Mike149
asked on
E-mail, How does it work?
How does e-mail work and how does it get from one computer to another?
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
Create a free account to see this answer
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
RFC1123
Hey ozo, ya lost me with that comment...mind explaining? Â Thx!
~Aaron
~Aaron
RFC1123 is the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) document that define internet email protocol.
M
M
ah, i get it. Â Learn something new every day...I just went at it from a simple point of view(I hope)... Â ;-)
~Aaron
~Aaron
There are hundreds of RFC's (Request For Comment's) that apply to most every aspect of the internet. Some are adopted/ratified and become defacto standards since the IETF has no legislative or enforcement authority. If you go to Yahoo and search on RFC1123 you should find exactly what you're looking for.
M
M
Ask and ye shall receive:
This is the first eight pages or so from RFC1123. I'd have posted more but E-E would only accept this much...
The source link is:
http://www.normos.org/ietf/rfc/rfc1123.txt
M
Network Working Group           Internet Engineering Task Force
Request for Comments: 1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â R. Braden, Editor
                              October 1989
    Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Application and Support
Status of This Memo
  This RFC is an official specification for the Internet community.  It
  incorporates by reference, amends, corrects, and supplements the
  primary protocol standards documents relating to hosts.  Distribution
  of this document is unlimited.
Summary
  This RFC is one of a pair that defines and discusses the requirements
  for Internet host software.  This RFC covers the application and
  support protocols; its companion RFC-1122 covers the communication
  protocol layers: link layer, IP layer, and transport layer.
              Table of Contents
  1.  INTRODUCTION .......................... .......... .......... .   5
   1.1  The Internet Architecture .......................... ....   6
   1.2  General Considerations .......................... .......   6
     1.2.1  Continuing Internet Evolution .....................   6
     1.2.2  Robustness Principle .......................... ....   7
     1.2.3  Error Logging .......................... .......... .   8
     1.2.4  Configuration .......................... .......... .   8
   1.3  Reading this Document .......................... ........  10
     1.3.1  Organization .......................... .......... ..  10
     1.3.2  Requirements .......................... .......... ..  10
     1.3.3  Terminology .......................... .......... ...  11
   1.4  Acknowledgments .......................... .......... ....  12
  2.  GENERAL ISSUES .......................... .......... .........  13
   2.1  Host Names and Numbers .......................... .......  13
   2.2  Using Domain Name Service .......................... ....  13
   2.3  Applications on Multihomed hosts .......................  14
   2.4  Type-of-Service .......................... .......... ....  14
   2.5  GENERAL APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ...............  15
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 1]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
  3.  REMOTE LOGIN -- TELNET PROTOCOL .......................... ..  16
   3.1  INTRODUCTION .......................... .......... .......  16
   3.2  PROTOCOL WALK-THROUGH .......................... ........  16
     3.2.1  Option Negotiation .......................... ......  16
     3.2.2  Telnet Go-Ahead Function ..........................  16
     3.2.3  Control Functions .......................... .......  17
     3.2.4  Telnet "Synch" Signal .......................... ...  18
     3.2.5  NVT Printer and Keyboard ..........................  19
     3.2.6  Telnet Command Structure ..........................  20
     3.2.7  Telnet Binary Option .......................... ....  20
     3.2.8  Telnet Terminal-Type Option .......................  20
   3.3  SPECIFIC ISSUES .......................... .......... ....  21
     3.3.1  Telnet End-of-Line Convention .....................  21
     3.3.2  Data Entry Terminals .......................... ....  23
     3.3.3  Option Requirements .......................... .....  24
     3.3.4  Option Initiation .......................... .......  24
     3.3.5  Telnet Linemode Option .......................... ..  25
   3.4  TELNET/USER INTERFACE .......................... ........  25
     3.4.1  Character Set Transparency ........................  25
     3.4.2  Telnet Commands .......................... .........  26
     3.4.3  TCP Connection Errors .......................... ...  26
     3.4.4  Non-Default Telnet Contact Port ...................  26
     3.4.5  Flushing Output .......................... .........  26
   3.5.  TELNET REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY .......................... .  27
  4.  FILE TRANSFER .......................... .......... ..........  29
   4.1  FILE TRANSFER PROTOCOL -- FTP ..........................  29
     4.1.1  INTRODUCTION .......................... .......... ..  29
     4.1.2.  PROTOCOL WALK-THROUGH .......................... ..  29
      4.1.2.1  LOCAL Type .......................... .........  29
      4.1.2.2  Telnet Format Control ........................  30
      4.1.2.3  Page Structure .......................... .....  30
      4.1.2.4  Data Structure Transformations ...............  30
      4.1.2.5  Data Connection Management ...................  31
      4.1.2.6  PASV Command .......................... .......  31
      4.1.2.7  LIST and NLST Commands .......................  31
      4.1.2.8  SITE Command .......................... .......  32
      4.1.2.9  STOU Command .......................... .......  32
      4.1.2.10  Telnet End-of-line Code .....................  32
      4.1.2.11  FTP Replies .......................... .......  33
      4.1.2.12  Connections .......................... .......  34
      4.1.2.13  Minimum Implementation; RFC-959 Section .....  34
     4.1.3  SPECIFIC ISSUES .......................... .........  35
      4.1.3.1  Non-standard Command Verbs ...................  35
      4.1.3.2  Idle Timeout .......................... .......  36
      4.1.3.3  Concurrency of Data and Control ..............  36
      4.1.3.4  FTP Restart Mechanism ........................  36
     4.1.4  FTP/USER INTERFACE .......................... ......  39
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 2]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
      4.1.4.1  Pathname Specification .......................  39
      4.1.4.2  "QUOTE" Command .......................... ....  40
      4.1.4.3  Displaying Replies to User ...................  40
      4.1.4.4  Maintaining Synchronization ..................  40
     4.1.5  FTP REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY .........................  41
   4.2  TRIVIAL FILE TRANSFER PROTOCOL -- TFTP .................  44
     4.2.1  INTRODUCTION .......................... .......... ..  44
     4.2.2  PROTOCOL WALK-THROUGH .......................... ...  44
      4.2.2.1  Transfer Modes .......................... .....  44
      4.2.2.2  UDP Header .......................... .........  44
     4.2.3  SPECIFIC ISSUES .......................... .........  44
      4.2.3.1  Sorcerer's Apprentice Syndrome ...............  44
      4.2.3.2  Timeout Algorithms .......................... .  46
      4.2.3.3  Extensions .......................... .........  46
      4.2.3.4  Access Control .......................... .....  46
      4.2.3.5  Broadcast Request .......................... ..  46
     4.2.4  TFTP REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY .........................  47
  5.  ELECTRONIC MAIL -- SMTP and RFC-822 ........................  48
   5.1  INTRODUCTION .......................... .......... .......  48
   5.2  PROTOCOL WALK-THROUGH .......................... ........  48
     5.2.1  The SMTP Model .......................... ..........  48
     5.2.2  Canonicalization .......................... ........  49
     5.2.3  VRFY and EXPN Commands .......................... ..  50
     5.2.4  SEND, SOML, and SAML Commands .....................  50
     5.2.5  HELO Command .......................... .......... ..  50
     5.2.6  Mail Relay .......................... .......... ....  51
     5.2.7  RCPT Command .......................... .......... ..  52
     5.2.8  DATA Command .......................... .......... ..  53
     5.2.9  Command Syntax .......................... ..........  54
     5.2.10  SMTP Replies .......................... .......... .  54
     5.2.11  Transparency .......................... .......... .  55
     5.2.12  WKS Use in MX Processing .........................  55
     5.2.13  RFC-822 Message Specification ....................  55
     5.2.14  RFC-822 Date and Time Specification ..............  55
     5.2.15  RFC-822 Syntax Change .......................... ..  56
     5.2.16  RFC-822  Local-part .......................... ....  56
     5.2.17  Domain Literals .......................... ........  57
     5.2.18  Common Address Formatting Errors .................  58
     5.2.19  Explicit Source Routes .......................... .  58
   5.3  SPECIFIC ISSUES .......................... .......... ....  59
     5.3.1  SMTP Queueing Strategies ..........................  59
      5.3.1.1 Sending Strategy .......................... ....  59
      5.3.1.2  Receiving strategy .......................... .  61
     5.3.2  Timeouts in SMTP .......................... ........  61
     5.3.3  Reliable Mail Receipt .......................... ...  63
     5.3.4  Reliable Mail Transmission ........................  63
     5.3.5  Domain Name Support .......................... .....  65
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 3]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
     5.3.6  Mailing Lists and Aliases .........................  65
     5.3.7  Mail Gatewaying .......................... .........  66
     5.3.8  Maximum Message Size .......................... ....  68
   5.4  SMTP REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY .......................... ....  69
  6. SUPPORT SERVICES .......................... .......... ........  72
   6.1 DOMAIN NAME TRANSLATION .......................... .......  72
     6.1.1 INTRODUCTION .......................... .......... ...  72
     6.1.2  PROTOCOL WALK-THROUGH .......................... ...  72
      6.1.2.1  Resource Records with Zero TTL ...............  73
      6.1.2.2  QCLASS Values .......................... ......  73
      6.1.2.3  Unused Fields .......................... ......  73
      6.1.2.4  Compression .......................... ........  73
      6.1.2.5  Misusing Configuration Info ..................  73
     6.1.3  SPECIFIC ISSUES .......................... .........  74
      6.1.3.1  Resolver Implementation ......................  74
      6.1.3.2  Transport Protocols ..........................  75
      6.1.3.3  Efficient Resource Usage .....................  77
      6.1.3.4  Multihomed Hosts .......................... ...  78
      6.1.3.5  Extensibility .......................... ......  79
      6.1.3.6  Status of RR Types .......................... .  79
      6.1.3.7  Robustness .......................... .........  80
      6.1.3.8  Local Host Table .......................... ...  80
     6.1.4  DNS USER INTERFACE .......................... ......  81
      6.1.4.1  DNS Administration .......................... .  81
      6.1.4.2  DNS User Interface .......................... .  81
      6.1.4.3 Interface Abbreviation Facilities .............  82
     6.1.5  DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ...........  84
   6.2  HOST INITIALIZATION .......................... ..........  87
     6.2.1  INTRODUCTION .......................... .......... ..  87
     6.2.2  REQUIREMENTS .......................... .......... ..  87
      6.2.2.1  Dynamic Configuration ........................  87
      6.2.2.2  Loading Phase .......................... ......  89
   6.3  REMOTE MANAGEMENT .......................... .......... ..  90
     6.3.1  INTRODUCTION .......................... .......... ..  90
     6.3.2  PROTOCOL WALK-THROUGH .......................... ...  90
     6.3.3  MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ...................  92
  7.  REFERENCES .......................... .......... .......... ...  93
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 4]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
1. Â INTRODUCTION
  This document is one of a pair that defines and discusses the
  requirements for host system implementations of the Internet protocol
  suite.  This RFC covers the applications layer and support protocols.
  Its companion RFC, "Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Communications
  Layers" [INTRO:1] covers the lower layer protocols: transport layer,
  IP layer, and link layer.
  These documents are intended to provide guidance for vendors,
  implementors, and users of Internet communication software.  They
  represent the consensus of a large body of technical experience and
  wisdom, contributed by members of the Internet research and vendor
  communities.
  This RFC enumerates standard protocols that a host connected to the
  Internet must use, and it incorporates by reference the RFCs and
  other documents describing the current specifications for these
  protocols.  It corrects errors in the referenced documents and adds
  additional discussion and guidance for an implementor.
  For each protocol, this document also contains an explicit set of
  requirements, recommendations, and options.  The reader must
  understand that the list of requirements in this document is
  incomplete by itself; the complete set of requirements for an
  Internet host is primarily defined in the standard protocol
  specification documents, with the corrections, amendments, and
  supplements contained in this RFC.
  A good-faith implementation of the protocols that was produced after
  careful reading of the RFC's and with some interaction with the
  Internet technical community, and that followed good communications
  software engineering practices, should differ from the requirements
  of this document in only minor ways.  Thus, in many cases, the
  "requirements" in this RFC are already stated or implied in the
  standard protocol documents, so that their inclusion here is, in a
  sense, redundant.  However, they were included because some past
  implementation has made the wrong choice, causing problems of
  interoperability, performance, and/or robustness.
  This document includes discussion and explanation of many of the
  requirements and recommendations.  A simple list of requirements
  would be dangerous, because:
  o   Some required features are more important than others, and some
    features are optional.
  o   There may be valid reasons why particular vendor products that
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 5]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
    are designed for restricted contexts might choose to use
    different specifications.
  However, the specifications of this document must be followed to meet
  the general goal of arbitrary host interoperation across the
  diversity and complexity of the Internet system.  Although most
  current implementations fail to meet these requirements in various
  ways, some minor and some major, this specification is the ideal
  towards which we need to move.
  These requirements are based on the current level of Internet
  architecture.  This document will be updated as required to provide
  additional clarifications or to include additional information in
  those areas in which specifications are still evolving.
  This introductory section begins with general advice to host software
  vendors, and then gives some guidance on reading the rest of the
  document.  Section 2 contains general requirements that may be
  applicable to all application and support protocols.  Sections 3, 4,
  and 5 contain the requirements on protocols for the three major
  applications: Telnet, file transfer, and electronic mail,
  respectively. Section 6 covers the support applications: the domain
  name system, system initialization, and management.  Finally, all
  references will be found in Section 7.
  1.1  The Internet Architecture
   For a brief introduction to the Internet architecture from a host
   viewpoint, see Section 1.1 of [INTRO:1].  That section also
   contains recommended references for general background on the
   Internet architecture.
  1.2  General Considerations
   There are two important lessons that vendors of Internet host
   software have learned and which a new vendor should consider
   seriously.
   1.2.1  Continuing Internet Evolution
     The enormous growth of the Internet has revealed problems of
     management and scaling in a large datagram-based packet
     communication system.  These problems are being addressed, and
     as a result there will be continuing evolution of the
     specifications described in this document.  These changes will
     be carefully planned and controlled, since there is extensive
     participation in this planning by the vendors and by the
     organizations responsible for operations of the networks.
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 6]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
     Development, evolution, and revision are characteristic of
     computer network protocols today, and this situation will
     persist for some years.  A vendor who develops computer
     communication software for the Internet protocol suite (or any
     other protocol suite!) and then fails to maintain and update
     that software for changing specifications is going to leave a
     trail of unhappy customers.  The Internet is a large
     communication network, and the users are in constant contact
     through it.  Experience has shown that knowledge of
     deficiencies in vendor software propagates quickly through the
     Internet technical community.
   1.2.2  Robustness Principle
     At every layer of the protocols, there is a general rule whose
     application can lead to enormous benefits in robustness and
     interoperability:
        "Be liberal in what you accept, and
         conservative in what you send"
     Software should be written to deal with every conceivable
     error, no matter how unlikely; sooner or later a packet will
     come in with that particular combination of errors and
     attributes, and unless the software is prepared, chaos can
     ensue.  In general, it is best to assume that the network is
     filled with malevolent entities that will send in packets
     designed to have the worst possible effect.  This assumption
     will lead to suitable protective design, although the most
     serious problems in the Internet have been caused by
     unenvisaged mechanisms triggered by low-probability events;
     mere human malice would never have taken so devious a course!
     Adaptability to change must be designed into all levels of
     Internet host software.  As a simple example, consider a
     protocol specification that contains an enumeration of values
     for a particular header field -- e.g., a type field, a port
     number, or an error code; this enumeration must be assumed to
     be incomplete.  Thus, if a protocol specification defines four
     possible error codes, the software must not break when a fifth
     code shows up.  An undefined code might be logged (see below),
     but it must not cause a failure.
     The second part of the principle is almost as important:
     software on other hosts may contain deficiencies that make it
     unwise to exploit legal but obscure protocol features.  It is
     unwise to stray far from the obvious and simple, lest untoward
     effects result elsewhere.  A corollary of this is "watch out
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 7]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
     for misbehaving hosts"; host software should be prepared, not
     just to survive other misbehaving hosts, but also to cooperate
     to limit the amount of disruption such hosts can cause to the
     shared communication facility.
   1.2.3  Error Logging
     The Internet includes a great variety of host and gateway
     systems, each implementing many protocols and protocol layers,
     and some of these contain bugs and mis-features in their
     Internet protocol software.  As a result of complexity,
     diversity, and distribution of function, the diagnosis of user
     problems is often very difficult.
     Problem diagnosis will be aided if host implementations include
     a carefully designed facility for logging erroneous or
     "strange" protocol events.  It is important to include as much
     diagnostic information as possible when an error is logged.  In
     particular, it is often useful to record the header(s) of a
     packet that caused an error.  However, care must be taken to
     ensure that error logging does not consume prohibitive amounts
     of resources or otherwise interfere with the operation of the
     host.
     There is a tendency for abnormal but harmless protocol events
     to overflow error logging files; this can be avoided by using a
     "circular" log, or by enabling logging only while diagnosing a
     known failure.  It may be useful to filter and count duplicate
     successive messages.  One strategy that seems to work well is:
     (1) always count abnormalities and make such counts accessible
     through the management protocol (see Section 6.3); and (2)
     allow the logging of a great variety of events to be
     selectively enabled.  For example, it might useful to be able
     to "log everything" or to "log everything for host X".
     Note that different managements may have differing policies
     about the amount of error logging that they want normally
     enabled in a host.  Some will say, "if it doesn't hurt me, I
     don't want to know about it", while others will want to take a
     more watchful and aggressive attitude about detecting and
     removing protocol abnormalities.
   1.2.4  Configuration
     It would be ideal if a host implementation of the Internet
     protocol suite could be entirely self-configuring.  This would
     allow the whole suite to be implemented in ROM or cast into
     silicon, it would simplify diskless workstations, and it would
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 8]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
     be an immense boon to harried LAN administrators as well as
     system vendors.  We have not reached this ideal; in fact, we
     are not even close.
     At many points in this document, you will find a requirement
     that a parameter be a configurable option.  There are several
     different reasons behind such requirements.  In a few cases,
     there is current uncertainty or disagreement about the best
     value, and it may be necessary to update the recommended value
     in the future.  In other cases, the value really depends on
     external factors -- e.g., the size of the host and the
     distribution of its communication load, or the speeds and
     topology of nearby networks -- and self-tuning algorithms are
     unavailable and may be insufficient.  In some cases,
     configurability is needed because of administrative
     requirements.
     Finally, some configuration options are required to communicate
     with obsolete or incorrect implementations of the protocols,
     distributed without sources, that unfortunately persist in many
     parts of the Internet.  To make correct systems coexist with
     these faulty systems, administrators often have to "mis-
     configure" the correct systems.  This problem will correct
     itself gradually as the faulty systems are retired, but it
     cannot be ignored by vendors.
     When we say that a parameter must be configurable, we do not
     intend to require that its value be explicitly read from a
     configuration file at every boot time.  We recommend that
     implementors set up a default for each parameter, so a
     configuration file is only necessary to override those defaults
     that are inappropriate in a particular installation.  Thus, the
     configurability requirement is an assurance that it will be
     POSSIBLE to override the default when necessary, even in a
     binary-only or ROM-based product.
     This document requires a particular value for such defaults in
     some cases.  The choice of default is a sensitive issue when
     the configuration item controls the accommodation to existing
     faulty systems.  If the Internet is to converge successfully to
     complete interoperability, the default values built into
     implementations must implement the official protocol, not
     "mis-configurations" to accommodate faulty implementations.
     Although marketing considerations have led some vendors to
     choose mis-configuration defaults, we urge vendors to choose
     defaults that will conform to the standard.
     Finally, we note that a vendor needs to provide adequate
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 9]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
     documentation on all configuration parameters, their limits and
     effects.
  1.3  Reading this Document
   1.3.1  Organization
     In general, each major section is organized into the following
     subsections:
     (1)  Introduction
     (2)  Protocol Walk-Through -- considers the protocol
       specification documents section-by-section, correcting
       errors, stating requirements that may be ambiguous or
       ill-defined, and providing further clarification or
       explanation.
     (3)  Specific Issues -- discusses protocol design and
       implementation issues that were not included in the walk-
       through.
     (4)  Interfaces -- discusses the service interface to the next
       higher layer.
     (5)  Summary -- contains a summary of the requirements of the
       section.
     Under many of the individual topics in this document, there is
     parenthetical material labeled "DISCUSSION" or
     "IMPLEMENTATION".  This material is intended to give
     clarification and explanation of the preceding requirements
     text.  It also includes some suggestions on possible future
     directions or developments.  The implementation material
     contains suggested approaches that an implementor may want to
     consider.
     The summary sections are intended to be guides and indexes to
     the text, but are necessarily cryptic and incomplete.  The
     summaries should never be used or referenced separately from
     the complete RFC.
   1.3.2  Requirements
     In this document, the words that are used to define the
     significance of each particular requirement are capitalized.
     These words are:
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 10]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
     *   "MUST"
       This word or the adjective "REQUIRED" means that the item
       is an absolute requirement of the specification.
     *   "SHOULD"
       This word or the adjective "RECOMMENDED" means that there
       may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to
       ignore this item, but the full implications should be
       understood and the case carefully weighed before choosing
       a different course.
     *   "MAY"
       This word or the adjective "OPTIONAL" means that this item
       is truly optional.  One vendor may choose to include the
       item because a particular marketplace requires it or
       because it enhances the product, for example; another
       vendor may omit the same item.
This is the first eight pages or so from RFC1123. I'd have posted more but E-E would only accept this much...
The source link is:
http://www.normos.org/ietf/rfc/rfc1123.txt
M
Network Working Group           Internet Engineering Task Force
Request for Comments: 1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â R. Braden, Editor
                              October 1989
    Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Application and Support
Status of This Memo
  This RFC is an official specification for the Internet community.  It
  incorporates by reference, amends, corrects, and supplements the
  primary protocol standards documents relating to hosts.  Distribution
  of this document is unlimited.
Summary
  This RFC is one of a pair that defines and discusses the requirements
  for Internet host software.  This RFC covers the application and
  support protocols; its companion RFC-1122 covers the communication
  protocol layers: link layer, IP layer, and transport layer.
              Table of Contents
  1.  INTRODUCTION ..........................
   1.1  The Internet Architecture ..........................
   1.2  General Considerations ..........................
     1.2.1  Continuing Internet Evolution .....................   6
     1.2.2  Robustness Principle ..........................
     1.2.3  Error Logging ..........................
     1.2.4  Configuration ..........................
   1.3  Reading this Document ..........................
     1.3.1  Organization ..........................
     1.3.2  Requirements ..........................
     1.3.3  Terminology ..........................
   1.4  Acknowledgments ..........................
  2.  GENERAL ISSUES ..........................
   2.1  Host Names and Numbers ..........................
   2.2  Using Domain Name Service ..........................
   2.3  Applications on Multihomed hosts .......................  14
   2.4  Type-of-Service ..........................
   2.5  GENERAL APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ...............  15
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 1]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
  3.  REMOTE LOGIN -- TELNET PROTOCOL ..........................
   3.1  INTRODUCTION ..........................
   3.2  PROTOCOL WALK-THROUGH ..........................
     3.2.1  Option Negotiation ..........................
     3.2.2  Telnet Go-Ahead Function ..........................
     3.2.3  Control Functions ..........................
     3.2.4  Telnet "Synch" Signal ..........................
     3.2.5  NVT Printer and Keyboard ..........................
     3.2.6  Telnet Command Structure ..........................
     3.2.7  Telnet Binary Option ..........................
     3.2.8  Telnet Terminal-Type Option .......................  20
   3.3  SPECIFIC ISSUES ..........................
     3.3.1  Telnet End-of-Line Convention .....................  21
     3.3.2  Data Entry Terminals ..........................
     3.3.3  Option Requirements ..........................
     3.3.4  Option Initiation ..........................
     3.3.5  Telnet Linemode Option ..........................
   3.4  TELNET/USER INTERFACE ..........................
     3.4.1  Character Set Transparency ........................  25
     3.4.2  Telnet Commands ..........................
     3.4.3  TCP Connection Errors ..........................
     3.4.4  Non-Default Telnet Contact Port ...................  26
     3.4.5  Flushing Output ..........................
   3.5.  TELNET REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ..........................
  4.  FILE TRANSFER ..........................
   4.1  FILE TRANSFER PROTOCOL -- FTP ..........................
     4.1.1  INTRODUCTION ..........................
     4.1.2.  PROTOCOL WALK-THROUGH ..........................
      4.1.2.1  LOCAL Type ..........................
      4.1.2.2  Telnet Format Control ........................  30
      4.1.2.3  Page Structure ..........................
      4.1.2.4  Data Structure Transformations ...............  30
      4.1.2.5  Data Connection Management ...................  31
      4.1.2.6  PASV Command ..........................
      4.1.2.7  LIST and NLST Commands .......................  31
      4.1.2.8  SITE Command ..........................
      4.1.2.9  STOU Command ..........................
      4.1.2.10  Telnet End-of-line Code .....................  32
      4.1.2.11  FTP Replies ..........................
      4.1.2.12  Connections ..........................
      4.1.2.13  Minimum Implementation; RFC-959 Section .....  34
     4.1.3  SPECIFIC ISSUES ..........................
      4.1.3.1  Non-standard Command Verbs ...................  35
      4.1.3.2  Idle Timeout ..........................
      4.1.3.3  Concurrency of Data and Control ..............  36
      4.1.3.4  FTP Restart Mechanism ........................  36
     4.1.4  FTP/USER INTERFACE ..........................
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 2]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
      4.1.4.1  Pathname Specification .......................  39
      4.1.4.2  "QUOTE" Command ..........................
      4.1.4.3  Displaying Replies to User ...................  40
      4.1.4.4  Maintaining Synchronization ..................  40
     4.1.5  FTP REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY .........................  41
   4.2  TRIVIAL FILE TRANSFER PROTOCOL -- TFTP .................  44
     4.2.1  INTRODUCTION ..........................
     4.2.2  PROTOCOL WALK-THROUGH ..........................
      4.2.2.1  Transfer Modes ..........................
      4.2.2.2  UDP Header ..........................
     4.2.3  SPECIFIC ISSUES ..........................
      4.2.3.1  Sorcerer's Apprentice Syndrome ...............  44
      4.2.3.2  Timeout Algorithms ..........................
      4.2.3.3  Extensions ..........................
      4.2.3.4  Access Control ..........................
      4.2.3.5  Broadcast Request ..........................
     4.2.4  TFTP REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY .........................  47
  5.  ELECTRONIC MAIL -- SMTP and RFC-822 ........................  48
   5.1  INTRODUCTION ..........................
   5.2  PROTOCOL WALK-THROUGH ..........................
     5.2.1  The SMTP Model ..........................
     5.2.2  Canonicalization ..........................
     5.2.3  VRFY and EXPN Commands ..........................
     5.2.4  SEND, SOML, and SAML Commands .....................  50
     5.2.5  HELO Command ..........................
     5.2.6  Mail Relay ..........................
     5.2.7  RCPT Command ..........................
     5.2.8  DATA Command ..........................
     5.2.9  Command Syntax ..........................
     5.2.10  SMTP Replies ..........................
     5.2.11  Transparency ..........................
     5.2.12  WKS Use in MX Processing .........................  55
     5.2.13  RFC-822 Message Specification ....................  55
     5.2.14  RFC-822 Date and Time Specification ..............  55
     5.2.15  RFC-822 Syntax Change ..........................
     5.2.16  RFC-822  Local-part ..........................
     5.2.17  Domain Literals ..........................
     5.2.18  Common Address Formatting Errors .................  58
     5.2.19  Explicit Source Routes ..........................
   5.3  SPECIFIC ISSUES ..........................
     5.3.1  SMTP Queueing Strategies ..........................
      5.3.1.1 Sending Strategy ..........................
      5.3.1.2  Receiving strategy ..........................
     5.3.2  Timeouts in SMTP ..........................
     5.3.3  Reliable Mail Receipt ..........................
     5.3.4  Reliable Mail Transmission ........................  63
     5.3.5  Domain Name Support ..........................
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 3]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
     5.3.6  Mailing Lists and Aliases .........................  65
     5.3.7  Mail Gatewaying ..........................
     5.3.8  Maximum Message Size ..........................
   5.4  SMTP REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ..........................
  6. SUPPORT SERVICES ..........................
   6.1 DOMAIN NAME TRANSLATION ..........................
     6.1.1 INTRODUCTION ..........................
     6.1.2  PROTOCOL WALK-THROUGH ..........................
      6.1.2.1  Resource Records with Zero TTL ...............  73
      6.1.2.2  QCLASS Values ..........................
      6.1.2.3  Unused Fields ..........................
      6.1.2.4  Compression ..........................
      6.1.2.5  Misusing Configuration Info ..................  73
     6.1.3  SPECIFIC ISSUES ..........................
      6.1.3.1  Resolver Implementation ......................  74
      6.1.3.2  Transport Protocols ..........................
      6.1.3.3  Efficient Resource Usage .....................  77
      6.1.3.4  Multihomed Hosts ..........................
      6.1.3.5  Extensibility ..........................
      6.1.3.6  Status of RR Types ..........................
      6.1.3.7  Robustness ..........................
      6.1.3.8  Local Host Table ..........................
     6.1.4  DNS USER INTERFACE ..........................
      6.1.4.1  DNS Administration ..........................
      6.1.4.2  DNS User Interface ..........................
      6.1.4.3 Interface Abbreviation Facilities .............  82
     6.1.5  DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ...........  84
   6.2  HOST INITIALIZATION ..........................
     6.2.1  INTRODUCTION ..........................
     6.2.2  REQUIREMENTS ..........................
      6.2.2.1  Dynamic Configuration ........................  87
      6.2.2.2  Loading Phase ..........................
   6.3  REMOTE MANAGEMENT ..........................
     6.3.1  INTRODUCTION ..........................
     6.3.2  PROTOCOL WALK-THROUGH ..........................
     6.3.3  MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS SUMMARY ...................  92
  7.  REFERENCES ..........................
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 4]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
1. Â INTRODUCTION
  This document is one of a pair that defines and discusses the
  requirements for host system implementations of the Internet protocol
  suite.  This RFC covers the applications layer and support protocols.
  Its companion RFC, "Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Communications
  Layers" [INTRO:1] covers the lower layer protocols: transport layer,
  IP layer, and link layer.
  These documents are intended to provide guidance for vendors,
  implementors, and users of Internet communication software.  They
  represent the consensus of a large body of technical experience and
  wisdom, contributed by members of the Internet research and vendor
  communities.
  This RFC enumerates standard protocols that a host connected to the
  Internet must use, and it incorporates by reference the RFCs and
  other documents describing the current specifications for these
  protocols.  It corrects errors in the referenced documents and adds
  additional discussion and guidance for an implementor.
  For each protocol, this document also contains an explicit set of
  requirements, recommendations, and options.  The reader must
  understand that the list of requirements in this document is
  incomplete by itself; the complete set of requirements for an
  Internet host is primarily defined in the standard protocol
  specification documents, with the corrections, amendments, and
  supplements contained in this RFC.
  A good-faith implementation of the protocols that was produced after
  careful reading of the RFC's and with some interaction with the
  Internet technical community, and that followed good communications
  software engineering practices, should differ from the requirements
  of this document in only minor ways.  Thus, in many cases, the
  "requirements" in this RFC are already stated or implied in the
  standard protocol documents, so that their inclusion here is, in a
  sense, redundant.  However, they were included because some past
  implementation has made the wrong choice, causing problems of
  interoperability, performance, and/or robustness.
  This document includes discussion and explanation of many of the
  requirements and recommendations.  A simple list of requirements
  would be dangerous, because:
  o   Some required features are more important than others, and some
    features are optional.
  o   There may be valid reasons why particular vendor products that
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 5]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
    are designed for restricted contexts might choose to use
    different specifications.
  However, the specifications of this document must be followed to meet
  the general goal of arbitrary host interoperation across the
  diversity and complexity of the Internet system.  Although most
  current implementations fail to meet these requirements in various
  ways, some minor and some major, this specification is the ideal
  towards which we need to move.
  These requirements are based on the current level of Internet
  architecture.  This document will be updated as required to provide
  additional clarifications or to include additional information in
  those areas in which specifications are still evolving.
  This introductory section begins with general advice to host software
  vendors, and then gives some guidance on reading the rest of the
  document.  Section 2 contains general requirements that may be
  applicable to all application and support protocols.  Sections 3, 4,
  and 5 contain the requirements on protocols for the three major
  applications: Telnet, file transfer, and electronic mail,
  respectively. Section 6 covers the support applications: the domain
  name system, system initialization, and management.  Finally, all
  references will be found in Section 7.
  1.1  The Internet Architecture
   For a brief introduction to the Internet architecture from a host
   viewpoint, see Section 1.1 of [INTRO:1].  That section also
   contains recommended references for general background on the
   Internet architecture.
  1.2  General Considerations
   There are two important lessons that vendors of Internet host
   software have learned and which a new vendor should consider
   seriously.
   1.2.1  Continuing Internet Evolution
     The enormous growth of the Internet has revealed problems of
     management and scaling in a large datagram-based packet
     communication system.  These problems are being addressed, and
     as a result there will be continuing evolution of the
     specifications described in this document.  These changes will
     be carefully planned and controlled, since there is extensive
     participation in this planning by the vendors and by the
     organizations responsible for operations of the networks.
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 6]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
     Development, evolution, and revision are characteristic of
     computer network protocols today, and this situation will
     persist for some years.  A vendor who develops computer
     communication software for the Internet protocol suite (or any
     other protocol suite!) and then fails to maintain and update
     that software for changing specifications is going to leave a
     trail of unhappy customers.  The Internet is a large
     communication network, and the users are in constant contact
     through it.  Experience has shown that knowledge of
     deficiencies in vendor software propagates quickly through the
     Internet technical community.
   1.2.2  Robustness Principle
     At every layer of the protocols, there is a general rule whose
     application can lead to enormous benefits in robustness and
     interoperability:
        "Be liberal in what you accept, and
         conservative in what you send"
     Software should be written to deal with every conceivable
     error, no matter how unlikely; sooner or later a packet will
     come in with that particular combination of errors and
     attributes, and unless the software is prepared, chaos can
     ensue.  In general, it is best to assume that the network is
     filled with malevolent entities that will send in packets
     designed to have the worst possible effect.  This assumption
     will lead to suitable protective design, although the most
     serious problems in the Internet have been caused by
     unenvisaged mechanisms triggered by low-probability events;
     mere human malice would never have taken so devious a course!
     Adaptability to change must be designed into all levels of
     Internet host software.  As a simple example, consider a
     protocol specification that contains an enumeration of values
     for a particular header field -- e.g., a type field, a port
     number, or an error code; this enumeration must be assumed to
     be incomplete.  Thus, if a protocol specification defines four
     possible error codes, the software must not break when a fifth
     code shows up.  An undefined code might be logged (see below),
     but it must not cause a failure.
     The second part of the principle is almost as important:
     software on other hosts may contain deficiencies that make it
     unwise to exploit legal but obscure protocol features.  It is
     unwise to stray far from the obvious and simple, lest untoward
     effects result elsewhere.  A corollary of this is "watch out
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 7]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
     for misbehaving hosts"; host software should be prepared, not
     just to survive other misbehaving hosts, but also to cooperate
     to limit the amount of disruption such hosts can cause to the
     shared communication facility.
   1.2.3  Error Logging
     The Internet includes a great variety of host and gateway
     systems, each implementing many protocols and protocol layers,
     and some of these contain bugs and mis-features in their
     Internet protocol software.  As a result of complexity,
     diversity, and distribution of function, the diagnosis of user
     problems is often very difficult.
     Problem diagnosis will be aided if host implementations include
     a carefully designed facility for logging erroneous or
     "strange" protocol events.  It is important to include as much
     diagnostic information as possible when an error is logged.  In
     particular, it is often useful to record the header(s) of a
     packet that caused an error.  However, care must be taken to
     ensure that error logging does not consume prohibitive amounts
     of resources or otherwise interfere with the operation of the
     host.
     There is a tendency for abnormal but harmless protocol events
     to overflow error logging files; this can be avoided by using a
     "circular" log, or by enabling logging only while diagnosing a
     known failure.  It may be useful to filter and count duplicate
     successive messages.  One strategy that seems to work well is:
     (1) always count abnormalities and make such counts accessible
     through the management protocol (see Section 6.3); and (2)
     allow the logging of a great variety of events to be
     selectively enabled.  For example, it might useful to be able
     to "log everything" or to "log everything for host X".
     Note that different managements may have differing policies
     about the amount of error logging that they want normally
     enabled in a host.  Some will say, "if it doesn't hurt me, I
     don't want to know about it", while others will want to take a
     more watchful and aggressive attitude about detecting and
     removing protocol abnormalities.
   1.2.4  Configuration
     It would be ideal if a host implementation of the Internet
     protocol suite could be entirely self-configuring.  This would
     allow the whole suite to be implemented in ROM or cast into
     silicon, it would simplify diskless workstations, and it would
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 8]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
     be an immense boon to harried LAN administrators as well as
     system vendors.  We have not reached this ideal; in fact, we
     are not even close.
     At many points in this document, you will find a requirement
     that a parameter be a configurable option.  There are several
     different reasons behind such requirements.  In a few cases,
     there is current uncertainty or disagreement about the best
     value, and it may be necessary to update the recommended value
     in the future.  In other cases, the value really depends on
     external factors -- e.g., the size of the host and the
     distribution of its communication load, or the speeds and
     topology of nearby networks -- and self-tuning algorithms are
     unavailable and may be insufficient.  In some cases,
     configurability is needed because of administrative
     requirements.
     Finally, some configuration options are required to communicate
     with obsolete or incorrect implementations of the protocols,
     distributed without sources, that unfortunately persist in many
     parts of the Internet.  To make correct systems coexist with
     these faulty systems, administrators often have to "mis-
     configure" the correct systems.  This problem will correct
     itself gradually as the faulty systems are retired, but it
     cannot be ignored by vendors.
     When we say that a parameter must be configurable, we do not
     intend to require that its value be explicitly read from a
     configuration file at every boot time.  We recommend that
     implementors set up a default for each parameter, so a
     configuration file is only necessary to override those defaults
     that are inappropriate in a particular installation.  Thus, the
     configurability requirement is an assurance that it will be
     POSSIBLE to override the default when necessary, even in a
     binary-only or ROM-based product.
     This document requires a particular value for such defaults in
     some cases.  The choice of default is a sensitive issue when
     the configuration item controls the accommodation to existing
     faulty systems.  If the Internet is to converge successfully to
     complete interoperability, the default values built into
     implementations must implement the official protocol, not
     "mis-configurations" to accommodate faulty implementations.
     Although marketing considerations have led some vendors to
     choose mis-configuration defaults, we urge vendors to choose
     defaults that will conform to the standard.
     Finally, we note that a vendor needs to provide adequate
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 9]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
     documentation on all configuration parameters, their limits and
     effects.
  1.3  Reading this Document
   1.3.1  Organization
     In general, each major section is organized into the following
     subsections:
     (1)  Introduction
     (2)  Protocol Walk-Through -- considers the protocol
       specification documents section-by-section, correcting
       errors, stating requirements that may be ambiguous or
       ill-defined, and providing further clarification or
       explanation.
     (3)  Specific Issues -- discusses protocol design and
       implementation issues that were not included in the walk-
       through.
     (4)  Interfaces -- discusses the service interface to the next
       higher layer.
     (5)  Summary -- contains a summary of the requirements of the
       section.
     Under many of the individual topics in this document, there is
     parenthetical material labeled "DISCUSSION" or
     "IMPLEMENTATION".  This material is intended to give
     clarification and explanation of the preceding requirements
     text.  It also includes some suggestions on possible future
     directions or developments.  The implementation material
     contains suggested approaches that an implementor may want to
     consider.
     The summary sections are intended to be guides and indexes to
     the text, but are necessarily cryptic and incomplete.  The
     summaries should never be used or referenced separately from
     the complete RFC.
   1.3.2  Requirements
     In this document, the words that are used to define the
     significance of each particular requirement are capitalized.
     These words are:
Internet Engineering Task Force                 [Page 10]
RFC1123 Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â INTRODUCTION Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â October 1989
     *   "MUST"
       This word or the adjective "REQUIRED" means that the item
       is an absolute requirement of the specification.
     *   "SHOULD"
       This word or the adjective "RECOMMENDED" means that there
       may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to
       ignore this item, but the full implications should be
       understood and the case carefully weighed before choosing
       a different course.
     *   "MAY"
       This word or the adjective "OPTIONAL" means that this item
       is truly optional.  One vendor may choose to include the
       item because a particular marketplace requires it or
       because it enhances the product, for example; another
       vendor may omit the same item.
You write up an email message on your computer, and when you send it, it gets sent through a server. Â It could be a server at work, or a server through an ISP(internet service provider) like AOL. Â The server take a look at the address of the message(the part after the @) and it transfers it via a hard line(telephone) to that address's server. Â From that server, it takes the part before the @ symbol and finds the specific mailbox to place the message in. Â When you log in to your email server(like AOL, or Eudora, etc), and you ask it to give you your new messages, it queries the server for all the messages for you(the part before the @) and allows you to read them remotely. Â If you have any more questions, feel free to ask!
~Aaron