idnits 2.17.1 draft-yevstifeyev-pre-ietf-rfc-classifying-p2-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The abstract seems to contain references ([RFC2026]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (November 29, 2010) is 4889 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 132 (Obsoleted by RFC 154) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 160 (Obsoleted by RFC 200, RFC 999) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 170 (Obsoleted by RFC 200) Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 4 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 INTERNET-DRAFT M. Yevstifeyev 2 Intended Status: Informational November 29, 2010 3 Expires: June 2, 2011 5 Pre-IETF RFCs Classifying: Part 2 - RFCs 101-200 6 8 Status of this Memo 10 This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the 11 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 13 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 14 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 15 other groups may also distribute working documents as 16 Internet-Drafts. 18 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 19 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 20 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 21 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 23 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 24 http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html 26 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 27 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 29 Copyright and License Notice 31 Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 32 document authors. All rights reserved. 34 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 35 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 36 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 37 publication of this document. Please review these documents 38 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 39 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 40 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 41 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 42 described in the Simplified BSD License. 44 Abstract 46 This document classifies pre-IETF RFCs 101-200 in accordance with RFC 47 2026 [RFC2026]. 49 Table of Contents 51 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 52 2. RFC Editor Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 53 2.1. Informational RFCs Assignments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 54 2.2. Historic RFCs Assignments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 55 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 56 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 57 5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 58 5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 59 5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 60 Author's Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 62 1. Introduction 64 There are near 800 RFCs on the RFC Editor's archive with no definite 65 status. This was caused by the time these RFCs were published at. 66 Early RFCs (also called as 'Pre-IETF') were classified and marked 67 according to RFC 100 [RFC100]. RFC 2026 [RFC2026] mentioned that all 68 RFCs must be classified as 'Standards Track', 'Experimental', 69 'Informational', 'Best Current Practice' or 'Historic'. In order to 70 conform to this requirements, the series of document, which assign 71 Pre-IETF RFCs to one of the aforementioned status, were made. 73 This document classifies RFCs 101-200 in accordance with RFC 2026 74 [RFC2026]. 76 2. RFC Editor Considerations 78 2.1. Informational RFCs Assignments 80 RFC Editor is asked to mark following RFCs as 'Informational': 82 RFC 101 [RFC101] 84 RFC 108 [RFC108] 86 RFC 124 [RFC124] 88 RFC 132 [RFC132] 90 RFC 154 [RFC154] 92 RFC 160 [RFC160] 94 RFC 164 [RFC164] 96 RFC 170 [RFC170]. 98 2.2. Historic RFCs Assignments 100 RFC Editor is asked to mark all RFCs, not mentioned in Section 2.1, 101 which enter in the RFC 101-200 gap, as Historic. 103 3. Security Considerations 105 Security considerations are not discussed by this document. 107 4. IANA Considerations 109 IANA has no actions for this document. 111 5. References 113 5.1. Normative References 115 [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 116 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996. 118 5.2. Informative References 120 [RFC100] Karp, P., "Categorization and guide to NWG/RFCs", RFC 121 100, February 1971. 123 [RFC101] Watson, R., "Notes on the Network Working Group meeting, 124 Urbana, Illinois, February 17, 1971", RFC 101, February 125 1971. 127 [RFC108] Watson, R., "Attendance list at the Urbana NWG meeting, 128 February 17-19, 1971", RFC 108, March 1971. 130 [RFC124] Melvin, J., "Typographical error in RFC 107", RFC 124, 131 April 1971. 133 [RFC132] White, J., "Typographical Error in RFC 107", RFC 132, 134 April 1971. 136 [RFC154] Crocker, S., "Exposition Style", RFC 154, May 1971. 138 [RFC160] Network Information Center. Stanford Research Institute, 139 "RFC brief list", RFC 160, May 1971. 141 [RFC164] Heafner, J., "Minutes of Network Working Group meeting, 142 5/16 through 5/19/71", RFC 164, May 1971. 144 [RFC170] Network Information Center. Stanford Research Institute, 145 "RFC List by Number", RFC 170, June 1971. 147 Author's Addresses 149 Mykyta Yevstifeyev 150 8 Kuzovkov St., flat 25, 151 Kotovsk, Ukraine 153 EMail: evnikita2@gmail.com