Skip to main content

What's In a Name: RFC

Document Type Expired Internet-Draft (individual)
Expired & archived
Authors Jonathan Rosenberg , Allison J. Mankin
Last updated 2004-10-19
RFC stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state Expired
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:


Currently, the Request for Comments (RFC) moniker applies to all documents that are published by the RFC editor. This includes documents produced by IETF processes, such as IAB documents or working group standards, on an equal footing with individual contributions to the RFC editor. As a result, the term RFC does not mean that a document has been produced by the IETF (though some non-IETF RFCs strongly resemble IETF RFCs). This is at odds with the understanding of the commons, which has come to view RFCs as the output document series of the IETF. This document discusses the importance of aligning fact with this common understanding, and proposes that the name RFC be associated only with IETF documents.


Jonathan Rosenberg
Allison J. Mankin

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)