rack-mail_exception 0.0.1

data/vendor/mail/reference/rfc4234 Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,899 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group                                    D. Crocker, Ed.
+Request for Comments: 4234                   Brandenburg InternetWorking
+Obsoletes: 2234                                               P. Overell
+Category: Standards Track                                      THUS plc.
+                                                            October 2005
+
+
+             Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF
+
+Status of This Memo
+
+   This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
+   Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
+   improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
+   Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
+   and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
+
+Copyright Notice
+
+   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
+
+Abstract
+
+   Internet technical specifications often need to define a formal
+   syntax.  Over the years, a modified version of Backus-Naur Form
+   (BNF), called Augmented BNF (ABNF), has been popular among many
+   Internet specifications.  The current specification documents ABNF.
+   It balances compactness and simplicity, with reasonable
+   representational power.  The differences between standard BNF and
+   ABNF involve naming rules, repetition, alternatives, order-
+   independence, and value ranges.  This specification also supplies
+   additional rule definitions and encoding for a core lexical analyzer
+   of the type common to several Internet specifications.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                     [Page 1]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+Table of Contents
+
+   1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................2
+   2. RULE DEFINITION .................................................3
+      2.1. Rule Naming ................................................3
+      2.2. Rule Form ..................................................3
+      2.3. Terminal Values ............................................4
+      2.4. External Encodings .........................................5
+   3. OPERATORS .......................................................6
+      3.1. Concatenation:  Rule1 Rule2 ................................6
+      3.2. Alternatives:  Rule1 / Rule2 ...............................6
+      3.3. Incremental Alternatives: Rule1 =/ Rule2 ...................7
+      3.4. Value Range Alternatives:  %c##-## .........................7
+      3.5. Sequence Group:  (Rule1 Rule2) .............................8
+      3.6. Variable Repetition:  *Rule ................................8
+      3.7. Specific Repetition:  nRule ................................9
+      3.8. Optional Sequence:  [RULE] .................................9
+      3.9. Comment:  ; Comment ........................................9
+      3.10. Operator Precedence .......................................9
+   4. ABNF DEFINITION OF ABNF ........................................10
+   5. SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS ........................................11
+   6. References .....................................................11
+      6.1. Normative References ......................................11
+      6.2. Informative References ....................................11
+   Appendix A.  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .....................................13
+   Appendix B.  APPENDIX - CORE ABNF OF ABNF .........................13
+      B.1.  Core Rules ...............................................13
+      B.2.  Common Encoding ..........................................14
+
+1.  INTRODUCTION
+
+   Internet technical specifications often need to define a formal
+   syntax and are free to employ whatever notation their authors deem
+   useful.  Over the years, a modified version of Backus-Naur Form
+   (BNF), called Augmented BNF (ABNF), has been popular among many
+   Internet specifications.  It balances compactness and simplicity,
+   with reasonable representational power.  In the early days of the
+   Arpanet, each specification contained its own definition of ABNF.
+   This included the email specifications, [RFC733] and then [RFC822],
+   which came to be the common citations for defining ABNF.  The current
+   document separates those definitions to permit selective reference.
+   Predictably, it also provides some modifications and enhancements.
+
+   The differences between standard BNF and ABNF involve naming rules,
+   repetition, alternatives, order-independence, and value ranges.
+   Appendix B supplies rule definitions and encoding for a core lexical
+   analyzer of the type common to several Internet specifications.  It
+   is provided as a convenience and is otherwise separate from the meta
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                     [Page 2]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+   language defined in the body of this document, and separate from its
+   formal status.
+
+   Changes since [RFC2234]:
+
+      In Section 3.7, the phrase: "That is, exactly <N> occurrences of
+      <element>." was corrected to: "That is, exactly <n> occurrences of
+      <element>."
+
+      Some continuation comment lines needed to be corrected to begin
+      with comment character (";").
+
+2.  RULE DEFINITION
+
+2.1.  Rule Naming
+
+   The name of a rule is simply the name itself; that is, a sequence of
+   characters, beginning with an alphabetic character, and followed by a
+   combination of alphabetics, digits, and hyphens (dashes).
+
+   NOTE:
+
+      Rule names are case-insensitive
+
+   The names <rulename>, <Rulename>, <RULENAME>, and <rUlENamE> all
+   refer to the same rule.
+
+   Unlike original BNF, angle brackets ("<", ">") are not required.
+   However, angle brackets may be used around a rule name whenever their
+   presence facilitates in discerning the use of a rule name.  This is
+   typically restricted to rule name references in free-form prose, or
+   to distinguish partial rules that combine into a string not separated
+   by white space, such as shown in the discussion about repetition,
+   below.
+
+2.2.  Rule Form
+
+   A rule is defined by the following sequence:
+
+         name =  elements crlf
+
+   where <name> is the name of the rule, <elements> is one or more rule
+   names or terminal specifications, and <crlf> is the end-of-line
+   indicator (carriage return followed by line feed).  The equal sign
+   separates the name from the definition of the rule.  The elements
+   form a sequence of one or more rule names and/or value definitions,
+   combined according to the various operators defined in this document,
+   such as alternative and repetition.
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                     [Page 3]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+   For visual ease, rule definitions are left aligned.  When a rule
+   requires multiple lines, the continuation lines are indented.  The
+   left alignment and indentation are relative to the first lines of the
+   ABNF rules and need not match the left margin of the document.
+
+2.3.  Terminal Values
+
+   Rules resolve into a string of terminal values, sometimes called
+   characters.  In ABNF, a character is merely a non-negative integer.
+   In certain contexts, a specific mapping (encoding) of values into a
+   character set (such as ASCII) will be specified.
+
+   Terminals are specified by one or more numeric characters, with the
+   base interpretation of those characters indicated explicitly.  The
+   following bases are currently defined:
+
+         b           =  binary
+
+         d           =  decimal
+
+         x           =  hexadecimal
+
+   Hence:
+
+         CR          =  %d13
+
+         CR          =  %x0D
+
+   respectively specify the decimal and hexadecimal representation of
+   [US-ASCII] for carriage return.
+
+   A concatenated string of such values is specified compactly, using a
+   period (".") to indicate a separation of characters within that
+   value.  Hence:
+
+         CRLF        =  %d13.10
+
+   ABNF permits the specification of literal text strings directly,
+   enclosed in quotation-marks.  Hence:
+
+         command     =  "command string"
+
+   Literal text strings are interpreted as a concatenated set of
+   printable characters.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                     [Page 4]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+   NOTE:
+
+      ABNF strings are case-insensitive and the character set for these
+      strings is us-ascii.
+
+   Hence:
+
+         rulename = "abc"
+
+   and:
+
+         rulename = "aBc"
+
+   will match "abc", "Abc", "aBc", "abC", "ABc", "aBC", "AbC", and
+   "ABC".
+
+      To specify a rule that IS case SENSITIVE, specify the characters
+      individually.
+
+   For example:
+
+         rulename    =  %d97 %d98 %d99
+
+   or
+
+         rulename    =  %d97.98.99
+
+   will match only the string that comprises only the lowercased
+   characters, abc.
+
+2.4.  External Encodings
+
+   External representations of terminal value characters will vary
+   according to constraints in the storage or transmission environment.
+   Hence, the same ABNF-based grammar may have multiple external
+   encodings, such as one for a 7-bit US-ASCII environment, another for
+   a binary octet environment, and still a different one when 16-bit
+   Unicode is used.  Encoding details are beyond the scope of ABNF,
+   although Appendix A (Core) provides definitions for a 7-bit US-ASCII
+   environment as has been common to much of the Internet.
+
+   By separating external encoding from the syntax, it is intended that
+   alternate encoding environments can be used for the same syntax.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                     [Page 5]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+3.  OPERATORS
+
+3.1.  Concatenation:  Rule1 Rule2
+
+   A rule can define a simple, ordered string of values (i.e., a
+   concatenation of contiguous characters) by listing a sequence of rule
+   names.  For example:
+
+         foo         =  %x61           ; a
+
+         bar         =  %x62           ; b
+
+         mumble      =  foo bar foo
+
+   So that the rule <mumble> matches the lowercase string "aba".
+
+   LINEAR WHITE SPACE: Concatenation is at the core of the ABNF parsing
+   model.  A string of contiguous characters (values) is parsed
+   according to the rules defined in ABNF.  For Internet specifications,
+   there is some history of permitting linear white space (space and
+   horizontal tab) to be freely and implicitly interspersed around major
+   constructs, such as delimiting special characters or atomic strings.
+
+   NOTE:
+
+      This specification for ABNF does not provide for implicit
+      specification of linear white space.
+
+   Any grammar that wishes to permit linear white space around
+   delimiters or string segments must specify it explicitly.  It is
+   often useful to provide for such white space in "core" rules that are
+   then used variously among higher-level rules.  The "core" rules might
+   be formed into a lexical analyzer or simply be part of the main
+   ruleset.
+
+3.2.  Alternatives:  Rule1 / Rule2
+
+   Elements separated by a forward slash ("/") are alternatives.
+   Therefore,
+
+         foo / bar
+
+   will accept <foo> or <bar>.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                     [Page 6]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+   NOTE:
+
+      A quoted string containing alphabetic characters is a special form
+      for specifying alternative characters and is interpreted as a
+      non-terminal representing the set of combinatorial strings with
+      the contained characters, in the specified order but with any
+      mixture of upper and lower case.
+
+3.3.  Incremental Alternatives: Rule1 =/ Rule2
+
+   It is sometimes convenient to specify a list of alternatives in
+   fragments.  That is, an initial rule may match one or more
+   alternatives, with later rule definitions adding to the set of
+   alternatives.  This is particularly useful for otherwise, independent
+   specifications that derive from the same parent rule set, such as
+   often occurs with parameter lists.  ABNF permits this incremental
+   definition through the construct:
+
+         oldrule     =/ additional-alternatives
+
+   So that the rule set
+
+         ruleset     =  alt1 / alt2
+
+         ruleset     =/ alt3
+
+         ruleset     =/ alt4 / alt5
+
+   is the same as specifying
+
+         ruleset     =  alt1 / alt2 / alt3 / alt4 / alt5
+
+3.4.  Value Range Alternatives:  %c##-##
+
+   A range of alternative numeric values can be specified compactly,
+   using dash ("-") to indicate the range of alternative values.  Hence:
+
+         DIGIT       =  %x30-39
+
+   is equivalent to:
+
+         DIGIT       =  "0" / "1" / "2" / "3" / "4" / "5" / "6" /
+
+                        "7" / "8" / "9"
+
+   Concatenated numeric values and numeric value ranges cannot be
+   specified in the same string.  A numeric value may use the dotted
+   notation for concatenation or it may use the dash notation to specify
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                     [Page 7]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+   one value range.  Hence, to specify one printable character between
+   end of line sequences, the specification could be:
+
+         char-line = %x0D.0A %x20-7E %x0D.0A
+
+3.5.  Sequence Group:  (Rule1 Rule2)
+
+   Elements enclosed in parentheses are treated as a single element,
+   whose contents are STRICTLY ORDERED.  Thus,
+
+         elem (foo / bar) blat
+
+   matches (elem foo blat) or (elem bar blat), and
+
+         elem foo / bar blat
+
+   matches (elem foo) or (bar blat).
+
+   NOTE:
+
+      It is strongly advised that grouping notation be used, rather than
+      relying on the proper reading of "bare" alternations, when
+      alternatives consist of multiple rule names or literals.
+
+   Hence, it is recommended that the following form be used:
+
+        (elem foo) / (bar blat)
+
+   It will avoid misinterpretation by casual readers.
+
+   The sequence group notation is also used within free text to set off
+   an element sequence from the prose.
+
+3.6.  Variable Repetition:  *Rule
+
+   The operator "*" preceding an element indicates repetition.  The full
+   form is:
+
+         <a>*<b>element
+
+   where <a> and <b> are optional decimal values, indicating at least
+   <a> and at most <b> occurrences of the element.
+
+   Default values are 0 and infinity so that *<element> allows any
+   number, including zero; 1*<element> requires at least one;
+   3*3<element> allows exactly 3 and 1*2<element> allows one or two.
+
+
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                     [Page 8]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+3.7.  Specific Repetition:  nRule
+
+   A rule of the form:
+
+         <n>element
+
+   is equivalent to
+
+         <n>*<n>element
+
+   That is, exactly <n> occurrences of <element>.  Thus, 2DIGIT is a 2-
+   digit number, and 3ALPHA is a string of three alphabetic characters.
+
+3.8.  Optional Sequence:  [RULE]
+
+   Square brackets enclose an optional element sequence:
+
+         [foo bar]
+
+   is equivalent to
+
+         *1(foo bar).
+
+3.9.  Comment:  ; Comment
+
+   A semi-colon starts a comment that continues to the end of line.
+   This is a simple way of including useful notes in parallel with the
+   specifications.
+
+3.10.  Operator Precedence
+
+   The various mechanisms described above have the following precedence,
+   from highest (binding tightest) at the top, to lowest (loosest) at
+   the bottom:
+
+         Strings, Names formation
+
+         Comment
+
+         Value range
+
+         Repetition
+
+         Grouping, Optional
+
+         Concatenation
+
+         Alternative
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                     [Page 9]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+   Use of the alternative operator, freely mixed with concatenations,
+   can be confusing.
+
+      Again, it is recommended that the grouping operator be used to
+      make explicit concatenation groups.
+
+4.  ABNF DEFINITION OF ABNF
+
+   NOTES:
+
+      1. This syntax requires a formatting of rules that is relatively
+         strict.  Hence, the version of a ruleset included in a
+         specification might need preprocessing to ensure that it can be
+         interpreted by an ABNF parser.
+
+      2. This syntax uses the rules provided in Appendix B (Core).
+
+         rulelist       =  1*( rule / (*c-wsp c-nl) )
+
+         rule           =  rulename defined-as elements c-nl
+                                ; continues if next line starts
+                                ;  with white space
+
+         rulename       =  ALPHA *(ALPHA / DIGIT / "-")
+
+         defined-as     =  *c-wsp ("=" / "=/") *c-wsp
+                                ; basic rules definition and
+                                ;  incremental alternatives
+
+         elements       =  alternation *c-wsp
+
+         c-wsp          =  WSP / (c-nl WSP)
+
+         c-nl           =  comment / CRLF
+                                ; comment or newline
+
+         comment        =  ";" *(WSP / VCHAR) CRLF
+
+         alternation    =  concatenation
+                           *(*c-wsp "/" *c-wsp concatenation)
+
+         concatenation  =  repetition *(1*c-wsp repetition)
+
+         repetition     =  [repeat] element
+
+         repeat         =  1*DIGIT / (*DIGIT "*" *DIGIT)
+
+
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                    [Page 10]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+         element        =  rulename / group / option /
+                           char-val / num-val / prose-val
+
+         group          =  "(" *c-wsp alternation *c-wsp ")"
+
+         option         =  "[" *c-wsp alternation *c-wsp "]"
+
+         char-val       =  DQUOTE *(%x20-21 / %x23-7E) DQUOTE
+                                ; quoted string of SP and VCHAR
+                                ;  without DQUOTE
+
+         num-val        =  "%" (bin-val / dec-val / hex-val)
+
+         bin-val        =  "b" 1*BIT
+                           [ 1*("." 1*BIT) / ("-" 1*BIT) ]
+                                ; series of concatenated bit values
+                                ;  or single ONEOF range
+
+         dec-val        =  "d" 1*DIGIT
+                           [ 1*("." 1*DIGIT) / ("-" 1*DIGIT) ]
+
+         hex-val        =  "x" 1*HEXDIG
+                           [ 1*("." 1*HEXDIG) / ("-" 1*HEXDIG) ]
+
+         prose-val      =  "<" *(%x20-3D / %x3F-7E) ">"
+                                ; bracketed string of SP and VCHAR
+                                ;  without angles
+                                ; prose description, to be used as
+                                ;  last resort
+
+5.  SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS
+
+   Security is truly believed to be irrelevant to this document.
+
+6.  References
+
+6.1.  Normative References
+
+   [US-ASCII] American National Standards Institute, "Coded Character
+              Set -- 7-bit American Standard Code for Information
+              Interchange", ANSI X3.4, 1986.
+
+6.2.  Informative References
+
+   [RFC2234]  Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
+              Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997.
+
+
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                    [Page 11]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+   [RFC733]   Crocker, D., Vittal, J., Pogran, K., and D. Henderson,
+              "Standard for the format of ARPA network text messages",
+              RFC 733, November 1977.
+
+   [RFC822]   Crocker, D., "Standard for the format of ARPA Internet
+              text messages", STD 11, RFC 822, August 1982.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                    [Page 12]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+Appendix A.  ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
+
+   The syntax for ABNF was originally specified in RFC 733.  Ken L.
+   Harrenstien, of SRI International, was responsible for re-coding the
+   BNF into an augmented BNF that makes the representation smaller and
+   easier to understand.
+
+   This recent project began as a simple effort to cull out the portion
+   of RFC 822 that has been repeatedly cited by non-email specification
+   writers, namely the description of augmented BNF.  Rather than simply
+   and blindly converting the existing text into a separate document,
+   the working group chose to give careful consideration to the
+   deficiencies, as well as benefits, of the existing specification and
+   related specifications made available over the last 15 years, and
+   therefore to pursue enhancement.  This turned the project into
+   something rather more ambitious than was first intended.
+   Interestingly, the result is not massively different from that
+   original, although decisions, such as removing the list notation,
+   came as a surprise.
+
+   This "separated" version of the specification was part of the DRUMS
+   working group, with significant contributions from Jerome Abela,
+   Harald Alvestrand, Robert Elz, Roger Fajman, Aviva Garrett, Tom
+   Harsch, Dan Kohn, Bill McQuillan, Keith Moore, Chris Newman, Pete
+   Resnick, and Henning Schulzrinne.
+
+   Julian Reschke warrants a special thanks for converting the Draft
+   Standard version to XML source form.
+
+Appendix B.  APPENDIX - CORE ABNF OF ABNF
+
+   This Appendix is provided as a convenient core for specific grammars.
+   The definitions may be used as a core set of rules.
+
+B.1.  Core Rules
+
+   Certain basic rules are in uppercase, such as SP, HTAB, CRLF, DIGIT,
+   ALPHA, etc.
+
+         ALPHA          =  %x41-5A / %x61-7A   ; A-Z / a-z
+
+         BIT            =  "0" / "1"
+
+         CHAR           =  %x01-7F
+                                ; any 7-bit US-ASCII character,
+                                ;  excluding NUL
+
+
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                    [Page 13]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+         CR             =  %x0D
+                                ; carriage return
+
+         CRLF           =  CR LF
+                                ; Internet standard newline
+
+         CTL            =  %x00-1F / %x7F
+                                ; controls
+
+         DIGIT          =  %x30-39
+                                ; 0-9
+
+         DQUOTE         =  %x22
+                                ; " (Double Quote)
+
+         HEXDIG         =  DIGIT / "A" / "B" / "C" / "D" / "E" / "F"
+
+         HTAB           =  %x09
+                                ; horizontal tab
+
+         LF             =  %x0A
+                                ; linefeed
+
+         LWSP           =  *(WSP / CRLF WSP)
+                                ; linear white space (past newline)
+
+         OCTET          =  %x00-FF
+                                ; 8 bits of data
+
+         SP             =  %x20
+
+         VCHAR          =  %x21-7E
+                                ; visible (printing) characters
+
+         WSP            =  SP / HTAB
+                                ; white space
+
+B.2.  Common Encoding
+
+   Externally, data are represented as "network virtual ASCII" (namely,
+   7-bit US-ASCII in an 8-bit field), with the high (8th) bit set to
+   zero.  A string of values is in "network byte order", in which the
+   higher-valued bytes are represented on the left-hand side and are
+   sent over the network first.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                    [Page 14]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+Authors' Addresses
+
+   Dave Crocker (editor)
+   Brandenburg InternetWorking
+   675 Spruce Dr.
+   Sunnyvale, CA  94086
+   US
+
+   Phone: +1.408.246.8253
+   EMail: dcrocker@bbiw.net
+
+
+   Paul Overell
+   THUS plc.
+   1/2 Berkeley Square
+   99 Berkeley Street
+   Glasgow
+   G3 7HR
+   UK
+
+   EMail: paul.overell@thus.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                    [Page 15]
+
+RFC 4234                          ABNF                      October 2005
+
+
+Full Copyright Statement
+
+   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
+
+   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
+   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
+   retain all their rights.
+
+   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
+   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
+   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
+   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
+   INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
+   INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
+   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
+
+Intellectual Property
+
+   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
+   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
+   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
+   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
+   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
+   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
+   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
+   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
+
+   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
+   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
+   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
+   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
+   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
+   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
+
+   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
+   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
+   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
+   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
+   ipr@ietf.org.
+
+Acknowledgement
+
+   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
+   Internet Society.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Crocker & Overell           Standards Track                    [Page 16]
+