Network Working Group J. Flick
Request for Comments: 3638 Hewlett-Packard Company
Obsoletes: 1643 C. Heard
Category: Informational Consultant
September 2003
Network Working Group J. Flick
Request for Comments: 3638 Hewlett-Packard Company
Obsoletes: 1643 C. Heard
Category: Informational Consultant
September 2003
Applicability Statement for Reclassification of RFC 1643 to Historic Status
RFC 1643重新分类为历史状态的适用性声明
Status of this Memo
本备忘录的状况
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
本备忘录为互联网社区提供信息。它没有规定任何类型的互联网标准。本备忘录的分发不受限制。
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
版权所有（C）互联网协会（2003年）。版权所有。
Abstract
摘要
This memo recommends that RFC 1643 be reclassified as an Historic document and provides the supporting motivation for that recommendation.
本备忘录建议将RFC 1643重新归类为历史性文件，并为该建议提供支持动机。
STD 50, RFC 1643 [RFC1643], "Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types", and its SMIv2 equivalent, RFC 1650 [RFC1650], are applicable to half-duplex 10 Mb/s Ethernet interfaces only. Subsequent to the 1994 publication of these documents, 100 Mb/s, 1000 Mb/s, and 10 Gb/s Ethernet interface types have been developed, and full-duplex operation at 10 Mb/s has been standardized. Updates to RFC 1650 have been produced to accommodate these new technologies [RFC2358] [RFC2665] [RFC2666] [RFC3635]. These updates define new MIB objects to supplement those defined in RFC 1643 and RFC 1650 and in addition deprecate some of the objects in RFC 1643 and RFC 1650 that are no longer considered useful. They also levy a requirement for implementations of the EtherLike-MIB to support the MAU-MIB [RFC2239] [RFC2668] [RFC3636] as well.
STD 50、RFC 1643[RFC1643]、“类以太网接口类型的受管对象定义”及其SMIv2等价物RFC 1650[RFC1650]仅适用于半双工10 Mb/s以太网接口。在1994年出版这些文件之后，开发了100 Mb/s、1000 Mb/s和10 Gb/s以太网接口类型，并对10 Mb/s的全双工操作进行了标准化。已制作RFC 1650的更新以适应这些新技术[RFC2358][RFC2665][RFC2666][RFC3635]。这些更新定义了新的MIB对象，以补充RFC 1643和RFC 1650中定义的对象，此外还弃用了RFC 1643和RFC 1650中不再有用的一些对象。他们还要求实现类似以太网的MIB，以支持MAU-MIB[RFC2239][RFC2668][RFC3636]。
RFC 1643 is an obsolete specification, overtaken by events. Its SMIv2 equivalent, RFC 1650, was officially retired in 1998. New implementations -- even those that support only half-duplex 10 Mb/s interfaces -- should comply with in the latest version of the specification, currently RFC 3635 [RFC3635] and RFC 2666 [RFC2666], instead of RFC 1643. It is therefore recommended that RFC 1643 be reclassified as an Historic document.
RFC1643是一个过时的规范，被事件取代。其SMIv2等价物RFC1650于1998年正式退役。新的实现——即使是那些只支持半双工10 Mb/s接口的实现——也应该符合最新版本的规范，目前是RFC 3635[RFC3635]和RFC 2666[RFC2666]，而不是RFC 1643。因此，建议将RFC 1643重新归类为历史文件。
Reclassification of RFC 1643 will have no impact on the status of any standards track RFC because no standards track RFC cites it as a normative reference. An RFC content search made with the tools available at http://www.rfc-editor.org reveals the following standards track documents that cite RFC 1643:
RFC 1643的重新分类不会影响任何标准跟踪RFC的状态，因为没有标准跟踪RFC将其引用为规范性参考。使用以下站点提供的工具进行RFC内容搜索：http://www.rfc-editor.org 显示引用RFC 1643的以下标准跟踪文档：
Document Title
-------- -----
Document Title
-------- -----
RFC 2020 IEEE 802.12 Interface MIB
RFC 2020 IEEE 802.12接口MIB
RFC 2358 Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types
RFC 2358类以太网接口类型的托管对象定义
RFC 2665 Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types
RFC 2665类以太网接口类型的托管对象定义
RFC 2720 Traffic Flow Measurement: Meter MIB
RFC 2720交通流量测量：仪表MIB
RFC 3635 Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types
RFC 3635类以太网接口类型的托管对象定义
RFC 2020 [RFC2020] contains DOT12-IF-MIB, which is the MIB module for managing IEEE 802.12 100VG-AnyLAN interfaces. It refers to RFC 1643 in the context of an admonition not to implement the EtherLike-MIB for any interface where the DOT12-IF-MIB is implemented.
RFC 2020[RFC2020]包含DOT12-IF-MIB，它是用于管理IEEE 802.12 100VG AnyLAN接口的MIB模块。它在警告中引用了RFC 1643，警告不要为实现DOT12-IF-MIB的任何接口实现类以太MIB。
RFC 2358 [RFC2358], RFC 2665 [RFC2665], and RFC 3635 [RFC3635] all contain updated versions of the EtherLike-MIB. They refer to RFC 1643 in the context of explaining the history of the EtherLike-MIB, and the citation in RFC 3635 is explicitly listed as a non-normative reference.
RFC 2358[RFC2358]、RFC 2665[RFC2665]和RFC 3635[RFC3635]都包含以太MIB的更新版本。他们在解释以太式MIB的历史时参考了RFC 1643，RFC 3635中的引用明确列为非规范性参考。
RFC 2720 [RFC2720] contains the FLOW-METER-MIB. It refers to RFC 1643 only in an ASN.1 comment in the MIB module. Omission of that comment would not preclude correct implementation of the MIB module.
RFC 2720[RFC2720]包含流量计-MIB。它仅在MIB模块中的ASN.1注释中引用RFC1643。省略该注释不会妨碍MIB模块的正确实现。
Clearly, none of these citations are normative.
显然，这些引用都不是规范性的。
Reclassification of RFC 1643 will not, in and of itself, have any effect on the security of the Internet.
RFC 1643的重新分类本身不会对互联网的安全产生任何影响。
[RFC1643] Kastenholz, F., "Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types", STD 50, RFC 1643, July 1994.
[RFC1643]Kastenholz，F.，“类似以太网接口类型的托管对象定义”，STD 50，RFC 1643，1994年7月。
[RFC1650] Kastenholz, F., "Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types using SMIv2", RFC 1650, August 1994.
[RFC1650]Kastenholz，F.，“使用SMIv2的类以太网接口类型的托管对象定义”，RFC1650，1994年8月。
[RFC2020] Flick, J., "IEEE 802.12 Interface MIB", RFC 2020, October 1996.
[RFC2020]Flick，J.，“IEEE 802.12接口MIB”，RFC 2020，1996年10月。
[RFC2239] de Graaf, K., Romascanu, D., McMaster, D., McCloghrie, K. and S. Roberts, "Definitions of Managed Objects for IEEE 802.3 Medium Attachment Units (MAUs) using SMIv2", RFC 2239, November 1997.
[RFC2239]de Graaf，K.，Romascan，D.，McMaster，D.，McCloghrie，K.和S.Roberts，“使用SMIv2的IEEE 802.3介质连接单元（MAU）的托管对象定义”，RFC 2239，1997年11月。
[RFC2358] Flick, J. and J. Johnson, "Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types", RFC 2358, June 1998.
[RFC2358]Flick，J.和J.Johnson，“类似以太网接口类型的托管对象定义”，RFC 2358，1998年6月。
[RFC2665] Flick, J. and J. Johnson, "Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types", RFC 2665, August 1999.
[RFC2665]Flick，J.和J.Johnson，“类似以太网接口类型的托管对象定义”，RFC 2665，1999年8月。
[RFC2666] Flick, J., "Definitions of Object Identifiers for Identifying Ethernet Chip Sets", RFC 2666, August 1999.
[RFC2666]Flick，J.，“识别以太网芯片组的对象标识符的定义”，RFC 2666，1999年8月。
[RFC2668] Smith, A., Flick, J., deGraaf, K., Romascanu, D., McMaster, D., McCloghrie, K. and S. Roberts, "Definitions of Managed Objects for IEEE 802.3 Medium Attachment Units (MAUs)", RFC 2668, August 1999.
[RFC2668]Smith，A.，Flick，J.，deGraaf，K.，Romascan，D.，McMaster，D.，McLoghrie，K.和S.Roberts，“IEEE 802.3介质连接单元（MAU）的受管对象定义”，RFC 2668，1999年8月。
[RFC2720] Brownlee, N., "Traffic Flow Measurement: Meter MIB", RFC 2720, October 1999.
[RFC2720]布朗利，N.，“交通流量测量：仪表MIB”，RFC27201999年10月。
[RFC3635] Flick, J., "Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types", RFC 3635, September 2003.
[RFC3635]Flick，J.，“类似以太网接口类型的托管对象定义”，RFC 3635，2003年9月。
[RFC3636] Flick, J., "Definitions of Managed Objects for IEEE 802.3 Medium Attachment Units (MAUs)", RFC 3636, September 2003.
[RFC3636]Flick，J.，“IEEE 802.3介质连接单元（MAU）受管对象的定义”，RFC 36362003年9月。
John Flick Hewlett-Packard Company 8000 Foothills Blvd. M/S 5557 Roseville, CA 95747-5557 USA
约翰·弗利克惠普公司8000山麓大道。美国加利福尼亚州罗斯维尔市南5557号，邮编95747-5557
Phone: +1 916 785 4018
Fax: +1 916 785 1199
EMail: johnf@rose.hp.com
Phone: +1 916 785 4018
Fax: +1 916 785 1199
EMail: johnf@rose.hp.com
C. M. Heard 600 Rainbow Dr. #141 Mountain View, CA 94041-2542 USA
C.M.赫德600彩虹博士#141美国加利福尼亚州山景城94041-2542
Phone: +1 650 964 8391
EMail: heard@pobox.com
Phone: +1 650 964 8391
EMail: heard@pobox.com
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved.
版权所有（C）互联网协会（2003年）。版权所有。
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English.
本文件及其译本可复制并提供给他人，对其进行评论或解释或协助其实施的衍生作品可全部或部分编制、复制、出版和分发，不受任何限制，前提是上述版权声明和本段包含在所有此类副本和衍生作品中。但是，不得以任何方式修改本文件本身，例如删除版权通知或对互联网协会或其他互联网组织的引用，除非出于制定互联网标准的需要，在这种情况下，必须遵循互联网标准过程中定义的版权程序，或根据需要将其翻译成英语以外的其他语言。
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees.
上述授予的有限许可是永久性的，互联网协会或其继承人或受让人不会撤销。
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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.
本文件和其中包含的信息是按“原样”提供的，互联网协会和互联网工程任务组否认所有明示或暗示的保证，包括但不限于任何保证，即使用本文中的信息不会侵犯任何权利，或对适销性或特定用途适用性的任何默示保证。
Acknowledgement
确认
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society.
RFC编辑功能的资金目前由互联网协会提供。