TCP Maintenance and Minor Extensions (TCPM) WG A. Zimmermann
Internet-Draft NetApp, Inc.
Obsoletes: 675 721 761 813 816 879 896 W. Eddy
1078 6013 (if approved) MTI Systems
Updates: 7414 (if approved) L. Eggert
Intended status: Informational NetApp, Inc.
Expires: April 15, 2016 October 13, 2015

Moving Outdated TCP Extensions and TCP-related Documents to Historic and Informational Status


This document reclassifies several TCP extensions and TCP-related documents that have either been superseded, have never seen widespread use, or are no longer recommended for use to "Historic" status. The affected RFCs are RFC 675, RFC 721, RFC 761, RFC 813, RFC 816, RFC 879, RFC 896, RFC 1078, and RFC 6013. Additionally, this document reclassifies RFC 700, RFC 794, RFC 814, RFC 817, RFC 872, RFC 889, RFC 964, and RFC 1071 to "Informational" status.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on April 15, 2016.

Copyright Notice

Copyright (c) 2015 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 ( 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.

1. Introduction

TCP has a long history. Over time, many RFCs have accumulated that describe aspects of the TCP protocol, implementation, and extensions. Some of these have been superseded, are no longer recommended for use, or have simply never seen widespread use.

Section 6 and 7.1 of the TCP roadmap document [RFC7414] already reclassified a number of TCP extensions as "Historic" and describes the reasons for doing so, but it did not instruct the RFC Editor to change the status of these RFCs in the RFC database. The purpose of this document is to do just that.

In addition, this document reclassifies all other documents mentioned in the TCP roadmap that currently have an "Unknown" status to either "Historic" or "Informational".

2. RFC Editor Considerations

The following two sections give a short justification why a specific TCP extension or a TCP-related document is being reclassified as "Historic" or "Informational". In addition, the letter code after an RFC number indicates from which original status a particular RFC is changed to "Historic" or "Informational" (see BCP 9 [RFC2026] for an explanation of these categories): [RFC7414].

For the content of the documents itself, the reader is referred either to the corresponding RFC or, for a brief description, to the TCP Roadmap document

2.1. Moving to "Historic" Status

The RFC Editor is requested to change the status of the following RFCs to "Historic" [RFC2026]:

2.2. Moving to "Informational" Status

The RFC Editor is requested to change the status of the following RFCs to "Informational" [RFC2026]:

3. IANA Considerations

None of the documents moved to "Historic" or "Informational" status have assigned TCP options numbers. Therefore, no IANA actions are required.

4. Security Considerations

This document introduces no new security considerations. Each RFC listed in this document attempts to address the security considerations of the specification it contains.

5. Acknowledgments

The authors thank John Leslie, Pasi Sarolahti, Richard Scheffenegger, Martin Stiemerling, and Joe Touch for their contributions.

Alexander Zimmermann and Lars Eggert have received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program 2014-2018 under grant agreement No. 644866 (SSICLOPS). This document reflects only the authors' views and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

6. References

6.1. Normative References

[RFC0675] Cerf, V., Dalal, Y. and C. Sunshine, "Specification of Internet Transmission Control Program", RFC 675, DOI 10.17487/RFC0675, December 1974.
[RFC0700] Mader, E., Plummer, W. and R. Tomlinson, "Protocol experiment", RFC 700, DOI 10.17487/RFC0700, August 1974.
[RFC0721] Garlick, L., "Out-of-Band Control Signals in a Host-to-Host Protocol", RFC 721, DOI 10.17487/RFC0721, September 1976.
[RFC0761] Postel, J., "DoD standard Transmission Control Protocol", RFC 761, DOI 10.17487/RFC0761, January 1980.
[RFC0794] Cerf, V., "Pre-emption", RFC 794, DOI 10.17487/RFC0794, September 1981.
[RFC0813] Clark, D., "Window and Acknowledgement Strategy in TCP", RFC 813, DOI 10.17487/RFC0813, July 1982.
[RFC0814] Clark, D., "Name, addresses, ports, and routes", RFC 814, DOI 10.17487/RFC0814, July 1982.
[RFC0816] Clark, D., "Fault isolation and recovery", RFC 816, DOI 10.17487/RFC0816, July 1982.
[RFC0817] Clark, D., "Modularity and efficiency in protocol implementation", RFC 817, DOI 10.17487/RFC0817, July 1982.
[RFC0872] Padlipsky, M., "TCP-on-a-LAN", RFC 872, DOI 10.17487/RFC0872, September 1982.
[RFC0879] Postel, J., "The TCP Maximum Segment Size and Related Topics", RFC 879, DOI 10.17487/RFC0879, November 1983.
[RFC0889] Mills, D., "Internet Delay Experiments", RFC 889, DOI 10.17487/RFC0889, December 1983.
[RFC0896] Nagle, J., "Congestion Control in IP/TCP Internetworks", RFC 896, DOI 10.17487/RFC0896, January 1984.
[RFC0964] Sidhu, D. and T. Blumer, "Some problems with the specification of the Military Standard Transmission Control Protocol", RFC 964, DOI 10.17487/RFC0964, November 1985.
[RFC1071] Braden, R., Borman, D. and C. Partridge, "Computing the Internet checksum", RFC 1071, DOI 10.17487/RFC1071, September 1988.
[RFC1078] Lottor, M., "TCP port service Multiplexer (TCPMUX)", RFC 1078, DOI 10.17487/RFC1078, November 1988.
[RFC6013] Simpson, W., "TCP Cookie Transactions (TCPCT)", RFC 6013, DOI 10.17487/RFC6013, January 2011.

6.2. Informative References

[I-D.ietf-tcpm-tcp-edo] Touch, J. and W. Eddy, "TCP Extended Data Offset Option", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tcpm-tcp-edo-03, April 2015.
[RFC0793] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", STD 7, RFC 793, DOI 10.17487/RFC0793, September 1981.
[RFC1122] Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts - Communication Layers", STD 3, RFC 1122, DOI 10.17487/RFC1122, October 1989.
[RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, DOI 10.17487/RFC2026, October 1996.
[RFC5461] Gont, F., "TCP's Reaction to Soft Errors", RFC 5461, DOI 10.17487/RFC5461, February 2009.
[RFC6633] Gont, F., "Deprecation of ICMP Source Quench Messages", RFC 6633, DOI 10.17487/RFC6633, May 2012.
[RFC6691] Borman, D., "TCP Options and Maximum Segment Size (MSS)", RFC 6691, DOI 10.17487/RFC6691, July 2012.
[RFC7413] Cheng, Y., Chu, J., Radhakrishnan, S. and A. Jain, "TCP Fast Open", RFC 7413, DOI 10.17487/RFC7413, December 2014.
[RFC7414] Duke, M., Braden, R., Eddy, W., Blanton, E. and A. Zimmermann, "A Roadmap for Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Specification Documents", RFC 7414, DOI 10.17487/RFC7414, February 2015.

Authors' Addresses

Alexander Zimmermann NetApp, Inc. Sonnenallee 1 Kirchheim, 85551 Germany Phone: +49 89 900594712 EMail:
Wesley M. Eddy MTI Systems Suite 170, 18013 Cleveland Parkway Cleveland, OH 44135 Phone: 216-433-6682 EMail:
Lars Eggert NetApp, Inc. Sonnenallee 1 Kirchheim, 85551 Germany Phone: +49 89 900594306 EMail:

Table of Contents