|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
standards track RFC
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
This is a normative reference in ITU-T J.484
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?draft=&rfc=9113&doctitle=&group=&holder=&iprtitle=&patent=&submit=rfc
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
RFC 9113 was published in June 2022 and is a standards track RFC. It is largely used for World Wide Web service and related Web Browsers.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
The concepts in this document is sufficiently stable for our use. Errata exist. Obsoletes RFC 7540, RFC 8740.
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
RFC 9113 obsoletes RFC 7540, RFC8740.
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
[CACHING] Fielding, R., Ed., Nottingham, M., Ed., and J. Reschke,/
Ed., "HTTP Caching", STD 98, RFC 9111,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC9111, June 2022,/
./
/
[COMPRESSION]/
Peon, R. and H. Ruellan, "HPACK: Header Compression for/
HTTP/2", RFC 7541, DOI 10.17487/RFC7541, May 2015,/
./
/
[COOKIE] Barth, A., "HTTP State Management Mechanism", RFC 6265,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC6265, April 2011,/
./
/
[HTTP] Fielding, R., Ed., Nottingham, M., Ed., and J. Reschke,/
Ed., "HTTP Semantics", STD 97, RFC 9110,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC9110, June 2022,/
./
/
[QUIC] Iyengar, J., Ed. and M. Thomson, Ed., "QUIC: A UDP-Based/
Multiplexed and Secure Transport", RFC 9000,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC9000, May 2021,/
./
/
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate/
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,/
./
/
[RFC3986] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform/
Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,/
RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005,/
./
/
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC/
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,/
May 2017, ./
/
[RFC8422] Nir, Y., Josefsson, S., and M. Pegourie-Gonnard, "Elliptic/
Curve Cryptography (ECC) Cipher Suites for Transport Layer/
Security (TLS) Versions 1.2 and Earlier", RFC 8422,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC8422, August 2018,/
./
/
[RFC8470] Thomson, M., Nottingham, M., and W. Tarreau, "Using Early/
Data in HTTP", RFC 8470, DOI 10.17487/RFC8470, September/
2018, ./
/
[TCP] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", STD 7,/
RFC 793, DOI 10.17487/RFC0793, September 1981,/
./
/
[TLS-ALPN] Friedl, S., Popov, A., Langley, A., and E. Stephan,/
"Transport Layer Security (TLS) Application-Layer Protocol/
Negotiation Extension", RFC 7301, DOI 10.17487/RFC7301,/
July 2014, ./
/
[TLS-ECDHE]/
Rescorla, E., "TLS Elliptic Curve Cipher Suites with SHA-/
256/384 and AES Galois Counter Mode (GCM)", RFC 5289,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC5289, August 2008,/
./
/
[TLS-EXT] Eastlake 3rd, D., "Transport Layer Security (TLS)/
Extensions: Extension Definitions", RFC 6066,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC6066, January 2011,/
./
/
[TLS12] Dierks, T. and E. Rescorla, "The Transport Layer Security/
(TLS) Protocol Version 1.2", RFC 5246,/
DOI 10.17487/RFC5246, August 2008,/
./
/
[TLS13] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol/
Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018,/
./
/
[TLSBCP] Sheffer, Y., Holz, R., and P. Saint-Andre,/
"Recommendations for Secure Use of Transport Layer/
Security (TLS) and Datagram Transport Layer Security/
(DTLS)", BCP 195, RFC 7525, DOI 10.17487/RFC7525, May/
2015, .
|
|
9.
|
Qualification of
ISOC/IETF:
|
|
|
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
|
10.
|
Other (for any supplementary information):
|
|
|
None.
|
|
