RFC On New Internet Routing Protocol

PoesRaven writes "An A. Farrel has put out a Request For Comments paper on a new routing protocol with profound implications for the internet, the usability of the TCP/IP protocol, and the security of the net's youngest users. From the RFC: "It has often been the case that morality has not been given proper consideration in the design and specification of protocols produced within the Routing Area. This has led to a decline in the moral values within the Internet and attempts to retrofit a suitable moral code to implemented and deployed protocols has been shown to be sub-optimal." Interesting, but seems to raise some serious privacy questions.

Comments

Hey! I read the article!

[halivar]

Just kidding. April Fool's!

Re:Hey! I read the article!

[Anml4ixoye]

Since when does April Fool's Day end at noon?

April Fools, fool!</Mr.T Voice>

April fools

[jimbo3123]

The april fools stories are just getting worse and worse.

Re:April fools

[Proaxiom]

Can't blame the editors for this one. It's one of the annual April Fools RFC, like RFC 1149 - A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on Avian Carriers, RFC 2324 Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol, and RFC 2795 - The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite.

Slashdot would be remiss if they didn't put up the link.

I suspect RFC 4042 will make a cameo on the Slashdot homepage today as well.

Re:April fools

[lilo_booter]

The april fools stories are just getting worse and worse.

Actually, if you read the article, you might find this one quite funny... has some great quotes in it, like:

The key words "SHALT", "SHALT NOT", "SMITE", and "PILLAR OF SALT" in this document are to be interpreted as expected.

and:

If the Morality Considerations section is present, it MUST contain at least the following subsections. The content of these subsections is surely self-evident to any right-thinking person. Further guidance can be obtained from your moral guardian, your household gods, or from any member of the IMM (Internet Moral Majority).

Oh well, mebbe I'm easily amused...

I'm going to have to call it...

[whitelabrat]

Horse S**t! Isn't the lack of morality what makes the internet so nice?

Re:I'm going to have to call it...

[maxwell demon]

No, the internet obviously needs more moral. However, contrary to current believe the problem is not that the people are so bad, but that there are simply no free implementations of moral around. All existing versions of moral come with quite stringent licensing conditions, and are usually controlled by big companies like the churches. As usual, any modification of the moral code by the user is disallowed. This is usually implemented directly into the moral (everything which contradicts the original version of the moral is considered immoral), making the moral vendors the first implementors of DRM schemes. So what is needed is an open source version of moral, where everyone is allowed not only to share their version of moral, but also to freely modify your own version.

Yes, but....

[gowen]

A. Farrel has put out a Request For Comments paper I still think he'll regret leaving Wigan Warriors to try his hand at Rugby Union with Saracens...

Oh, hell, no-one's going to get this joke.

This time i will eat my PDA

[FidelCatsro]

ok this one looked resonible till i got to this part
"It is well accepted by popular opinion and other reliable metrics
that moral values are declining and that degeneracy is increasing.
Young people are particularly at risk from the rising depravity in
society and much of the blame can be squarely placed at the door of
the Internet. If you do not feel safe on the streets at night, what
do you think it is like on the Information Superhighway?"
Then it all came apart , This is a better april fools though

RTFRFC

[OpenYourEyes]

You should read more carefully. The RFC does not specify a new protocol, it specifies a new section in RFC documentation, much like the "security implication" sections that started appearing a few years back.

If you're going to try and be funny - at least be correct. That said, your rush to condemn it certainly puts your moral standing in question - eh?

April Fools

[freak4u]

So at first I'm getting all pissed off, then I realized the date. Damn hippies. :)

Last year's evil bit was funnier.

[hrieke]

No really. All 12 times that story was posted.
Oh well.

Spoof RFCs

[stevey]

I hada great idea for TCP/IP over chocolate - inspired by pidgeon transmission.

Every time I sit down to write it up I get so full of laughter it's never completed. Shame.

Some choice bits include:

• Faster transmission of packets in Summer months.
• Different coloured chocolates for different data-types.
• Native support for different levels of encapsulation - runny cores, wrapped in a touch layer of privacy protecting armour (ie chocolate).

Maybe next year ..

First I thought..

[malkavian]

April Fool..
Then I thought..
"Don't give 'em ideas!"

April Fools Day is Great isn't it?

[Urgo]

For a full list of sites that pulled April Fools Day Pranks this year check out this list here Here is a sampling: dotget.net - Microsoft to put P2P software .GET into next version of Windows
kylewenda.com - the government records your phone calls... scary
rfc-editor.org - RFC for "Requirements for Morality Sections in Routing Area Drafts"
waferbaby.com - amusing php error
planet.gentoo.org - Various things, CFLAGS, etc
fark.com - Many Jokes (keep reloading): BOOBIES!, Logged in as admin, North-Central Kentucky Bunghole-Discharge, page from 1999, BEER
2600.com - Formal Attire required for 2600 meetings today
forumsector.com - Changed the name to Nascar Sector
wikipedia.org - Britannica taking over Wikimedia
google.com - Google releases Google Gulp
kellyosbourne.org - Sanctuary records group shut us down
nukefreezone.net - Making fun of atrios.blogspot.com
weebl.jolt.co.uk - Replaced with Cats-By-Mail
telecom.co.nz - Click 2 Brick
ytmnd.com - (NSFW) hacked by teens for christ
wingus.ampedhost.com - Site converted into Mingus' Gently-Used Furniture store. Oh dear. Why won't he be kind?
homestarrunner.com - Now a pay service.
whirlpool.net.au - Australia's biggest Luddite to head Australia's largest telco
thinkgeek.com - Fake product listings.
theregister.co.uk - Bush twins to join Air Force tech unit in Iraq
creativebits.org - Site purchased by Microsoft
ocremix.org - Now partnered with EA (or something like that). Called EA ReMix.
spacedaily.com - Bush Cancels Space Shuttle Program
planet.gnome.org - Switched sites with planet.kde.org
planet.kde.org - Switched sites with planet.gnome.org
ietf.org - RFC: Efficient Transformation Formats of Unicode
beejaysworld.de - Gentoo dropping livecds for x86
nature.com - Apollo bacteria spur lunar erosion
antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov - Water On Mars

In other news ...

[Scorpius-nl]

Steve Jobs joins Ikea!
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/01/steve_jobs _joins_ikea/
And Bush's twins join the Air Force!
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/04/01/bush_twins _volunteer/

I'd like to remind everyone...

[r00t_ur_b0x]

that this is April Fool's Day, not Stupid Joke Day. So please don't submit an article unless it is a really well-thought-out and clever hoax. Thanks.

Re:i can only take so much...

[uberjon]

you trust the news here

that's like trusting everything you hear from FOX news

P.S the popes dead...

Morality is a subjective matter

[Ashtead]

I would think that any blocking actions caused by morality would be routed around. And presumably, the evil bit would be crucial to determine the quality of morals.

As for blockin pr0n, who cares. It would really be useful if this could block spam!

Still, problem is, who gets to sit and determine what is immoral and what isn't? And for that matter, whose morals are we talking about here, is it the FCC, the WWE, the people behind goatse, the Republican Right, or maybe some Islamic Council for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice? And who will pay them? Again, remember the system's ability to block any obstacles including taxation; the ARPAnet people back in the day thought in terms of nuclear bombs not nuclear family value enforcements...

Then again, considering the date of issue of this RFC, it is all in the +1 Funny realm anyway, which as we know, is karma neutral.

I rest my case.

There are 10 kinds of people.

[Thaelon]

Those who think this is a real story.
Those who realize it's an April fool's joke without having to be told.
Those who think that was binary.

Hah funny.

[geeveees]

No, not really:

Likelihood of misuse by large, multi-national corporations. Such a thought is, of course, unthinkable.

Availability of oversight facilities. There are those who would corrupt our morals motivated as they are by a hatred of the freedom of Internet access with which we are graced. We place a significant burden of responsibility on those who guard our community from these evil-doers and it is only fitting that we give them as much support as is possible. Therefore, all encryption and obfuscation techniques MUST be excluded - individuals who have nothing to hide need to fear the oversight of those whose morals are beyond doubt.

Care and concern for avian carriers. A duck may be somebody's mother.

The real joke is ofcourse that I actually RTFA

Slashdot useless for the day.

[borgheron]

Might as well forget about visiting/posting or reading slashdot. It's April 1st. :/

Oh.. wait... I should follow my own advice. :)

GJC

As much as I know it's April 1 . . . . .

[failure-man]

This does read like something the US congress would be interested in doing.

Disturbing

[Illserve]

Have I finally lost touch with the computing industry or is this just not funny?

Even though this kind of joke has been done to death, I had hoped for a smile to at least cross my lips.

So did Clippy

[AndroidCat]

His reaction

Re:Dead horses

[Proaxiom]

While I agree that RFC 1149 was the classic April Fools RFC, it was not the first. The previous year, 1989, had RFC 1097 - TELNET SUBLIMINAL-MESSAGE Option. There were a couple earlier ones as well, such as the RFC 748 - TELNET RANDOMLY-LOSE Option in 1978.

RFC 748 was written by the same guy who wrote RFC 4042, issued today.

I also agree that the recent April Fools RFCs aren't all that funny. The Evil Bit last year was pretty lame.

Re:Dead horses

[Illserve]

On the contrary, some jokes get funnier and funnier with retelling.

The problem is that converting one-off jokes into running gags is more art than science, and clearly something these poor guys have absolutely no grasp of.

This RFC was just pitiful, all the more so because of the obvious time investment.

RFC 1149 was actually implemented

[Ulric]

By Norwegians, no less.

Fnally

[bitswapper]

"3.2.2. Jumbo Packets
It is no longer appropriate to refer to "jumbo packets". Please use the term "capacitorially challenged".

Also known as "Fat Bastard" packets.

Another RFC Today....

[sepluv]

There's also UTF-9 and UTF-18: Efficient Transformation Formats of Unicode.

It may be a joke, but I for one welcome our new nonet-using PDP10 overlords. (It would be better with nonets of balanced trits, but hey...)