RFC 1438 INFORMATIONAL HUMOR · APRIL FOOLS · META

Internet Engineering Task Force Statements Of Boredom (SOBs)

A satirical proposal for an RFC subseries that approves and then discards documents.

On rfc-editor.org ↗
PUBLISHED
April 1993
AUTHORS
A. Lyman Chapin, C. Huitema
STREAM
INDEPENDENT
DOI
10.17487/RFC1438
ERRATA
Reported errata

RFC text

Contents
Original text · RFC Editor View on rfc-editor.org ↗
Network Working Group                                         L. Chapin
Request for Comments: 1438                                          BBN
                                                             C. Huitema
                                                                  INRIA
                                                           1 April 1993


                    Internet Engineering Task Force
                      Statements Of Boredom (SOBs)

Status of this Memo

   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
   not specify an Internet standard.  Distribution of this memo is
   unlimited.

Discussion

   The current IETF process has two types of RFCs: standards track
   documents and other RFCs (e.g., informational, experimental, FYIs).
   The intent of the standards track documents is clear, and culminates
   in an official Internet Standard.  Informational RFCs can be
   published on a less formal basis, subject to the reasonable
   constraints of the RFC Editor.  Informational RFCs are not subject to
   peer review and carry no significance whatsoever within the IETF
   process.

   The IETF currently has no mechanism or means of publishing documents
   that express its deep concern about something important, but
   otherwise contain absolutely no useful information whatsoever.  This
   document creates a new subseries of RFCs, entitled, IETF Statements
   Of Boredom (SOBs).  The SOB process is similar to that of the normal
   standards track.  The SOB is submitted to the IAB, the IRSG, the
   IESG, the SOB Editor (Morpheus), and the Academie Francais for
   review, analysis, reproduction in triplicate, translation into ASN.1,
   and distribution to Internet insomniacs.  However, once everyone has
   approved the document by falling asleep over it, the process ends and
   the document is discarded.  The resulting vacuum is viewed as having
   the technical approval of the IETF, but it is not, and cannot become,
   an official Internet Standard.

References

   [1] Internet Activities Board, "The Internet Standards Process", RFC
       1310, IAB, March 1992.

   [2] Postel, J., Editor, "IAB OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS", RFC 1410,
       IAB, March 1993.

Security Considerations

   Security issues are not discussed in this memo, but then again, no
   other issues of any importance are discussed in this memo either.

Authors' Addresses

   A. Lyman Chapin
   Bolt, Beranek & Newman
   Mail Stop 20/5b
   150 Cambridge Park Drive
   Cambridge, MA 02140
   USA

   Phone: 1 617 873 3133
   EMail: Lyman@BBN.COM


   Christian Huitema
   INRIA, Sophia-Antipolis
   2004 Route des Lucioles
   BP 109
   F-06561 Valbonne Cedex
   France

   Phone: +33 93 65 77 15
   EMail: Christian.Huitema@MIRSA.INRIA.FR

ISO Plain Language

On this page
PROBLEMThe memo imagines a gap in the RFC process: no category for documents that express concern while containing no useful information.
MECHANISMIt proposes IETF Statements Of Boredom, reviewed through an elaborate process and discarded after reviewers fall asleep.
HOW THE PROPOSAL ENDSThe proposal ends in a vacuum that, the memo says, cannot be an official Internet Standard.

§1A New Category for Nothing

The memo describes standards-track and other RFCs, then proposes an additional category for documents that express deep concern about something but contain no useful information. It names the proposed subseries IETF Statements Of Boredom, or SOBs.

The proposal invents a category for documents whose only purpose is to express concern without useful content. The name is IETF Statements Of Boredom.

§2The SOB Review Process

The fictional process sends an SOB to the IAB, IRSG, IESG, an SOB Editor named Morpheus, and the Academie Francais for review and other formal steps. Once everyone has approved the document by falling asleep over it, the process ends and the document is discarded.

The RFC says the resulting vacuum is viewed as having technical approval but is not, and cannot become, an official Internet Standard.

The proposed reviewers perform formal steps, then approve the document by falling asleep. The document is discarded, so the result is a vacuum rather than a standard.

§3Status of the Memo

RFC 1438 provides information and does not specify an Internet standard. Its description of a new subseries is presented as satire of the RFC process.

This memo uses a fictional process to make fun of standards procedures. It does not establish an Internet standard.

§4References