Protocol Specification of Internet Transmission Control Program Procedure call documents - version 2 Some changes to the IMP and the IMP/Host interface Throughput degradations for single packet messages On a possible lockup condition in IMP subnet due to message sequencing Network connectivity Two changes to the IMP/Host Protocol to improve user/network communications Speedup of Host-IMP interface Addition to the Very Distant Host specifications Proposal for modifying linking NIC NCP experiment Hosts using the IMP Going Down message Software checksumming in the IMP and network reliability Restricted use of IMP DDT Comment on resynchronization of connection status proposal NLS classes at network sites IMP/TIP memory retrofit schedule rev. 2 MIX and MIXAL? NCP survey Network questionnaires MULTICS sampling timeout change Current flow-control scheme for IMPSYS IMP/TIP preventive maintenance schedule Current flow-control scheme for IMPSYS IMP/TIP memory retrofit schedule Reconnection Protocol Link usage violation ICP sockets Switch settings on IMPs and TIPs Two proposed changes to the IMP-Host Protocol Status of the release of the new IMP System Echoing strategy for satellite links Discard process Echo process Satellite considerations IMP System change notification Proposed change in IMP-to-Host Protocol

Nesser

Informational

[Page 44]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

301:: 300:: 271:: 241:: 210:: 203:: 202:: 197:: 190:: 178:: 176:: 175:: 166:: 165:: 161:: 151:: 150:: 146:: 145:: 143:: 142:: 128:: 127:: 123:: 122:: 93:: 91:: 80:: 79:: 70:: 67:: 65:: 62:: 60:: 59:: 56:: 55:: 54:: 53:: 41:: 38:: 33:: 23:: 22:: 20::

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

BBN IMP #5 and NCC schedule March 4, 1971 ARPA Network mailing lists IMP System change notifications Connecting computers to MLC ports Improvement of flow control Achieving reliable communication Possible deadlock in ICP Initial Connection Protocol - Reviewed DEC PDP-10-IMLAC communications system Network graphic attention handling Comments on "Byte size for connections" Comments on "Socket conventions reconsidered" Data Reconfiguration Service Proffered official Initial Connection Protocol Solution to the race condition in the ICP Comments on a proffered official ICP Use of IPC facilities Views on issues relevant to data sharing on computer networks Initial Connection Protocol control commands Regarding proffered official ICP Time-out mechanism in the Host-Host Protocol Bytes Comments on RFC 123 Proffered official ICP Network specifications for UCSB's Simple-Minded File System Initial Connection Protocol Proposed User-User Protocol Protocols and data formats Logger Protocol error Note on padding Proposed change to Host/IMP spec to eliminate marking Comments on Host/Host Protocol document #1 Systems for interprocess communication in a resource sharing computer network Simplified NCP Protocol Flow control - fixed versus demand allocation Third level protocol Prototypical implementation of the NCP Official protocol proffering Official protocol mechanism IMP-IMP teletype communication Comments on network protocol from NWG/RFC #36 New Host-Host Protocol Transmission of multiple control messages Host-host control message formats ASCII format for network interchange

Nesser

Informational

[Page 45]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

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

19::

::

Nesser

Informational

[Page 46]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1870:: 1869:: 1864:: 1854:: 1848:: 1847:: 1846:: 1845:: 1844:: 1830:: 1820:: 1806:: 1804:: 1803:: 1801:: 1767:: 1741:: 1740:: 1734:: 1733:: 1732:: 1731:: 1730:: 1725:: 1711:: 1685:: 1653:: 1652:: 1651:: 1649::

S:: S:: DS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: E:: E:: I:: E:: I:: E:: E:: I:: E:: PS:: I:: PS:: PS:: I:: I:: PS:: PS:: DS:: I:: I:: DS:: DS:: DS:: I::

1648:: PS:: 1642:: E:: 1641:: E:: 1616:: I:: 1615:: I:: 1563:: I:: 1557:: I:: 1556:: I:: 1555:: I:: 1544:: PS:: 1524:: I:: 1523:: I:: 1522:: DS::

SMTP Service Extension for Message Size Declaration SMTP Service Extensions The Content-MD5 Header Field SMTP Service Extension for Command Pipelining MIME Object Security Services Security Multiparts for MIME SMTP 521 reply code SMTP Service Extension for Checkpoint/Restart Multimedia E-mail (MIME) User Agent checklist SMTP Service Extensions for Transmission of Large and Binary MIME Messages Multimedia E-mail (MIME) User Agent Checklist Communicating Presentation Information in Internet Messages Schema Publishing in X.500 Directory Recommendations for an X.500 Production Directory Service MHS use of the X.500 Directory to support MHS Routing MIME Encapsulation of EDI Objects MIME Content Type for BinHex Encoded Files MIME Encapsulation of Macintosh files - MacMIME POP3 AUTHentication command DISTRIBUTED ELECTRONIC MAIL MODELS IN IMAP4 IMAP4 COMPATIBILITY WITH IMAP2 AND IMAP2BIS IMAP4 Authentication mechanisms INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - VERSION 4 Post Office Protocol - Version 3 Classifications in E-mail Routing Writing X.400 O/R Names SMTP Service Extension for Message Size Declaration SMTP Service Extension for 8bit-MIMEtransport SMTP Service Extensions Operational Requirements for X.400 Management Domains in the GO-MHS Community Postmaster Convention for X.400 Operations UTF-7 - A Mail-Safe Transformation Format of Unicode Using Unicode with MIME X.400(1988) for the Academic and Research Community in Europe Migrating from X.400(84) to X.400(88) The text/enriched MIME Content-type Korean Character Encoding for Internet Messages Handling of Bi-directional Texts in MIME Hebrew Character Encoding for Internet Messages The Content-MD5 Header Field A User Agent Configuration Mechanism For Multimedia Mail Format Information The text/enriched MIME Content-type MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part Two

Nesser

Informational

[Page 47]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1521:: DS:: 1506:: I:: 1505:: E:: 1502:: PS:: 1496:: PS:: 1495:: PS:: 1494:: PS:: 1468:: I:: 1465:: E::

1460:: DS:: 1456:: I:: 1437:: I:: 1429:: I:: 1428:: I:: 1427:: PS:: 1426:: PS:: 1425:: PS:: 1405:: E:: 1357:: I:: 1344:: I:: 1343:: I:: 1342:: PS:: 1341:: 1339:: 1328:: 1327:: 1225:: 1211:: 1204:: 1203:: 1176:: 1168:: 1159:: 1154:: 1153:: 1148:: 1138:: 1137:: PS:: E:: PS:: PS:: DS:: :: E:: H:: E:: :: E:: E:: E:: E:: I:: E::

1090:: :: 1082:: H:: 1081:: PS::

MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part One A tutorial on gatewaying between X.400 and Internet mail Encoding Header Field for Internet Messages X.400 Use of Extended Character Sets Rules for downgrading messages from X.400/88 to X.400/84 when MIME content-types are present in the messages Mapping between X.400 and RFC-822 Message Bodies Equivalences between 1988 X.400 and RFC-822 Message Bodies Japanese Character Encoding for Internet Messages Routing coordination for X.400 MHS services within a multi protocol / multi network environment Table Format V3 for static routing Post Office Protocol - Version 3 Conventions for Encoding the Vietnamese Language VISCII The Extension of MIME Content-Types to a New Medium Listserv Distribute Protocol Transition of Internet Mail from Just-Send-8 to 8Bit-SMTP/MIME SMTP Service Extension for Message Size Declaration SMTP Service Extension for 8bit-MIMEtransport SMTP Service Extensions Mapping between X.400(1984/1988) and Mail-11 (DECnet mail) A Format for E-mailing Bibliographic Records Implications of MIME for Internet Mail Gateways A User Agent Configuration Mechanism For Multimedia Mail Format Information Representation of Non-ASCII Text in Internet Message Headers MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Remote Mail Checking Protocol X.400 1988 to 1984 downgrading Mapping between X.400(1988) / ISO 10021 and RFC 822 Post Office Protocol - Version 3 Problems with the Maintenance of Large Mailing Lists Message Posting Protocol (MPP) Interactive Mail Access Protocol - Version 3 Interactive Mail Access Protocol - Version 2 Intermail and Commercial Mail Relay Services Message Send Protocol Encoding Header Field for Internet Messages Digest Message Format Mapping between X.400 (1988) / ISO 10021 and RFC 822 Mapping between X.400(1988) / ISO 10021 and RFC 822 Mapping between full RFC 822 and RFC 822 with restricted encoding SMTP on X.25 Post Office Protocol - version 3 Post Office Protocol - version 3

Nesser

Informational

[Page 48]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1064:: H:: 1056:: I:: 1049:: S:: 1047:: :: 1026:: PS:: 993:: :: 987:: PS:: 984:: :: 976:: :: 974:: S:: 937:: H:: 934:: :: 918:: :: 915:: :: 910:: :: 886:: :: 876:: :: 841:: :: 822:: 821:: 808:: 807:: 805:: 788:: 786:: 785:: 784:: 780:: 773:: 772:: 771:: 767:: 763:: 757:: 754:: 753:: 744:: 733:: 724:: 720:: 714:: 713:: 706:: S:: S:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Interactive Mail Access Protocol PCMAIL Content-type header field for Internet messages Duplicate messages and SMTP Addendum to RFC 987 PCMAIL Mapping between X.400 and RFC 822 PCMAIL UUCP mail interchange format standard Mail routing and the domain system Post Office Protocol - version 2 Proposed standard for message encapsulation Post Office Protocol Network mail path service Multimedia mail meeting notes Proposed standard for message header munging Survey of SMTP implementations Specification for message format for Computer Based Message Systems Standard for the format of ARPA Internet text messages Simple Mail Transfer Protocol Summary of computer mail services meeting held at BBN on 10 January 1979 Multimedia mail meeting notes Computer mail meeting notes Simple Mail Transfer Protocol Mail Transfer Protocol Mail Transfer Protocol Mail Transfer Protocol Mail Transfer Protocol Comments on NCP/TCP mail service transition strategy Mail Transfer Protocol Mail transition plan Structured format for transmission of multi-media documents Role mailboxes Suggested solution to the naming, addressing, and delivery problem for ARPANET message systems Out-of-net host addresses for mail Internet Message Protocol MARS - a Message Archiving and Retrieval Service Standard for theformat of ARPA network text messages Proposed official standard for the format of ARPA Network messages Address specification syntax for network mail Host-Host Protocol for an ARPANET-type network MSDTP-Message Services Data Transmission Protocol On the junk mail problem

Nesser

Informational

[Page 49]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

577:: :: Mail priority 574:: :: Announcement of a mail facility at UCSB 561:: :: Standardizingnetwork mail headers 555:: :: Responses to critiques of the proposed mail protocol 539:: :: Thoughts on the mail protocol proposed in RFC524 534:: :: Lost message detection 533:: :: Message-ID numbers 524:: :: Proposed Mail Protocol 516:: :: Lost message detection 512:: :: More on lost message detection 510:: :: Request for network mailbox addresses 498:: :: On mail service to CCN 475:: :: FTP and network mail system 469:: :: Network mail meeting summary 458:: :: Mail retrieval via FTP 453:: :: Meeting announcement to discuss a network mail system 333:: :: Proposed experiment with a Message Switching Protocol 278:: :: Revision of theMail Box Protocol 224:: :: Comments on Mailbox Protocol 221:: :: Mail Box Protocol 196:: :: Mail Box Protocol 58:: :: Logical message synchronization 42:: :: Message data types ===================================================================== NTP 2030:: I:: Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP) Version 4 for IPv4, IPv6 and OSI 1769:: I:: Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP) 1708:: I:: NTP PICS PROFORMA For the Network Time Protocol Version 3 1589:: I:: A Kernel Model for Precision Timekeeping 1361:: I:: Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP) 1305:: PS:: Network Time Protocol (v3) 1165:: E:: Network Time Protocol (NTP) over the OSI Remote Operations Service 1129:: :: Internet time synchronization 1128:: :: Measured performance of the Network Time Protocol in the Internet system 1119:: S:: Network Time Protocol version 2 specification and implementation 1059:: :: Network Time Protocol version 1 specification and implementation 958:: :: Network Time Protocol NTP 957:: :: Experiments in network clock synchronization 956:: :: Algorithms for synchronizing network clocks 868:: S:: Time Protocol 867:: S:: Daytime Protocol 778:: H:: DCNET Internet Clock Service 738:: :: Time server

Nesser

Informational

[Page 50]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

29:: :: Response to RFC 28 28:: :: Time standards ===================================================================== Name Serving 2053:: I:: The AM (Armenia) Domain 2052:: E:: A DNS RR for specifying the location of services (DNS SRV) 2010:: I:: Operational Criteria for Root Name Servers 1996:: PS:: A Mechanism for Prompt Notification of Zone Changes (DNS NOTIFY) 1995:: PS:: Incremental Zone Transfer in DNS 1982:: PS:: Serial Number Arithmetic 1956:: I:: Registration in the MIL Domain 1912:: I:: Common DNS Operational and Configuration Errors 1886:: PS:: DNS Extensions to support IP version 6 1876:: E:: A Means for Expressing Location Information in the Domain Name System 1794:: I:: DNS Support for Load Balancing 1713:: I:: Tools for DNS debugging 1712:: E:: DNS Encoding of Geographical Location 1706:: I:: DNS NSAP Resource Records 1664:: E:: Using the Internet DNS to Distribute RFC1327 Mail Address Mapping Tables 1591:: I:: Domain Name System Structure and Delegation 1537:: I:: Common DNS Data File Configuration Error 1536:: I:: Common DNS Implementation Errors and Suggested Fixes. 1480:: I:: The US Domain 1464:: E:: Using the Domain Name System To Store Arbitrary String Attributes 1394:: I:: Relationship of Telex Answerback Codes to Internet Domains 1386:: I:: The US Domain 1348:: E:: DNS NSAP RRs 1183:: E:: New DNS RR Definitions 1101:: :: DNS encoding of network names and other types 1035:: S:: Domain names - implementation and specification 1034:: S:: Domain names - concepts and facilities 1033:: :: Domain administrators operations guide 1032:: :: Domain administrators guide 1031:: :: MILNET name domain transition 973:: :: Domain system changes and observations 952:: :: DoD Internet host table specification 921:: :: Domain name system implementation schedule - revised 920:: :: Domain requirements 897:: :: Domain name system implementation schedule 883:: :: Domain names 882:: :: Domain names 881:: :: Domain names plan and schedule 849:: :: Suggestions for improved host table distribution 830:: :: Distributed system for Internet name service

Nesser

Informational

[Page 51]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

819:: :: Domain naming convention for Internet user applications 811:: :: Hostnames Server 810:: :: DoD Internet host table specification 799:: :: Internet name domains 796:: :: Address mappings 627:: :: ASCII text file of hostnames 625:: :: On-line hostnames service 623:: :: Comments on on-line host name service 620:: :: Request for monitor host table updates 608:: :: Host names on-line 606:: :: Host names on-line 289:: :: What we hope is an official list of host names 280:: :: Draft of host names 273:: :: More on standard host names 247:: :: Proffered set of standard host names 237:: :: NIC view of standard host names 236:: :: Standard host names 233:: :: Standardization of host call letters 229:: :: Standard host names 226:: :: Standardization of host mnemonics ===================================================================== Network Management 2128:: PS:: Dial Control Management Information Base using SMIv2 2127:: PS:: ISDN Management Information Base 2124:: I:: Light-weight Flow Admission Protocol Specification Version 1.0 2108:: PS:: Definitions of Managed Objects for IEEE 802.3 Repeater Devices using SMIv2 2096:: PS:: IP Forwarding Table MIB 2089:: I:: V2ToV1 Mapping SNMPv2 onto SNMPv1 within a bi-lingual SNMP agent 2074:: PS:: Remote Network Monitoring MIB Protocol Identifiers 2064:: E:: Traffic Flow Measurement 2063:: E:: Traffic Flow Measurement 2051:: PS:: Definitions of Managed Objects for APPC 2041:: I:: Mobile Network Tracing 2039:: I:: Applicability of Standards Track MIBs to Management of World Wide Web Servers 2037:: PS:: Entity MIB 2024:: PS:: Definitions of Managed Objects for Data Link Switching using SNMPv2 2021:: PS:: Remote Network Monitoring Management Information Base Version 2 using SMIv2 2020:: PS:: Definitions of Managed Objects for IEEE 802.12 Interfaces 2013:: PS:: SNMPv2 Management Information Base for the User Datagram Protocol using SMIv2 2012:: PS:: SNMPv2 Management Information Base for the Transmission Control Protocol

Nesser

Informational

[Page 52]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

2011:: PS:: 2006:: PS:: 1944:: I:: 1910:: E:: 1909:: E:: 1908:: DS:: 1907:: DS:: 1906:: DS:: 1905:: DS:: 1904:: DS:: 1903:: DS:: 1902:: DS:: 1901:: 1857:: 1856:: 1850:: 1792:: 1759:: 1757:: 1749:: 1748:: 1747:: 1743:: 1742:: 1724:: 1697:: E:: I:: I:: DS:: E:: PS:: DS:: PS:: DS:: PS:: DS:: PS:: DS:: PS::

1696:: PS:: 1695:: PS:: 1694:: DS:: 1666:: PS:: 1665:: PS:: 1660:: DS:: 1659:: DS:: 1658:: DS::

SNMPv2 Management Information Base for the Internet Protocol using SMIv2 The Definitions of Managed Objects for IP Mobility Support using SMIv2 Benchmarking Methodology for Network Interconnect Devices User-based Security Model for SNMPv2 An Administrative Infrastructure for SNMPv2 Coexistence between Version 1 and Version 2 of the Internet-standard Network Management Framework Management Information Base for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Transport Mappings for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Protocol Operations for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Conformance Statements for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Textual Conventions for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Structure of Management Information for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Introduction to Community-based SNMPv2 A Model for Common Operational Statistics The Opstat Client-Server Model for Statistics Retrieval OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base TCP/IPX Connection Mib Specification Printer MIB Remote Network Monitoring Management Information Base IEEE 802.5 Station Source Routing MIB using SMIv2 IEEE 802.5 MIB using SMIv2 Definitions of Managed Objects for SNA Data Link Control IEEE 802.5 MIB using SMIv2 AppleTalk Management Information Base II RIP Version 2 MIB Extension Relational Database Management System (RDBMS) Management Information Base (MIB) using SMIv2 Modem Management Information Base (MIB) using SMIv2 Definitions of Managed Objects for ATM Management Version 8.0 using SMIv2 Definitions of Managed Objects for SMDS Interfaces using SMIv2 Definitions of Managed Objects for SNA NAUs using SMIv2 Definitions of Managed Objects for SNA NAUs using SMIv2 Definitions of Managed Objects for Parallel-printer-like Hardware Devices using SMIv2 Definitions of Managed Objects for RS-232-like Hardware Devices using SMIv2 Definitions of Managed Objects for Character Stream

Nesser

Informational

[Page 53]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1657:: PS:: 1650:: PS:: 1643:: PS:: 1628:: PS:: 1623:: S:: 1612:: 1611:: 1596:: 1595:: 1593:: 1592:: 1573:: 1567:: 1566:: 1565:: 1564:: 1559:: 1525:: 1516:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: I:: E:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: I:: DS:: PS:: DS::

1515:: PS:: 1514:: PS:: 1513:: PS:: 1512:: PS:: 1503:: I:: 1493:: DS:: 1474:: PS:: 1473:: PS:: 1472:: PS:: 1471:: PS:: 1470:: I:: 1461:: PS:: 1452:: PS::

Devices using SMIv2 Definitions of Managed Objects for the Fourth Version of the Border Gateway Protocol (BGP-4) using SMIv2 Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types using SMIv2 Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types UPS Management Information Base Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types DNS Resolver MIB Extensions DNS Server MIB Extensions Definitions of Managed Objects for Frame Relay Service Definitions of Managed Objects for the SONET/SDH Interface Type SNA APPN Node MIB Simple Network Management Protocol Distributed Protocol Interface Version 2.0 Evolution of the Interfaces Group of MIB-II X.500 Directory Monitoring MIB Mail Monitoring MIB Network Services Monitoring MIB DSA Metrics (OSI-DS 34 (v3)) DECnet Phase IV MIB Extensions Definitions of Managed Objects for Source Routing Bridges Definitions of Managed Objects for IEEE 802.3 Repeater Devices Definitions of Managed Objects for IEEE 802.3 Medium Attachment Units (MAUs) Host Resources MIB Token Ring Extensions to the Remote Network Monitoring MIB FDDI Management Information Base Algorithms for Automating Administration in SNMPv2 Managers Definitions of Managed Objects for Bridges The Definitions of Managed Objects for the Bridge Network Control Protocol of the Point-to-Point Protocol The Definitions of Managed Objects for the IP Network Control Protocol of the Point-to-Point Protocol The Definitions of Managed Objects for the Security Protocols of the Point-to-Point Protocol The Definitions of Managed Objects for the Link Control Protocol of the Point-to-Point Protocol FYI on a Network Management Tool Catalog SNMP MIB extension for MultiProtocol Interconnect over X.25 Coexistence between version 1 and version 2 of the Internet-standard Network Management Framework

Nesser

Informational

[Page 54]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1451:: PS:: 1450:: PS:: 1449:: PS:: 1448:: PS:: 1447:: PS:: 1446:: PS:: 1445:: PS:: 1444:: PS:: 1443:: PS:: 1442:: PS:: 1441:: PS:: 1431:: 1420:: 1419:: 1418:: 1414:: 1407:: I:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS::

1406:: PS:: 1404:: I:: 1398:: DS:: 1389:: PS:: 1382:: PS:: 1381:: PS:: 1369:: I:: 1368:: PS:: 1354:: PS:: 1353:: H:: 1352:: 1351:: 1346:: H:: H:: I::

1318:: PS::

Manager to Manager Management Information Base Management Information Base for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Transport Mappings for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Protocol Operations for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Party MIB for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Security Protocols for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Administrative Model for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Conformance Statements for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Textual Conventions for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Structure of Management Information for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2) Introduction to version 2 of the Internet-standard Network Management Framework DUA Metrics SNMP over IPX SNMP over AppleTalk SNMP over OSI Ident MIB Definitions of Managed Objects for the DS3/E3 Interface Type Definitions of Managed Objects for the DS1 and E1 Interface Types A Model for Common Operational Statistics Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types RIP Version 2 MIB Extension SNMP MIB Extension for the X.25 Packet Layer SNMP MIB Extension for X.25 LAPB Implementation Notes and Experience for The Internet Ethernet MIB Definitions of Managed Objects for IEEE 802.3 Repeater Devices IP Forwarding Table MIB Definitions of Managed Objects for Administration of SNMP Parties SNMP Security Protocols SNMP Administrative Model Resource Allocation, Control, and Accounting for the Use of Network Resources Definitions of Managed Objects for Parallel-printer-like

Nesser

Informational

[Page 55]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1317:: PS:: 1316:: PS:: 1315:: 1304:: 1303:: 1298:: 1289:: 1286:: 1285:: 1284:: 1283:: 1273:: PS:: PS:: I:: I:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: E:: I::

1272:: I:: 1271:: PS:: 1270:: I:: 1269:: PS:: 1262:: 1253:: 1252:: 1248:: 1247:: 1243:: 1242:: :: PS:: PS:: PS:: DS:: PS:: I::

1239:: PS:: 1238:: E::

1233:: H:: 1232:: H:: 1231:: DS:: 1230:: H:: 1229:: DS:: 1228:: E:: 1227:: 1224:: 1215:: 1214:: 1213:: 1212:: E:: E:: I:: H:: S:: S::

Hardware Devices Definitions of Managed Objects for RS-232-like Hardware Devices Definitions of Managed Objects for Character Stream Devices Management Information Base for Frame Relay DTEs Definitions of Managed Objects for the SIP Interface Type A Convention for Describing SNMP-based Agents SNMP over IPX DECnet Phase IV MIB Extensions Definitions of Managed Objects for Bridges FDDI Management Information Base Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types SNMP over OSI A Measurement Study of Changes in Service-Level Reachability in the Global TCP/IP Internet Internet Accounting Remote Network Monitoring Management Information Base SNMP Communications Services Definitions of Managed Objects for the Border Gateway Protocol (Version 3) Guidelines for Internet Measurement Activities OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base OSPF Version 2 Management Information Base OSPF Version 2 AppleTalk Management Information Base Benchmarking Terminology for Network Interconnection Devices Reassignment of Experimental MIBs to Standard MIBs CLNS MIB - for use with Connectionless Network Protocol (ISO 8473) and End System to Intermediate System (ISO 9542) Definitions of Managed Objects for the DS3 Interface Type Definitions of Managed Objects for the DS1 Interface Type IEEE 802.5 Token Ring MIB IEEE 802.4 Token Bus MIB Extensions to the Generic-Interface MIB SNMP-DPI - Simple Network Management Protocol Distributed Program Interface SNMP MUX Protocol and MIB Techniques for Managing Asynchronously Generated Alerts A Convention for Defining Traps for use with the SNMP OSI Internet Management Management Information Base for Network Management of TCP/IP-based internets Concise MIB Definitions

Nesser

Informational

[Page 56]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1189::

H::

1187:: E:: 1161:: E:: 1158:: PS:: 1157:: 1155:: 1109:: S:: S:: ::

1098:: :: 1095:: DS:: 1089:: 1067:: 1066:: 1065:: 1052:: 1028:: 1024:: 1023:: 1022:: 1021:: 1012:: 1011:: 1010:: 996:: 619:: 618:: 616:: 615:: 612:: 601:: 586:: 579:: 568:: 567:: 566:: 565:: 557:: 546:: 545:: 538:: 531:: :: :: H:: H:: :: H:: :: :: :: H:: :: S:: S:: H:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

The Common Management Information Services and Protocols for the Internet Bulk Table Retrieval with the SNMP SNMP over OSI Management Information Base for Network Management of TCP/IP-based internets A Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) Structure and Identification of Management Information for TCP/IP-based Internets Report of the second Ad Hoc Network Management Review Group Simple Network Management Protocol SNMP Common Management Information Services and Protocol over TCP/IP CMOT SNMP over Ethernet Simple Network Management Protocol Management Information Base for network management of TCP/IP-based internets Structure and identification of management information for TCP/IP-based internets IAB recommendations for the development of Internet network management standards Simple Gateway Monitoring Protocol HEMS variable definitions HEMS monitoring and control language High-level Entity Management Protocol HEMP High-level Entity Management System HEMS Bibliography of Request For Comments 1 through 999 Official Internet protocols Assigned numbers Statistics server Mean round-trip times in the ARPANET Few observations on NCP statistics Latest network maps Proposed Network Standard Data Pathname Syntax Traffic statistics December 1973 Traffic statistics November 1973 Traffic statistics October 1973 Traffic statistics September 1973 Response to RFC 567 - cross country network bandwidth Cross country network bandwidth Traffic statistics August 1973 Storing network survey data at the datacomputer Revelations in network host measurements Tenex load averages for July 1973 Of what quality be the UCSB resources evaluators? Traffic statistics June 1973 Feast or famine? A response to two recent RFC's about

Nesser

Informational

[Page 57]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

network information Traffic statistics May 1973 Traffic statistics April 1973 Integration of data management systems on a computer network 482:: :: Traffic statistics February 1973 455:: :: Traffic statistics January 1973 443:: :: Traffic statistics December 1972 423:: :: UCLA Campus Computing Network liaison staff for ARPANET 422:: :: Traffic statistics November 1972 421:: :: Software consulting service for network users 416:: :: ARC system will be unavailable for use during Thanksgivingweek 415:: :: Tenex bandwidth 413:: :: Traffic statistics October 1972 400:: :: Traffic statistics September 1972 392:: :: Measurement of host costs for transmitting network data 391:: :: Traffic statistics August 1972 389:: :: UCLA Campus Computing Network liaison staff for ARPA Network 388:: :: NCP statistics 384:: :: Official site idents for organizations in the ARPA Network 381:: :: Three aids to improved network operation 378:: :: Traffic statistics July 1972 369:: :: Evaluation of ARPANET services January-March, 1972 362:: :: Network host status 353:: :: Network host status 344:: :: Network host status 326:: :: Network host status 323:: :: Formation of Network Measurement Group NMG 308:: :: ARPANET host availability data 304:: :: Data management system proposal for the ARPA network 302:: :: Exercising the ARPANET 274:: :: Establishing a local guide for network usage 227:: :: Data transfer rates Rand/UCLA 212:: :: NWG meeting on network usage 193:: :: Network checkout 188:: :: Data management meeting announcement 156:: :: Status of the Illinois site 153:: :: SRI ARC-NIC status 96:: :: Interactive network experiment to study modes of access tothe Network Information Center 32:: :: Connecting M.I.T. computers to the ARPA Computer-to-computer communication network 18:: :: [Link assignments] ====================================================================== 522:: 509:: 500:: :: :: ::

Nesser

Informational

[Page 58]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

Network News 1036:: :: Standard for interchange of USENET messages 977:: PS:: Network News Transfer Protocol 850:: :: Standard for interchange of USENET messages =================================================================== Real Time Services :: :: 2102:: I:: Multicast Support for Nimrod 2090:: E:: TFTP Multicast Option 2038:: PS:: RTP Payload Format for MPEG1/MPEG2 Video 2035:: PS:: RTP Payload Format for JPEG-compressed Video 2032:: PS:: RTP payload format for H.261 video streams 2029:: PS:: RTP Payload Format of Sun's CellB Video Encoding 2022:: PS:: Support for Multicast over UNI 3.0/3.1 based ATM Networks 1890:: PS:: RTP Profile for Audio and Video Conferences with Minimal Control 1889:: PS:: RTP 1861:: I:: Simple Network Paging Protocol - Version 3 - Two-Way Enhanced 1821:: I:: Integration of Real-time Services in an IP-ATM Network Architecture 1819:: E:: Internet Stream Protocol Version 2 (ST2) Protocol Specification - Version ST2+ 1789:: I:: INETPhone 1768:: E:: Host Group Extensions for CLNP Multicasting 1703:: I:: Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain 1645:: I:: Simple Network Paging Protocol - Version 2 1614:: I:: Network Access to Multimedia Information 1569:: I:: Principles of Operation for the TPC.INT Subdomain 1568:: I:: Simple Network Paging Protocol - Version 1(b) 1546:: I:: Host Anycasting Service 1469:: PS:: IP Multicast over Token-Ring Local Area Networks 1458:: I:: Requirements for Multicast Protocols 1453:: I:: A Comment on Packet Video Remote Conferencing and the Transport/Network Layers 1313:: I:: Today's Programming for KRFC AM 1313 Internet Talk Radio 1301:: I:: Multicast Transport Protocol 1257:: I:: Isochronous Applications Do Not Require Jitter-Controlled Networks 1197:: I:: Using ODA for Translating Multimedia Information 1193:: :: Client Requirements for Real-Time Communication Services 1190:: E:: Experimental Internet Stream Protocol, Version 2 (ST-II) 1112:: S:: Host extensions for IP multicasting 1054:: :: Host extensions for IP multicasting 988:: :: Host extensions for IP multicasting 966:: :: Host groups 947:: :: Multi-network broadcasting within the Internet

Nesser

Informational

[Page 59]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

UCL facsimile system CCITT draft recommendation T.4 [Standardization of Group 3 facsimile apparatus for document transmission] 803:: :: Dacom 450/500 facsimile data transcoding 798:: :: Decoding facsimile data from the Rapicom 450 769:: :: Rapicom 450 facsimile file format 741:: :: Specifications for the Network Voice Protocol NVP 511:: :: Enterprise phone service to NIC from ARPANET sites 508:: :: Real-time data transmission on the ARPANET 420:: :: CCA ICCC weather demo 408:: :: NETBANK 251:: :: Weather data ===================================================================== Routing 2103:: I:: Mobility Support for Nimrod 2092:: I:: Protocol Analysis for Triggered RIP 2091:: PS:: Triggered Extensions to RIP to Support Demand Circuits 2081:: I:: RIPng Protocol Applicability Statement 2080:: PS:: RIPng for IPv6 2073:: PS:: An IPv6 Provider-Based Unicast Address Format 2072:: I:: Router Renumbering Guide 2042:: I:: Registering New BGP Attribute Types 2008:: BC:: Implications of Various Address Allocation Policies for Internet Routing 1998:: I:: An Application of the BGP Community Attribute in Multi-home Routing 1997:: PS:: BGP Communities Attribute 1992:: I:: The Nimrod Routing Architecture 1987:: I:: Ipsilon's General Switch Management Protocol Specification Version 1.1 1966:: E:: BGP Route Reflection An alternative to full mesh IBGP 1965:: E:: Autonomous System Confederations for BGP 1955:: I:: New Scheme for Internet Routing and Addressing (ENCAPS) for IPN 1953:: I:: Ipsilon Flow Management Protocol Specification for IPv4 Version 1.0 1940:: I:: Source Demand Routing 1930:: BC:: Guidelines for creation, selection, and registration of an Autonomous System (AS) 1925:: I:: The Twelve Networking Truths 1923:: I:: RIPv1 Applicability Statement for Historic Status 1863:: E:: A BGP/IDRP Route Server alternative to a full mesh routing 1817:: I:: CIDR and Classful Routing 1812:: PS:: Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers 1793:: PS:: Extending OSPF to Support Demand Circuits 1787:: I:: Routing in a Multi-provider Internet 1786:: I:: Representation of IP Routing Policies in a Routing Registry (ripe-81++)

809:: 804::

:: ::

Nesser

Informational

[Page 60]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1774:: I:: 1773:: I:: 1772:: DS:: 1771:: DS:: 1765:: E:: 1753:: I:: 1745:: PS:: 1723:: DS:: 1722:: DS:: 1721:: I:: 1716:: I:: 1702:: I:: 1701:: I:: 1668:: I:: 1656:: I:: 1655:: PS:: 1654:: 1587:: 1586:: 1585:: 1584:: 1583:: 1582:: 1581:: 1520:: PS:: PS:: I:: I:: PS:: DS:: PS:: I:: I::

1519:: PS:: 1517:: PS:: 1504:: 1482:: 1479:: 1478:: 1477:: 1476:: 1439:: 1403:: 1397:: I:: I:: PS:: PS:: I:: E:: I:: PS:: PS::

1388:: PS:: 1387:: I:: 1383:: I:: 1380:: I:: 1371:: I::

BGP-4 Protocol Analysis Experience with the BGP-4 protocol Application of the Border Gateway Protocol in the Internet A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4) OSPF Database Overflow IPng Technical Requirements Of the Nimrod Routing and Addressing Architecture BGP4/IDRP for IP---OSPF Interaction RIP Version 2 Carrying Additional Information RIP Version 2 Protocol Applicability Statement RIP Version 2 Protocol Analysis Towards Requirements for IP Routers Generic Routing Encapsulation over IPv4 networks Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE) Unified Routing Requirements for IPng BGP-4 Protocol Document Roadmap and Implementation Experience Application of the Border Gateway Protocol in the Internet A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4) The OSPF NSSA Option Guidelines for Running OSPF Over Frame Relay Networks MOSPF Multicast Extensions to OSPF OSPF Version 2 Extensions to RIP to Support Demand Circuits Protocol Analysis for Extensions to RIP to Support Demand Circuits Exchanging Routing Information Across Provider Boundaries in the CIDR Environment Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) Applicability Statement for the Implementation of Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) Appletalk Update-Based Routing Protocol Aggregation Support in the NSFNET Policy Routing Database Inter-Domain Policy Routing Protocol Specification An Architecture for Inter-Domain Policy Routing IDPR as a Proposed Standard RAP The Uniqueness of Unique Identifiers BGP OSPF Interaction Default Route Advertisement In BGP2 And BGP3 Versions Of The Border Gateway Protocol RIP Version 2 Carrying Additional Information RIP Version 2 Protocol Analysis An Experiment in DNS Based IP Routing IESG Deliberations on Routing and Addressing Choosing a "Common IGP" for the IP Internet (The

Nesser

Informational

[Page 61]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1370:: 1364:: 1338:: 1322:: 1268:: 1267:: 1266:: 1265:: 1264:: 1254:: 1246:: 1245:: 1222:: 1195::

PS:: PS:: I:: I:: DS:: DS:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: :: PS::

1164:: PS:: 1163:: PS:: 1142:: I:: 1136:: :: 1133:: :: 1131:: PS:: 1126:: :: 1125:: 1124:: 1105:: 1104:: 1102:: 1092:: 1075:: 1074:: 1058:: 1009:: 995:: 985:: 981:: 975:: 950:: 911:: 904:: 898:: 890:: 888:: 875:: 827:: :: :: E:: :: :: :: E:: :: S:: H:: :: :: :: :: S:: :: H:: :: :: :: :: ::

IESG's Recommendation to the IAB) Applicability Statement for OSPF BGP OSPF Interaction Supernetting A Unified Approach to Inter-Domain Routing Application of the Border Gateway Protocol in the Internet A Border Gateway Protocol 3 (BGP-3) Experience with the BGP Protocol BGP Protocol Analysis Internet Routing Protocol Standardization Criteria Gateway Congestion Control Survey Experience with the OSPF Protocol OSPF Protocol Analysis Advancing the NSFNET Routing Architecture Use of OSI IS-IS for Routing in TCP/IP and Dual Environments Application of the Border Gateway Protocol in the Internet A Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) OSI IS-IS Intra-domain Routing Protocol Administrative Domains and Routing Domains Routing between the NSFNET and the DDN OSPF specification Goals and functional requirements for inter-autonomous system routing Policy requirements for inter Administrative Domain routing Policy issues in interconnecting networks Border Gateway Protocol BGP Models of policy based routing Policy routing in Internet protocols EGP and policy based routing in the new NSFNET backbone Distance Vector Multicast Routing Protocol NSFNET backbone SPF based Interior Gateway Protocol Routing Information Protocol Requirements for Internet gateways End System to Intermediate System Routing Exchange Protocol for use in conjunction with ISO 8473 Requirements for Internet gateways - draft Experimental multiple-path routing algorithm Autonomous confederations Internet standard subnetting procedure EGP Gateway under Berkeley UNIX 4.2 Exterior Gateway Protocol formal specification Gateway special interest group meeting notes Exterior Gateway Protocol implementation schedule STUB Exterior Gateway Protocol Gateways, architectures, and heffalumps Exterior Gateway Protocol EGP

Nesser

Informational

[Page 62]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

823:: H:: DARPA Internet gateway ===================================================================== Security 2104:: I:: HMAC 2085:: PS:: HMAC-MD5 IP Authentication with Replay Prevention 2084:: I:: Considerations for Web Transaction Security 2082:: PS:: RIP-2 MD5 Authentication 2078:: PS:: Generic Security Service Application Program Interface, Version 2 2069:: PS:: An Extension to HTTP 2065:: PS:: Domain Name System Security Extensions 2059:: I:: RADIUS Accounting 2058:: PS:: Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS) 2057:: I:: Source directed access control on the Internet. 2040:: I:: The RC5, RC5-CBC, RC5-CBC-Pad, and RC5-CTS Algorithms 2025:: PS:: The Simple Public-Key GSS-API Mechanism (SPKM) 2015:: :: MIME Security with Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) 1984:: I:: IAB and IESG Statement on Cryptographic Technology and the Internet 1969:: I:: The PPP DES Encryption Protocol (DESE) 1968:: PS:: The PPP Encryption Control Protocol (ECP) 1964:: PS:: The Kerberos Version 5 GSS-API Mechanism 1961:: PS:: GSS-API Authentication Method for SOCKS Version 5 1949:: E:: Scalable Multicast Key Distribution 1948:: I:: Defending Against Sequence Number Attacks 1938:: PS:: A One-Time Password System 1929:: PS:: Username/Password Authentication for SOCKS V5 1928:: PS:: SOCKS Protocol Version 5 1898:: I:: CyberCash Credit Card Protocol Version 0.8 1858:: I:: Security Considerations for IP Fragment Filtering 1852:: E:: IP Authentication using Keyed SHA 1851:: E:: The ESP Triple DES-CBC Transform 1829:: PS:: The ESP DES-CBC Transform 1828:: PS:: IP Authentication using Keyed MD5 1827:: PS:: IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) 1826:: PS:: IP Authentication Header 1825:: PS:: Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol 1824:: I:: The Exponential Security System TESS 1760:: I:: The S/KEY One-Time Password System 1751:: I:: A Convention for Human-Readable 128-bit Keys 1750:: I:: Randomness Recommendations for Security 1704:: I:: On Internet Authentication 1675:: I:: Security Concerns for IPng 1579:: I:: Firewall-Friendly FTP 1535:: I:: A Security Problem and Proposed Correction With Widely Deployed DNS Software 1511:: I:: Common Authentication Technology Overview 1510:: PS:: The Kerberos Network Authentication Service (V5)

Nesser

Informational

[Page 63]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1509:: 1508:: 1507:: 1492:: 1457:: 1455:: 1424:: 1423:: 1422:: 1421:: 1416:: 1412:: 1411:: 1409:: 1408:: 1321:: 1320:: 1319:: 1281:: 1244:: 1186:: 1170:: 1156::

Generic Security Service API Generic Security Service Application Program Interface DASS - Distributed Authentication Security Service An Access Control Protocol, Sometimes Called TACACS Security Label Framework for the Internet Physical Link Security Type of Service Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail Privacy Enhancement for Internet Electronic Mail Telnet Authentication Option Telnet Authentication Telnet Authentication Telnet Authentication Option Telnet Environment Option The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm The MD4 Message-Digest Algorithm The MD2 Message-Digest Algorithm Guidelines for the Secure Operation of the Internet Site Security Handbook The MD4 Message Digest Algorithm Public Key Standards and Licenses Management Information Base for Network Management of TCP/IP-based internets 1115:: H:: Privacy enhancement for Internet electronic mail 1114:: H:: Privacy enhancement for Internet electronic mail 1113:: H:: Privacy enhancement for Internet electronic mail 1108:: PS:: U.S. Department of Defense Security Options for the Internet Protocol 1040:: :: Privacy enhancement for Internet electronic mail 1038:: :: Draft revised IP security option 1004:: E:: Distributed-protocol authentication scheme 989:: :: Privacy enhancement for Internet electronic mail 972:: :: Password Generator Protocol 931:: E:: Authentication server 927:: :: TACACS user identification Telnet option 912:: :: Authentication service 644:: :: On the problem of signature authentication for network mail ===================================================================== Virtual Terminal 2066:: E:: TELNET CHARSET Option 1647:: PS:: TN3270 Enhancements 1646:: I:: TN3270 Extensions for LUname and Printer Selection 1576:: I:: TN3270 Current Practices 1572:: PS:: Telnet Environment Option 1571:: I:: Telnet Environment Option Interoperability Issues 1372:: PS:: Telnet Remote Flow Control Option

PS:: PS:: E:: I:: I:: E:: PS:: PS:: PS:: PS:: E:: E:: E:: E:: H:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: S::

Nesser

Informational

[Page 64]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1282:: I:: 1258:: I:: 1221:: :: 1205:: :: 1184:: DS:: 1143:: :: 1116:: PS:: 1097:: :: 1096:: :: 1091:: :: 1080:: :: 1079:: :: 1073:: :: 1053:: :: 1043:: :: 1041:: :: 1013:: :: 1005:: :: 946:: :: 933:: :: 930:: :: 929:: :: 907:: S:: 885:: :: 884:: :: 878:: :: 861:: :: 860:: S:: 859:: S:: 858:: S:: 857:: S:: 856:: S:: 855:: S:: 854:: S:: 851:: :: 818:: H:: 802:: :: 782:: :: 779:: :: 764:: :: 749:: :: 748:: :: 747:: :: 746:: :: 736:: :: 735:: :: 734:: H:: 732:: ::

BSD Rlogin BSD Rlogin Host Access Protocol (HAP) Specification - Version 2 5250 Telnet Interface Telnet Linemode Option The Q Method of Implementing TELNET Option Negotiation Telnet Linemode option Telnet subliminal-message option Telnet X display location option Telnet terminal-type option Telnet remote flow control option Telnet terminal speed option Telnet window size option Telnet X.3 PAD option Telnet Data Entry Terminal option Telnet 3270 regime option X Window System Protocol, version 11 ARPANET AHIP-E Host Access Protocol enhanced AHIP Telnet terminal location number option Output marking Telnet option Telnet terminal type option Proposed Host-Front End Protocol Host Access Protocol specification Telnet end of record option Telnet terminal type option ARPANET 1822L Host Access Protocol Telnet extended options Telnet timing mark option Telnet status option Telnet Suppress Go Ahead option Telnet echo option Telnet binary transmission Telnet option specifications Telnet Protocol specification ARPANET 1822L Host Access Protocol Remote User Telnet service ARPANET 1822L Host Access Protocol Virtual Terminal management model Telnet send-location option Telnet Protocol specification Telnet SUPDUP-Output option Telnet randomly-lose option Recent extensions to the SUPDUP Protocol SUPDUP graphics extension Telnet SUPDUP option Revised Telnet byte macro option SUPDUP Protocol Telnet Data Entry Terminal option

Nesser

Informational

[Page 65]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

731:: 729:: 728:: 727:: 726:: 721:: 719:: 718:: 703:: 702:: 701:: 698:: 688:: 679:: 669:: 659:: 658:: 657:: 656:: 655:: 654:: 653:: 652:: 651:: 647:: 636:: 600:: 596:: 595:: 587:: 563:: 562:: 560:: 559:: 513:: 495:: 470:: 466:: 461:: 447:: 435:: 431:: 399:: 393:: 386:: 377::

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Telnet Data Entry Terminal option Telnet byte macro option Minor pitfall in the Telnet Protocol Telnet logout option Remote Controlled Transmission and Echoing Telnet option Out-of-band control signals in a Host-to-Host Protocol Discussion on RCTE Comments on RCTE from the Tenex implementation experience July, 1975, survey of New-Protocol Telnet Servers September, 1974, survey of New-Protocol Telnet servers August, 1974, survey of New-Protocol Telnet servers Telnet extended ASCII option Tentative schedule for the new Telnet implementation for the TIP February, 1975, survey of New-Protocol Telnet servers November, 1974, survey of New-Protocol Telnet servers Announcing additional Telnet options Telnet output linefeed disposition Telnet output vertical tab disposition option Telnet output vertical tabstops option Telnet output formfeed disposition option Telnet output horizontal tab disposition option Telnet output horizontal tabstops option Telnet output carriage-return disposition option Revised Telnet status option Proposed protocol for connecting host computers to ARPA-like networks via front end processors TIP/Tenex reliability improvements Interfacing an Illinois plasma terminal to the ARPANET Second thoughts on Telnet Go-Ahead Second thoughts in defense of the Telnet Go-Ahead Announcing new Telnet options Comments on the RCTE Telnet option Modifications to the Telnet specification Remote Controlled Transmission and Echoing Telnet option Comments on the new Telnet Protocol and its implementation Comments on the new Telnet specifications Telnet Protocol specifications Change in socket for TIP news facility Telnet logger/server for host LL-67 Telnet Protocol meeting announcement IMP/TIP memory retrofit schedule Telnet issues Update on SMFS login and logout SMFS login and logout Comments on Telnet Protocol changes Letter to TIP users-2 Using TSO via ARPA Network Virtual Terminal

Nesser

Informational

[Page 66]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

Letter to all TIP users Serving remote users on the ARPANET TIP site information form Proposed Telnet changes MLTNET Suggested Telnet Protocol changes [Ad hoc Telnet Protocol] New console attachments to the USCB host TIP message buffers DS-1 display system Service center standards for remote usage Toward reliable operation of minicomputer-based terminals on a TIP 216:: :: Telnet access to UCSB's On-Line System 215:: :: NCP, ICP, and Telnet 206:: :: User Telnet - description of an initial implementation 205:: :: NETCRT - a character display protocol 177:: :: Device independent graphical display description 158:: :: Telnet Protocol 139:: :: Discussion of Telnet Protocol 137:: :: Telnet Protocol - a proposed document 110:: :: Conventions for using an IBM 2741 terminal as a user console for access to network server hosts 97:: :: First cut at a proposed Telnet Protocol ===================================================================== Other 2123:: I:: Traffic Flow Measurement 2121:: I:: Issues affecting MARS Cluster Size 2119:: BC:: Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels 2101:: I:: IPv4 Address Behaviour Today 2100:: I:: The Naming of Hosts 2099:: I:: Request for Comments Summary RFC Numbers 2000-2099 2083:: I:: PNG (Portable Network Graphics) Specification Version 1.0 2071:: I:: Network Renumbering Overview 2050:: BC:: INTERNET REGISTRY IP ALLOCATION GUIDELINES 2036:: I:: Observations on the use of Components of the Class A Address Space within the Internet 2031:: I:: IETF-ISOC relationship 2028:: BC:: The Organizations Involved in the IETF Standards Process 2027:: BC:: IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process 2026:: BC:: The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3 2014:: BC:: IRTF Research Group Guidelines and Procedures 2007:: I:: Catalogue of Network Training Materials 2000:: S:: INTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS 1999:: I:: Request for Comments Summary RFC Numbers 1900-1999 1988:: I:: Conditional Grant of Rights to Specific Hewlett-Packard Patents In Conjunction With the Internet Engineering Task Force's Internet-Standard Network Management

365:: 364:: 352:: 340:: 339:: 328:: 318:: 311:: 297:: 296:: 231:: 230::

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Nesser

Informational

[Page 67]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1983:: I:: 1958:: I:: 1952:: I:: 1951:: I:: 1950:: I:: 1941:: I:: 1935:: I:: 1920:: S:: 1900:: I:: 1899:: I:: 1882:: I:: 1880:: S:: 1879:: I:: 1875:: I:: 1871:: BC:: 1855:: I:: 1822:: I:: 1818:: 1816:: 1814:: 1811:: 1810:: 1805:: 1802:: 1800:: 1799:: 1797:: 1796:: 1790:: S:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: S:: I:: E:: I:: I::

1780:: 1776:: 1775:: 1758:: 1746:: 1739:: 1720:: 1718:: 1715:: 1709:: 1700:: 1699:: 1691:: 1690::

S:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: S:: I:: I:: I:: S:: I:: I:: I::

Framework Internet Users' Glossary Architectural Principles of the Internet GZIP file format specification version 4.3 DEFLATE Compressed Data Format Specification version 1.3 ZLIB Compressed Data Format Specification version 3.3 Frequently Asked Questions for Schools What is the Internet, Anyway? INTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS Renumbering Needs Work Request for Comments Summary RFC Numbers 1800-1899 The 12-Days of Technology Before Christmas INTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS Class A Subnet Experiment Results and Recommendations UNINETT PCA Policy Statements Addendum to RFC 1602 -- Variance Procedure Netiquette Guidelines A Grant of Rights to Use a Specific IBM patent with Photuris Best Current Practices U.S. Government Internet Domain Names Unique Addresses are Good U.S. Government Internet Domain Names Report on MD5 Performance Location-Independent Data/Software Integrity Protocol Introducing Project Long Bud INTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS Request for Comments Summary RFC Numbers 1700-1799 Class A Subnet Experiment Not All RFCs are Standards An Agreement between the Internet Society and Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the Matter of ONC RPC and XDR Protocols INTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS The Address is the Message To Be "On" the Internet NADF Standing Documents Ways to Define User Expectations A Primer On Internet and TCP/IP Tools INTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS The Tao of IETF - A Guide for New Attendees of the Internet Engineering Task Force The H Ratio for Address Assignment Efficiency K-12 Internetworking Guidelines ASSIGNED NUMBERS Request for Comments Summary RFC Numbers 1600-1699 The Document Architecture for the Cornell Digital Library Introducing the Internet Engineering and Planning

Nesser

Informational

[Page 68]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

Group (IEPG) A Status Report on Networked Information Retrieval The Process for Organization of Internet Standards Working Group (POISED) 1636:: I:: Report of IAB Workshop on Security in the Internet Architecture - February 8-10, 1994 1635:: I:: How to Use Anonymous FTP 1627:: I:: Network 10 Considered Harmful (Some Practices Shouldn't be Codified) 1610:: S:: INTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS 1607:: I:: A VIEW FROM THE 21ST CENTURY 1606:: I:: A Historical Perspective On The Usage Of IP Version 9 1603:: I:: IETF Working Group Guidelines and Procedures y1602:: I:: The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 2 1601:: I:: Charter of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) 1600:: S:: INTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS 1599:: I:: Request for Comments Summary RFC Numbers 1500 - 1599 1597:: I:: Address Allocation for Private Internets 1594:: I:: FYI on Questions and Answer Answers to Commonly asked "New Internet User" Questions 1580:: I:: Guide to Network Resource Tools 1578:: I:: FYI on Questions and Answers 1574:: I:: Essential Tools for the OSI Internet 1550:: I:: IP 1543:: I:: Instructions to RFC Authors 1540:: S:: INTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS 1539:: I:: The Tao of IETF - A Guide for New Attendees of the Internet Engineering Task Force 1527:: I:: What Should We Plan Given the Dilemma of the Network? 1501:: I:: OS/2 User Group 1500:: S:: INTERNET OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS 1499:: I:: Request for Comments Summary RFC Numbers 1400-1499 1481:: I:: IAB Recommendation for an Intermediate Strategy to Address the Issue of Scaling 1467:: I:: Status of CIDR Deployment in the Internet 1463:: I:: FYI on Introducing the Internet--A Short Bibliography of Introductory Internetworking Readings for the Network Novice 1462:: I:: FYI on "What is the Internet?" 1438:: I:: Internet Engineering Task Force Statements Of Boredom (SOBs) 1432:: I:: Recent Internet Books 1417:: I:: NADF Standing Documents 1410:: S:: IAB OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS 1402:: I:: There's Gold in them thar Networks! Searching for Treasure in all the Wrong Places 1401:: I:: Correspondence between the IAB and DISA on the use of DNS throughout the Internet 1689:: 1640:: I:: I::

Nesser

Informational

[Page 69]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1399:: 1396:: 1392:: 1391:: 1367:: 1366:: 1360:: 1359::

I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: S:: I::

1358:: I:: 1349:: PS:: 1340:: S:: 1336:: I:: 1325:: 1324:: 1311:: 1310:: 1300:: 1299:: 1297:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: I::

1296:: 1295:: 1291:: 1290:: 1287:: 1280:: 1261:: 1259:: 1251:: 1250:: 1249:: 1217:: 1216:: 1208:: 1207:: 1206:: 1200:: 1199:: 1198::

I:: I:: I:: I:: I:: S:: I:: I:: :: S:: I:: :: :: :: :: :: S:: I:: I::

Request for Comments Summary RFC Numbers 1300-1399 The Process for Organization of Internet Standards Working Group (POISED) Internet Users' Glossary The Tao of IETF Schedule for IP Address Space Management Guidelines Guidelines for Management of IP Address Space IAB OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS Connecting to the Internet What Connecting Institutions Should Anticipate Charter of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) Type of Service in the Internet Protocol Suite ASSIGNED NUMBERS Who's Who in the Internet Biographies of IAB, IESG and IRSG Members FYI on Questions and Answers Answers to Commonly asked "New Internet User" Questions A Discussion on Computer Network Conferencing Introduction to the STD Notes The Internet Standards Process Remembrances of Things Past Request for Comments Summary RFC Numbers 1200-1299 NOC Internal Integrated Trouble Ticket System Functional Specification Wishlist ("NOC TT REQUIREMENTS") Internet Growth (1981-1991) User Bill of Rights for entries and listings in the Public Directory Mid-Level Networks There's Gold in them thar Networks! or Searching for Treasure in all the Wrong Places Towards the Future Internet Architecture IAB OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS Transition of NIC Services Building The Open Road Who's Who in the Internet IAB Official Protocol Standards DIXIE Protocol Specification Memo from the Consortium for Slow Commotion Research (CSCR) Gigabit Network Economics and Paradigm Shifts A Glossary of Networking Terms Answers to Commonly asked "Experienced Internet User" Questions FYI on Questions and Answers - Answers to Commonly asked "New Internet User" Questions IAB Official Protocol Standards Request for Comments Summary RFC Numbers 1100-1199 FYI on the X Window System

Nesser

Informational

[Page 70]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

1192:: 1181:: 1180:: 1178:: 1177:: 1175:: 1174::

:: :: :: :: :: :: I::

1173:: 1169:: 1167:: 1160:: 1152:: 1150:: 1149:: 1147:: 1140:: 1135:: 1130:: 1127:: 1121:: 1120:: 1118:: 1117:: 1111:: 1100:: 1099:: 1093:: 1087:: 1083:: 1077:: 1076:: 1060:: 1039:: 1020:: 1019:: 1018:: 1017:: 1015:: 1014:: 1000:: 999::

:: :: :: :: :: I:: :: I:: S:: :: S:: :: :: :: :: :: :: S:: I:: :: :: S:: :: :: S:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Commercialization of the Internet Summary Report RIPE Terms of Reference A TCP/IP Tutorial Choosing a Name for Your Computer FYI on Questions and Answers - Answers to Commonly Asked "New Internet User" Questions FYI on Where to Start - A Bibliography of Internetworking Information IAB Recommended Policy on Distributing Internet Identifier Assignment and IAB Recommended Policy Change to Internet "Connected" Status Responsibilities of Host and Network Managers Summary of the "Oral Tradition" of the Internet Explaining the Role of GOSIP Thoughts on the National Research and Education Network The Internet Activities Board Workshop Report F.Y.I. on F.Y.I. A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on Avian Carriers FYI on a Network Management Tool Catalog IAB Official Protocol Standards Helminthiasis of the Internet IAB official protocol standards Perspective on the Host Requirements RFCs Act one - the poems Internet Activities Board Hitchhikers guide to the Internet Internet numbers Request for comments on Request for Comments IAB official protocol standards Request for Comments Summary RFC Numbers 1000-1099 NSFNET routing architecture Ethics and the Internet IAB official protocol standards Critical issues in high bandwidth networking HEMS monitoring and control language ASSIGNED NUMBERS DoD statement on Open Systems Interconnection protocols Internet numbers Report of the Workshop on Environments for Computational Mathematics Some comments on SQuID Network requirements for scientific research Implementation plan for interagency research Internet XDR Request For Comments reference guide Requests For Comments summary notes

Nesser

Informational

[Page 71]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

997:: 992:: 991:: 990:: 980:: 979:: 968:: 967:: 961:: 960:: 945:: 944:: 943:: 939:: 938:: 928:: 923:: 909:: 908:: 902:: 901:: 900:: 899:: 880:: 873:: 870:: 869:: 852:: 847:: 846:: 845:: 844:: 843:: 842:: 840:: 839:: 838:: 837:: 836:: 835:: 834:: 833:: 832:: 831:: 828:: 825::

:: :: S:: :: :: :: :: :: S:: :: :: S:: :: :: E:: :: :: E:: E:: :: S:: :: :: S:: :: :: H:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: S:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Internet numbers On communication support for fault tolerant process groups Official ARPA-Internet protocols Assigned numbers Protocol document order information PSN End-to-End functional specification Twas the night before start-up All victims together Official ARPA-Internet protocols Assigned numbers DoD statement on the NRC report Official ARPA-Internet protocols Assigned numbers Executive summary of the NRC report on transport protocols for Department of Defense data networks Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol functional and interface specification Introduction to proposed DoD standard H-FP Assigned numbers Loader Debugger Protocol Reliable Data Protocol ARPA Internet Protocol policy Official ARPA-Internet protocols Assigned Numbers Request For Comments summary notes Official protocols Illusion of vendor support Assigned numbers Host Monitoring Protocol ARPANET short blocking feature Summary of Smallberg surveys Who talks TCP? - survey of 22 February 1983 Who talks TCP? - survey of 15 February 1983 Who talks ICMP, too? - Survey of 18 February 1983 Who talks TCP? - survey of 8 February 83 Who talks TCP? - survey of 1 February 83 Official protocols Who talks TCP? Who talks TCP? Who talks TCP? Who talks TCP? Who talks TCP? Who talks TCP? Who talks TCP? Who talks TCP? Backup access to the European side of SATNET Data communications Request for comments on Requests For Comments

Nesser

Informational

[Page 72]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

820:: 817:: 816:: 806:: 800:: 794:: 790:: 776:: 774:: 770:: 766:: 762:: 758:: 755:: 750:: 745:: 739:: 717:: 716:: 708:: 705:: 700:: 699:: 694:: 686:: 684:: 681:: 678:: 677:: 672:: 671:: 667:: 666:: 663:: 661:: 645:: 643:: 642:: 638:: 637:: 635:: 634:: 631:: 629:: 628:: 621::

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Assigned numbers Modularity and efficiency in protocol implementation Fault isolation and recovery Proposed Federal Information Processing Standard Request For Comments summary notes Pre-emption Assigned numbers Assigned numbers Internet Protocol Handbook Assigned numbers Internet Protocol Handbook Assigned numbers Assigned numbers Assigned numbers Assigned numbers JANUS interface specifications Assigned numbers Assigned network numbers Interim revision to Appendix F of BBN 1822 Elements of a distributed programming system Front-end Protocol B6700 version Protocol experiment Request For Comments summary notes Protocol information Leaving well enough alone Commentary on procedure calling as a network protocol Network UNIX Standard file formats Maintenance of duplicate databases Multi-site data collection facility Note on Reconnection Protocol BBN host ports Specification of the Unified User-Level Protocol Lost message detection and recovery protocol Protocol information Network Standard Data Specification syntax Network Debugging Protocol Ready line philosophy and implementation IMP/TIP preventive maintenance schedule Change of network address for SU-DSL Assessment of ARPANET protocols Change in network address for Haskins Lab International meeting on minicomputers and data communication Scenario for using the Network Journal Status of RFC numbers and a note on pre-assigned journal numbers NIC user directories at SRI ARC

Nesser

Informational

[Page 73]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

617:: 609:: 604:: 603:: 602:: 598:: 597:: 590:: 588:: 585:: 584:: 582:: 581:: 580:: 578:: 569:: 552:: 547:: 544:: 537:: 530:: 529:: 527:: 526:: 523:: 519:: 518:: 515:: 503:: 496:: 494:: 492:: 491:: 483:: 474:: 464:: 462:: 457:: 456:: 441:: 440:: 439:: 433:: 432:: 425:: 419:: 405:: 404::

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: H:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Note on socket number assignment Statement of upcoming move of NIC/NLS service Assigned link numbers Response to RFC 597 The stockings were hung by the chimney with care RFC index - December 5, 1973 Host status MULTICS address change London node is now up ARPANET users interest working group meeting Charter for ARPANET Users Interest Working Group Comments on RFC 580 Corrections to RFC 560 Note to protocol designers and implementers Using MIT-Mathlab MACSYMA from MIT-DMS Muddle NETED Single access to standard protocols Change to the Very Distant Host specification Locating on-line documentation at SRI-ARC Announcement of NGG meeting July 16-17 Report on the Survey project Note on protocol synch sequences ARPAWOCKY Technical meeting SURVEY is in operation again Resource evaluation ARPANET accounts Specifications for datalanguage Socket number list TNLS quick reference card is available Availability of MIX and MIXAL in the Network Response to RFC 467 What is "Free"? Cancellation of the resource notebook framework meeting Announcement of NGWG meeting Resource notebook framework Responding to user needs TIPUG Memorandum Inter-Entity Communication - an experiment Scheduled network software maintenance PARRY encounters the DOCTOR Socket number list Network logical map But my NCP costs $500 a day To Correction to RFC 404 Host address changes involving Rand and ISI

Nesser

Informational

[Page 74]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

403:: 402:: 401:: 390:: 379:: 376:: 372:: 371:: 370:: 363:: 356:: 355:: 350:: 349:: 345:: 334:: 331:: 330:: 329:: 327:: 322:: 321:: 320:: 319:: 317:: 316:: 315:: 313:: 305:: 303:: 295:: 291:: 290:: 282:: 276:: 270:: 269:: 263:: 256:: 254:: 253:: 249:: 246:: 245:: 243::

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Desirability of a network 1108 service ARPA Network mailing lists Conversion of NGP-0 coordinates to device specific coordinates TSO scenario Using TSO at CCN Network host status Notes on a conversation with Bob Kahn on the ICCC Demonstration at International Computer Communications Conference Network host status ARPA Network mailing lists ARPA Network Control Center Response to NWG/RFC 346 User accounts for UCSB On-Line System Proposed standard socket numbers Interest in mixed integer programming MPSX on NIC 360/91 at CCN Network use on May 8 IMP System change notification Network host status ARPA Network mailing lists Data and File Transfer workshop notes Well known socket numbers CBI networking activity at MITRE Workshop on hard copy line printers Network host status Official Host-Host Protocol modification ARPA Network Data Management Working Group Network host status Computer based instruction Unknown host numbers ARPA Network mailing lists Report of the Protocol Workshop, 12 October 1971 Data management meeting announcement Computer networks and data sharing Graphics meeting report NIC course Correction to BBN Report No. 1822 NIC NO 7958 Some experience with file transfer Very Distant Host interface IMPSYS change notification Scenarios for using ARPANET computers Second Network Graphics meeting details Coordination of equipment and supplies purchase Network Graphics meeting Reservations for Network Group meeting Network and data sharing bibliography

Nesser

Informational

[Page 75]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

242:: 240:: 239:: 235:: 234:: 232:: 228:: 225:: 223:: 219:: 218:: 214:: 213:: 211:: 209:: 208:: 207:: 204:: 200:: 198:: 195:: 194:: 187:: 186:: 185:: 182:: 180:: 179:: 173:: 171:: 170:: 169:: 168:: 167:: 164:: 162:: 160:: 157:: 155:: 154:: 149:: 148:: 147:: 140:: 138::

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Data descriptive language for shared data Site status Host mnemonics proposed in RFC 226 NIC 7625 Site status Network Working Group meeting schedule Postponement of network graphics meeting Clarification Rand/UCSB network graphics experiment Network Information Center schedule for network users User's view of the datacomputer Changing the IMP status reporting facility Network checkpoint IMP System change notification ARPA Network mailing lists Host/IMP interface documentation Address tables September Network Working Group meeting Sockets in use RFC list by number Site certification - Lincoln Labs 360/67 Data computers-data descriptions and access language Data Reconfiguration Service - compiler/interpreter implementation notes Network/440 protocol concept Network graphics loader NIC distribution of manuals and handbooks Compilation of list of relevant site reports File system questionnaire Link number assignments Network data management committee meeting announcement Data Transfer Protocol RFC list by number Computer networks ARPA Network mailing lists Socket conventions reconsidered Minutes of Network Working Group meeting, 5/16 through 5/19/71 NETBUGGER3 RFC brief list Invitation to the Second Symposium on Problems in the Optimization of Data Communications Systems ARPA Network mailing lists Exposition style Best laid plans Comments on RFC 123 Definition of a socket Agenda for the May NWG meeting Status report on proposed Data Reconfiguration Service

Nesser

Informational

[Page 76]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

136:: 135:: 132:: 131:: 130:: 129:: 126:: 124:: 121:: 120:: 119:: 118:: 117:: 116:: 115:: 113:: 112:: 111:: 109:: 108:: 107:: 106:: 104:: 103:: 102:: 101:: 100:: 99:: 95:: 90:: 89:: 87:: 85:: 84:: 82:: 81:: 78:: 77:: 76:: 75:: 74:: 73:: 72::

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Host accounting and administrative procedures Response to NWG/RFC 110 Typographical error in RFC 107 Response to RFC 116 Response to RFC 111 Request for comments on socket name structure Graphics facilities at Ames Research Center Typographical error in RFC 107 Network on-line operators Network PL1 subprograms Network Fortran subprograms Recommendations for facility documentation Some comments on the official protocol Structure of the May NWG meeting Some Network Information Center policies on handling documents Network activity report User/Server Site Protocol Pressure from the chairman Level III Server Protocol for the Lincoln Laboratory NIC 360/67 Host Attendance list at the Urbana NWG meeting, February 17-19,1971 Output of the Host-Host Protocol glitch cleaning committee User/Server Site Protocol network host questionnaire Link 191 Implementation of interrupt keys Output of the Host-Host Protocol glitch cleaning committee Notes on the Network Working Group meeting, Urbana, Illinois, February 17, 1971 Categorization and guide to NWG/RFCs Network meeting Distribution of NWG/RFC's through the NIC CCN as a network service center Some historic moments in networking Topic for discussion at the next Network Working Group meeting Network Working Group meeting List of NWG/RFC's 1-80 Network meeting notes Request for reference information NCP status report Network meeting report Connection by name Network meeting Specifications for network use of the UCSB On-Line System Response to NWG/RFC 67 Proposed moratorium on changes to network protocol

Nesser

Informational

[Page 77]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

71:: 69:: 68:: 66:: 64:: 63:: 61:: 57:: 52:: 51:: 50:: 49:: 48:: 47:: 46:: 45:: 44:: 43:: 40:: 39:: 37:: 36:: 35:: 34:: 31:: 30:: 27:: 25:: 24:: 21:: 16:: 15:: 13:: 11:: 10:: 9:: 8:: 7:: 6:: 5:: 4:: 3:: 2:: 1::

:: Reallocation in case of input error :: Distribution list change for MIT :: Comments on memory allocation control commands :: NIC - third level ideas and other noise :: Getting rid of marking :: Belated network meeting report :: Note on interprocess communication in a resource sharing computer network :: Thoughts and reflections on NWG/RFC 54 :: Updated distribution list :: Proposal for a Network Interchange Language :: Comments on the Meyer proposal :: Conversations with S. Crocker UCLA :: Possible protocol plateau :: BBN's comments on NWG/RFC #33 :: ARPA Network protocol notes :: New protocol is coming :: Comments on NWG/RFC 33 and 36 :: Proposed meeting [LIL] :: More comments on the forthcoming protocol :: Comments on protocol re :: Network meeting epilogue, etc :: Protocol notes :: Network meeting :: Some brief preliminary notes on the Augmentation Research Center clock :: Binary message forms in computer :: Documentation conventions :: Documentation conventions :: No high link numbers :: Documentation conventions :: Network meeting :: M.I.T :: Network subsystem for time sharing hosts :: [Referring to NWG/RFC 11] :: Implementation of the Host-Host software procedures in GORDO :: Documentation conventions :: Host software :: Functional specifications for the ARPA Network :: Host-IMP interface :: Conversation with Bob Kahn :: Decode Encode Language :: Network timetable :: Documentation conventions :: Host software :: Host software

Nesser

Informational

[Page 78]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

Appendix B:

Automatic Script to Implement Methodology

#!/usr/bin/perl # Program to read text files (such as RFCs and Internet Drafts) and # output items that might relate to year 2000 issues, particularly # 2-digit years. # Version 1.1a. Slight modification by Philip J. Nesser # (phil@nesser.com) to split lines from old RFC's that are # too wide to conform with current RFC standards. # Version 1.1. By Paul Hoffman (phoffman@imc.org). This is a # quick-and-dirty hack and could be written more elegantly and # more efficiently. There may be bugs in this software. For # example, there was an off-by-one-line bug in version 1.0. # Use this code at your own risk. This code may be freely # redistributed. # Some people like using disk files, others like STDIN and STDOUT. # This program accomodates both types by setting the $UsageType # variable. 'file' means input comes from the first argument on # the command line, output goes to that filename with a ".out" # extension; 'std' means STDIN and STDOUT. $UsageType = 'file'; # Should be 'file' or 'std' # @CheckWords is a list of words to look for. This list is used in # addition to the automatic checking for "yy" on a line without "YYYY". # You might want to add "year yyyy" to this list, but then a large # proportion of the RFCs and drafts get selected @CheckWords = qw(UTCTime two-digit 2-digit 2digit century 1900 2000); if($UsageType eq 'file') { if($ARGV[0] eq '') { die "You must specify the name $InName = $ARGV[0]; unless(-r $InName) { die "Could not read open(IN, $InName) or die "Could not open $OutName = "$InName.out"; open(OUT, ">$OutName") or die "Could not $OutStuff = ''; # Holder for what we're } else { # Do STDIN and STDOUT open(IN, "-"); open(OUT, ">-"); }

of the file to open.\n" } $InName.\n" } $InName.\n"; write to $OutName.\n"; going to print out

# Read the whole file into an array. This is a tad wasteful of memory # but makes the output easier.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 79]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

@All = (); while() { push(@All, $_) } $LastLine = $#All; # Process the instance of "yy" not followed by "yy" for($i = 0; $i <= $LastLine; $i += 1 ) { next unless(grep(/yy/i, $All[$i])); next if(grep(/yyyy/i, $All[$i])); &PrintFive($i, "'yy' on a line without 'yyyy'"); } # Next do the words that should cause extra concern foreach $Word (@CheckWords) { for($i = 0; $i <= $LastLine; $i += 1 ) { next unless(grep(/$Word/i, $All[$i])); &PrintFive($i, "$Word"); } } # All done. If writing to a file, and nothing got written, delete the # file so that you can quickly scan for the ".out" files. # (A better-written program would have waited to do the opens # until here so the unlink wouldn't be necessary. Oh, well.) if($UsageType eq 'file') { if(length($OutStuff) > 0) { $OutStuff = "+=+=+=+=+= File $InName +=+=+=+=+= \n$OutStuff\n print OUT $OutStuff; close(OUT); } else { # Nothing to put in the .out close(OUT); unlink($OutName) or die "Couldn't unlink $OutName\n"; } } exit; # Print the five lines around the word found sub PrintFive { my $Where = shift(@_); my $Msg = shift(@_); my ($WhereRealLine, $Start, $End, $j); $WhereRealLine = $Where + 1; $OutStuff .= "$Msg found at line $WhereRealLine:\n"; $Start = $WhereRealLine - 2; $End = $WhereRealLine + 2; if($Where < 2) { $Start = 0 } if($Where > $LastLine - 2) { $End = $LastLine } for($j = $Start; $j <= $End; $j += 1) { if (length($All[$j-1]) > 64) { $FirstHalf = substr($All[$j-1], 0, 64) . "\n"; $LastHalf = "$j(continued):\t\t" . substr($All[$j-1], 64);

Nesser

Informational

[Page 80]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

$OutStuff .= "$j: " . $FirstHalf . $LastHalf; } else { $OutStuff .= "$j: " . $All[$j-1] } } $OutStuff .= "\n"; } Appendix C: Output of the script in Appendix B on all RFC's from 1 through 2479 +=+=+=+=+= 2000 found 139: 140: 141: 142: 143: File rfc0052.txt +=+=+=+=+= at line 141: Chuck Rose Jennings Computing Center Case Western Reserve University 10900 Euclid Avenue Case University (216) 368-2000 x2808

+=+=+=+=+= File rfc0090.txt +=+=+=+=+= 2000 found at line 71: 69: consoles); 70: 71: j) Six data communication ports (3 dial @ 71(continued): 2000 baud, 72: 1 dedicated @ 4800 baud, and 2 dedicate 72(continued): d @ 50,000 73: baud) for remote batch entry terminals; 73(continued): +=+=+=+=+= File rfc0230.txt +=+=+=+=+= 2000 found at line 92: 90: as for conventional synchronous block communication, since start 90(continued): and 91: stop bits for each character would need to be transmitted. This 91(continued): loss 92: is not substantial and does occur now for 2000 bps TIP-terminal 93: communication. 94: 2000 found at line 134: 132: 92 transmitting sites in the U.S. and Canada were used with stan 132(continued): dard 133: Bell System Dataphone datasets used at both ends. At both 1200 133(continued): and 134: 2000 bps, approximately 82% of the calls had error rates of 1 er 134(continued): ror in

Nesser

Informational

[Page 81]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

135: 10^5 bits or better, assuming an equal number of short, medium, 135(continued): and 136: long hauls. +=+=+=+=+= File rfc0241.txt +=+=+=+=+= 2000 found at line 32: 30: justifiable on the basis that the IMP and Host computers were 30(continued): 31: expected to be either in the same room (up to 30 feet of cabl 31(continued): e) or, 32: via the Distant Host option, within 2000 feet on well- contro 32(continued): lled, 33: shielded cables. A connection through common carrier facilit 33(continued): ies is 34: not comparably free of errors. Usage of common- carrier line 34(continued): s for

+=+=+=+=+= File rfc0263.txt +=+=+=+=+= 2000 found at line 22: 20: of the occasional desire to interface a Host to some IMP via a 21: long-distance connection (where long-distance, in this context, 22: is any cable run longer than 2000 feet but may typically be tens 22(continued): 23: of miles) via either a hard-wire or telephone circuit. We belie 23(continued): ve 24: that any good solution to the general problem of interfacing Hos 24(continued): ts +=+=+=+=+= File rfc0662.txt +=+=+=+=+= 2000 found at line 143: 141: by a rather short cable (approximately 100 feet long.) The CISL 141(continued): Multics is 142: connected to the IMP number 6 (port 0) by an approximately l5OO 142(continued): feet long cable. 143: 8oth IMPs are in close physical proximity (approximately 2000 fe 143(continued): et,) and are 144: connected to each other by a 5O kilobits per second line. The re 144(continued): sults given 145: above show considerable improvement in the performance with the 145(continued): new IMP DIM. +=+=+=+=+= File rfc0713.txt +=+=+=+=+= 2000 found at line 830: 828: succeeding bytes in the stream used to encode the object. 829: 830: A data object requiring 20000 (47040 octal) bytes would 831: appear in the stream as follows.

Nesser

Informational

[Page 82]


RFC 2626

The Internet and the Millennium Problem (Year 2000)

June 1999

832: 2000 found at 835: 10000010 836: contain 837: 01001110 838: 00100000 839: . line -the --837: specifying that the next 2 bytes stream length first byte of number 20000 second byte

2000 found at line 845: 843: . 844: 845: Interpretation of the contents of the 20000 bytes in 846: the stream can be performed by a module which knows the 847: specific format of the non-atomic type specified by DEFGH in +=+=+=+=+= File 2-digit found at 1044: 1045: 1045(continued): 1046: 1046(continued): 1047: 1048: rfc0724.txt +=+=+=+=+= line 1046: ::= nth> <4-digit-year> "/" ::= ::=

2-digit found at line 1062: 1060: 1061: <4-digit-year> 1062: <2-digit-year> 1063: