Difference between revisions of "RFC6247"
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
ISSN: 2070-1721 | ISSN: 2070-1721 | ||
| − | Moving the Undeployed TCP Extensions RFC 1072, RFC 1106, | + | Moving the Undeployed TCP Extensions [[RFC1072|RFC 1072]], [[RFC1106|RFC 1106]], |
| − | RFC 1110, RFC 1145, RFC 1146, RFC 1379, RFC 1644, and RFC 1693 to | + | [[RFC1110|RFC 1110]], [[RFC1145|RFC 1145]], [[RFC1146|RFC 1146]], [[RFC1379|RFC 1379]], [[RFC1644|RFC 1644]], and [[RFC1693|RFC 1693]] to |
Historic Status | Historic Status | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
This document reclassifies several TCP extensions that have never | This document reclassifies several TCP extensions that have never | ||
seen widespread use to Historic status. The affected RFCs are RFC | seen widespread use to Historic status. The affected RFCs are RFC | ||
| − | 1072, RFC 1106, RFC 1110, RFC 1145, RFC 1146, RFC 1379, RFC 1644, and | + | 1072, [[RFC1106|RFC 1106]], [[RFC1110|RFC 1110]], [[RFC1145|RFC 1145]], [[RFC1146|RFC 1146]], [[RFC1379|RFC 1379]], [[RFC1644|RFC 1644]], and |
| − | RFC 1693. | + | [[RFC1693|RFC 1693]]. |
'''Status of This Memo''' | '''Status of This Memo''' | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents | Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents | ||
approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet | approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet | ||
| − | Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741. | + | Standard; see Section 2 of [[RFC5741|RFC 5741]]. |
Information about the current status of this document, any errata, | Information about the current status of this document, any errata, | ||
| Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | ||
| − | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | + | This document is subject to [[BCP78|BCP 78]] and the IETF Trust's Legal |
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | ||
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | ||
| Line 103: | Line 103: | ||
[[RFC1072]] Jacobson, V. and R. Braden, "TCP extensions for long- | [[RFC1072]] Jacobson, V. and R. Braden, "TCP extensions for long- | ||
| − | delay paths", RFC 1072, October 1988. | + | delay paths", [[RFC1072|RFC 1072]], October 1988. |
| − | [[RFC1106]] Fox, R., "TCP big window and NAK options", RFC 1106, | + | [[RFC1106]] Fox, R., "TCP big window and NAK options", [[RFC1106|RFC 1106]], |
June 1989. | June 1989. | ||
[[RFC1110]] McKenzie, A., "Problem with the TCP big window option", | [[RFC1110]] McKenzie, A., "Problem with the TCP big window option", | ||
| − | RFC 1110, August 1989. | + | [[RFC1110|RFC 1110]], August 1989. |
[[RFC1145]] Zweig, J. and C. Partridge, "TCP alternate checksum | [[RFC1145]] Zweig, J. and C. Partridge, "TCP alternate checksum | ||
| − | options", RFC 1145, February 1990. | + | options", [[RFC1145|RFC 1145]], February 1990. |
[[RFC1146]] Zweig, J. and C. Partridge, "TCP alternate checksum | [[RFC1146]] Zweig, J. and C. Partridge, "TCP alternate checksum | ||
| − | options", RFC 1146, March 1990. | + | options", [[RFC1146|RFC 1146]], March 1990. |
[[RFC1379]] Braden, B., "Extending TCP for Transactions -- | [[RFC1379]] Braden, B., "Extending TCP for Transactions -- | ||
| − | Concepts", RFC 1379, November 1992. | + | Concepts", [[RFC1379|RFC 1379]], November 1992. |
[[RFC1644]] Braden, B., "T/TCP -- TCP Extensions for Transactions | [[RFC1644]] Braden, B., "T/TCP -- TCP Extensions for Transactions | ||
| − | Functional Specification", RFC 1644, July 1994. | + | Functional Specification", [[RFC1644|RFC 1644]], July 1994. |
[[RFC1693]] Connolly, T., Amer, P., and P. Conrad, "An Extension to | [[RFC1693]] Connolly, T., Amer, P., and P. Conrad, "An Extension to | ||
| − | TCP : Partial Order Service", RFC 1693, November 1994. | + | TCP : Partial Order Service", [[RFC1693|RFC 1693]], November 1994. |
[[RFC4614]] Duke, M., Braden, R., Eddy, W., and E. Blanton, "A | [[RFC4614]] Duke, M., Braden, R., Eddy, W., and E. Blanton, "A | ||
Roadmap for Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) | Roadmap for Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) | ||
| − | Specification Documents", RFC 4614, September 2006. | + | Specification Documents", [[RFC4614|RFC 4614]], September 2006. |
=== Informative References === | === Informative References === | ||
| Line 138: | Line 138: | ||
[[RFC2026]] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision | [[RFC2026]] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision | ||
| − | 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996. | + | 3", [[BCP9|BCP 9]], [[RFC2026|RFC 2026]], October 1996. |
[TCPOPTREG] Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), "TCP Option | [TCPOPTREG] Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), "TCP Option | ||
Latest revision as of 06:01, 22 October 2020
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) L. Eggert Request for Comments: 6247 Nokia Obsoletes: 1072, 1106, 1110, 1145, May 2011
1146, 1379, 1644, 1693
Updates: 4614 Category: Informational ISSN: 2070-1721
Moving the Undeployed TCP Extensions RFC 1072, RFC 1106,
RFC 1110, RFC 1145, RFC 1146, RFC 1379, RFC 1644, and RFC 1693 to
Historic Status
Abstract
This document reclassifies several TCP extensions that have never seen widespread use to Historic status. The affected RFCs are RFC 1072, RFC 1106, RFC 1110, RFC 1145, RFC 1146, RFC 1379, RFC 1644, and RFC 1693.
Status of This Memo
This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6247.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
Contents
Introduction
TCP has a long history, and several proposed TCP extensions have never seen widespread deployment. Section 5 of the TCP "roadmap" document RFC4614 already classifies a number of TCP extensions as Historic and describes the reasons for doing so, but it does not instruct the RFC Editor and IANA to change the status of these RFCs in the RFC database and the relevant IANA registries. The sole purpose of this document is to do just that. Please refer to Section 5 of RFC4614 for justification.
RFC Editor Considerations
Per this document, the RFC Editor has changed the status of the following RFCs to Historic RFC2026:
o RFC1072 on "TCP Extensions for Long-Delay Paths"
o RFC1106 and RFC1110 related to the "TCP Big Window and Nak
Options"
o RFC1145 and RFC1146 related to the "TCP Alternate Checksum
Options"
o RFC1379 and RFC1644 on "T/TCP -- Extensions for Transactions
Functional Specification"
o RFC1693 on "An Extension to TCP : Partial Order Service"
IANA Considerations
IANA has marked the TCP options 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 documented in RFC1072, RFC1146, RFC1644, and RFC1693 as "obsolete" in the "TCP Option Kind Numbers" registry [TCPOPTREG], with a reference to this RFC.
Security Considerations
As mentioned in RFC4614, the TCP Extensions for Transactions (T/TCP) RFC1379RFC1644 are reported to have security issues [DEVIVO].
Acknowledgments
Lars Eggert is partly funded by [TRILOGY], a research project supported by the European Commission under its Seventh Framework Program.
References
Normative References
RFC1072 Jacobson, V. and R. Braden, "TCP extensions for long-
delay paths", RFC 1072, October 1988.
RFC1106 Fox, R., "TCP big window and NAK options", RFC 1106,
June 1989.
RFC1110 McKenzie, A., "Problem with the TCP big window option",
RFC 1110, August 1989.
RFC1145 Zweig, J. and C. Partridge, "TCP alternate checksum
options", RFC 1145, February 1990.
RFC1146 Zweig, J. and C. Partridge, "TCP alternate checksum
options", RFC 1146, March 1990.
RFC1379 Braden, B., "Extending TCP for Transactions --
Concepts", RFC 1379, November 1992.
RFC1644 Braden, B., "T/TCP -- TCP Extensions for Transactions
Functional Specification", RFC 1644, July 1994.
RFC1693 Connolly, T., Amer, P., and P. Conrad, "An Extension to
TCP : Partial Order Service", RFC 1693, November 1994.
RFC4614 Duke, M., Braden, R., Eddy, W., and E. Blanton, "A
Roadmap for Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)
Specification Documents", RFC 4614, September 2006.
Informative References
[DEVIVO] de Vivo, M., de Vivo, G., Koeneke, R., and G. Isern,
"Internet Vulnerabilities Related to TCP/IP and T/TCP",
ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communications Review (CCR), Vol.
29, No. 1, January 1999.
RFC2026 Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.
[TCPOPTREG] Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), "TCP Option
Kind Numbers", <http://www.iana.org>.
[TRILOGY] "Trilogy Project", <http://www.trilogy-project.org/>.
Author's Address
Lars Eggert Nokia Research Center P.O. Box 407 Nokia Group 00045 Finland
Phone: +358 50 48 24461 EMail: [email protected] URI: http://research.nokia.com/people/lars_eggert
