Add rfcs to doc directory

+1999-11-21  Jeff Bailey  <jbailey@nisa.net>
+
+	* doc/rfc*: Add.  Standards followed should be included here.
+
 1999-11-23  Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo  <jkaivo@elijah.nodomainname.net>
 1999-11-23  Jakob 'sparky' Kaivo  <jkaivo@elijah.nodomainname.net>
 
 
 	* TODO: Mention Maildir
 	* TODO: Mention Maildir

+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group                                           J. Myers
+Request for Comments: 1734                               Carnegie Mellon
+Category: Standards Track                                  December 1994
+
+
+                      POP3 AUTHentication command
+
+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.
+
+
+1. Introduction
+
+   This document describes the optional AUTH command, for indicating an
+   authentication mechanism to the server, performing an authentication
+   protocol exchange, and optionally negotiating a protection mechanism
+   for subsequent protocol interactions.  The authentication and
+   protection mechanisms used by the POP3 AUTH command are those used by
+   IMAP4.
+
+
+2. The AUTH command
+
+   AUTH mechanism
+
+         Arguments:
+             a string identifying an IMAP4 authentication mechanism,
+             such as defined by [IMAP4-AUTH].  Any use of the string
+             "imap" used in a server authentication identity in the
+             definition of an authentication mechanism is replaced with
+             the string "pop".
+
+         Restrictions:
+             may only be given in the AUTHORIZATION state
+
+         Discussion:
+             The AUTH command indicates an authentication mechanism to
+             the server.  If the server supports the requested
+             authentication mechanism, it performs an authentication
+             protocol exchange to authenticate and identify the user.
+             Optionally, it also negotiates a protection mechanism for
+             subsequent protocol interactions.  If the requested
+             authentication mechanism is not supported, the server
+
+
+
+Myers                                                           [Page 1]
+
+RFC 1734                       POP3 AUTH                   December 1994
+
+
+             should reject the AUTH command by sending a negative
+             response.
+
+             The authentication protocol exchange consists of a series
+             of server challenges and client answers that are specific
+             to the authentication mechanism.  A server challenge,
+             otherwise known as a ready response, is a line consisting
+             of a "+" character followed by a single space and a BASE64
+             encoded string.  The client answer consists of a line
+             containing a BASE64 encoded string.  If the client wishes
+             to cancel an authentication exchange, it should issue a
+             line with a single "*".  If the server receives such an
+             answer, it must reject the AUTH command by sending a
+             negative response.
+
+             A protection mechanism provides integrity and privacy
+             protection to the protocol session.  If a protection
+             mechanism is negotiated, it is applied to all subsequent
+             data sent over the connection.  The protection mechanism
+             takes effect immediately following the CRLF that concludes
+             the authentication exchange for the client, and the CRLF of
+             the positive response for the server.  Once the protection
+             mechanism is in effect, the stream of command and response
+             octets is processed into buffers of ciphertext.  Each
+             buffer is transferred over the connection as a stream of
+             octets prepended with a four octet field in network byte
+             order that represents the length of the following data.
+             The maximum ciphertext buffer length is defined by the
+             protection mechanism.
+
+             The server is not required to support any particular
+             authentication mechanism, nor are authentication mechanisms
+             required to support any protection mechanisms.  If an AUTH
+             command fails with a negative response, the session remains
+             in the AUTHORIZATION state and client may try another
+             authentication mechanism by issuing another AUTH command,
+             or may attempt to authenticate by using the USER/PASS or
+             APOP commands.  In other words, the client may request
+             authentication types in decreasing order of preference,
+             with the USER/PASS or APOP command as a last resort.
+
+             Should the client successfully complete the authentication
+             exchange, the POP3 server issues a positive response and
+             the POP3 session enters the TRANSACTION state.
+
+         Possible Responses:
+             +OK maildrop locked and ready
+             -ERR authentication exchange failed
+
+
+
+Myers                                                           [Page 2]
+
+RFC 1734                       POP3 AUTH                   December 1994
+
+
+
+         Examples:
+             S: +OK POP3 server ready
+             C: AUTH KERBEROS_V4
+             S: + AmFYig==
+             C: BAcAQU5EUkVXLkNNVS5FRFUAOCAsho84kLN3/IJmrMG+25a4DT
+                +nZImJjnTNHJUtxAA+o0KPKfHEcAFs9a3CL5Oebe/ydHJUwYFd
+                WwuQ1MWiy6IesKvjL5rL9WjXUb9MwT9bpObYLGOKi1Qh
+             S: + or//EoAADZI=
+             C: DiAF5A4gA+oOIALuBkAAmw==
+             S: +OK Kerberos V4 authentication successful
+                ...
+             C: AUTH FOOBAR
+             S: -ERR Unrecognized authentication type
+
+              Note: the line breaks in the first client answer  are
+              for editorial clarity and are not in real authentica-
+              tors.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Myers                                                           [Page 3]
+
+RFC 1734                       POP3 AUTH                   December 1994
+
+
+3. Formal Syntax
+
+   The following syntax specification uses the augmented Backus-Naur
+   Form (BNF) notation as specified in RFC 822.
+
+   Except as noted otherwise, all alphabetic characters are case-
+   insensitive.  The use of upper or lower case characters to define
+   token strings is for editorial clarity only.  Implementations MUST
+   accept these strings in a case-insensitive fashion.
+
+   ATOM_CHAR       ::= <any CHAR except atom_specials>
+
+   atom_specials   ::= "(" / ")" / "{" / SPACE / CTLs / "%" / "*" /
+                       <"> / "\"
+
+   auth            ::= "AUTH" 1*(SPACE / TAB) auth_type *(CRLF base64)
+                       CRLF
+
+   auth_type       ::= 1*ATOM_CHAR
+
+   base64          ::= *(4base64_CHAR) [base64_terminal]
+
+   base64_char     ::= "A" / "B" / "C" / "D" / "E" / "F" / "G" / "H" /
+           "I" / "J" / "K" / "L" / "M" / "N" / "O" / "P" /
+                       "Q" / "R" / "S" / "T" / "U" / "V" / "W" / "X" /
+                       "Y" / "Z" /
+                       "a" / "b" / "c" / "d" / "e" / "f" / "g" / "h" /
+                       "i" / "j" / "k" / "l" / "m" / "n" / "o" / "p" /
+                       "q" / "r" / "s" / "t" / "u" / "v" / "w" / "x" /
+                       "y" / "z" /
+                       "0" / "1" / "2" / "3" / "4" / "5" / "6" / "7" /
+                       "8" / "9" / "+" / "/"
+                       ;; Case-sensitive
+
+   base64_terminal ::= (2base64_char "==") / (3base64_char "=")
+
+   CHAR            ::= <any 7-bit US-ASCII character except NUL,
+                        0x01 - 0x7f>
+
+   continue_req    ::= "+" SPACE base64 CRLF
+
+   CR              ::= <ASCII CR, carriage return, 0x0C>
+
+   CRLF            ::= CR LF
+
+   CTL             ::= <any ASCII control character and DEL,
+                        0x00 - 0x1f, 0x7f>
+
+
+
+
+Myers                                                           [Page 4]
+
+RFC 1734                       POP3 AUTH                   December 1994
+
+
+   LF              ::= <ASCII LF, line feed, 0x0A>
+
+   SPACE           ::= <ASCII SP, space, 0x20>
+
+   TAB             ::= <ASCII HT, tab, 0x09>
+
+
+
+4. References
+
+   [IMAP4-AUTH]  Myers, J., "IMAP4 Authentication Mechanisms", RFC 1731,
+   Carnegie Mellon, December 1994.
+
+
+
+5. Security Considerations
+
+   Security issues are discussed throughout this memo.
+
+
+
+6. Author's Address
+
+   John G. Myers
+   Carnegie-Mellon University
+   5000 Forbes Ave
+   Pittsburgh, PA 15213
+
+   EMail: jgm+@cmu.edu
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Myers                                                           [Page 5]
+

+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group                                          R. Nelson
+Request for Comments: 1957                               Crynwr Software
+Updates: 1939                                                  June 1996
+Category: Informational
+
+
+                 Some Observations on Implementations
+                   of the Post Office Protocol (POP3)
+
+Status of this Memo
+
+   This memo provides information for the Internet community. This memo
+   does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of
+   this memo is unlimited.
+
+Observations
+
+   Sometimes an implementation is mistaken for a standard.  POP3 servers
+   and clients are no exception.  The widely-used UCB POP3 server,
+   popper, which has been further developed by Qualcomm, always has
+   additional information following the status indicator.  So, the
+   status indicator always has a space following it.  Two POP3 clients
+   have been observed to expect that space, and fail when it has not
+   been found.  The RFC does not require the space, hence this memo.
+   These clients are the freely copyable Unix "popclient" and the
+   proprietary "netApp Systems Internet Series".  The authors of both of
+   these have been contacted, and new releases will not expect the
+   space, but old versions should be supported.
+
+   In addition, two popular clients require optional parts of the RFC.
+   Netscape requires UIDL, and Eudora requires TOP.
+
+   The optional APOP authentication command has not achieved wide
+   penetration yet.  Newer versions of the Qualcomm POP server implement
+   it.  Known client implementations of APOP include GNU Emacs VM client
+   and Eudora Lite and Eudora Pro.
+
+Security Considerations
+
+   Security issues are not discussed in this memo.
+
+References
+
+   [1]  Myers, J., and M. Rose, "Post Office Protocol - Version 3",
+        STD 53, RFC 1939, May 1996.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Nelson                       Informational                      [Page 1]
+
+RFC 1957             Notes on POP3 Implementations             June 1996
+
+
+Author's Address
+
+   Russell Nelson
+   Crynwr Software
+   521 Pleasant Valley Rd.
+   Potsdam, NY 13676
+
+   Phone: +1.315.268.1925
+   FAX:   +1.315.268.9201
+   EMail: nelson@crynwr.com
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Nelson                       Informational                      [Page 2]
+