decoration decoration

When you want to know more...
For layout only
Site Map
About Groklaw
Legal Research
ApplevSamsung p.2
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Gordon v MS
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
MS Litigations
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
OOXML Appeals
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v Novell
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal

User Functions



Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.

What's New

No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

A New Salus Book: "The Complete April Fools' Day RFCs"
Thursday, March 15 2007 @ 09:47 AM EDT

Peter Salus has co-authored a new book, " The Complete April Fools' Day RFCs ", and I was positive you'd want to know about it. The RFCs themselves are all hyperlinked, and the Table of Contents is there, so you'll be able to decide if you want to buy the book when it's available (soon) so you can read the rest. The press release explains:
For over 35 years, the Requests for Comment have been the guidelines and standards of the Internet. But squirreled away within the over-4000 RFCs are a number of mock items, generally issued on April First -- April Fools' Day.

Now, for the first time, you can buy all the April Fools RFCs -- together with commentaries by Tom Limoncelli and Peter Salus -- and find out how to distinguish good stuff from malware; how to use pigeons as packet carriers; how the Roman addressing system works; and many other good ideas as well.

As a bonus, Tom and Peter have added the verse RFCs and ... well, find out for yourself.

I know I will. This is a great idea for a book. The Avian Carriers protocol was amended, "IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service". Just so you know how to do it.

Here's one I liked, "Omniscience Protocol Requirements", written by a guy at Harvard, S. Bradner, which I'm afraid may have confused Microsoft. When I read about Vista and things like WGA, I discern it seems to be doing its level best to actually implement this protocol. Could someone please inform them that it was an April Fool's joke?

It was inspired by Orrin Hatch's remarks about teaching copyright law by destroying evildoers' computers if they file share:


There have been a number of legislative initiatives in the U.S. and elsewhere over the past few years to use the Internet to actively interfere with allegedly illegal activities of Internet users. This memo proposes a number of requirements for a new protocol, the Omniscience Protocol, that could be used to enable such efforts.

1. Introduction

In a June 17, 2003 U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, entitled "The Dark Side of a Bright Idea: Could Personal and National Security Risks Compromise the Potential of Peer-to-Peer File-Sharing Networks?," U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), the chair of the committee, said he was interested in the ability to destroy the computers of people who illegally download copyrighted material. He said this "may be the only way you can teach somebody about copyrights." "If we can find some way to do this without destroying their machines, we'd be interested in hearing about that," Mr Hatch was quoted as saying during a Senate hearing. He went on to say "If that's the only way, then I'm all for destroying their machines." [Guardian]...

This memo proposes a set of requirements for a new protocol to be used by prosecutors to determine a person's intent, thus reducing the need to dilute the historical legal requirement to show intent and by groups such as the MPAA and RIAA to be sure they are dealing with lawbreakers and not 60 year old non computer users.

Speaking of security considerations, there is this note at the bottom of the page where the book is offered: "If you can't laugh at these, you may wish to examine your own insecurities."

Certainly the RIAA needs this protocol so they can stop suing grandmas who have never used a computer. And that all reminds me: here's the latest from Ray Beckerman, the lawyer you guys helped by explaining some technical issues to. If you scroll down that page, you can read about the latest litigation filed against, believe it or not, a stroke victim:

Although the defendant John Paladuk, an employee of C&N Railroad for 36 years, was living in Florida at the time of the alleged copyright infringement, and had notified the RIAA that he had not engaged in any copyright infringement, and despite that the fact that Mr. Paladuk suffered a stroke last year which resulted in complete paralysis of his entire left side and severely impaired speech, rendering him disabled, and despite the fact that his disability check is his sole source of income, the RIAA commenced suit against him on February 27, 2007.

Perfect. A retired stroke victim. Does the music industry have an unerring instinct for PR or what? Or is their problem they don't get the tech and are finding out in embarrassing ways that tracing an IP address the way they've reportedly been doing it isn't so reliable a method? You think?


A New Salus Book: "The Complete April Fools' Day RFCs" | 69 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
A New Salus Book: "The Complete April Fools' Day RFCs"
Authored by: entre on Thursday, March 15 2007 @ 09:52 AM EDT
Time for a new book, waiting for the Judge to decide.......

[ Reply to This | # ]

Off Topic
Authored by: Griffin3 on Thursday, March 15 2007 @ 10:08 AM EDT
Make sure your comments are all at least 1.2 sigmas off-topic, as determined by
the International Scale of Relevance.


[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: awildenberg on Thursday, March 15 2007 @ 10:10 AM EDT
"and the the Table of Contents is there" has a double the in it.

[ Reply to This | # ]

It works well
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 15 2007 @ 10:11 AM EDT
The rfc cited above is an example of sneakernet protocol. Although latency is often significant, the actual bandwidth can be quite acceptable according to Tanenbaum. Sneakernet wiki article

[ Reply to This | # ]

IP Over Avian Carriers
Authored by: red floyd on Thursday, March 15 2007 @ 10:23 AM EDT
I'd like to point out that RFC 1149 (IP over Avian Carriers) was actually implemented by the Bergen Linux Users Group

I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a *CITIZEN* of the United States of America.

[ Reply to This | # ]

RFC 1925 has always been my fave
Authored by: IRJustman on Thursday, March 15 2007 @ 10:40 AM EDT
Thanks, Peter, for collating all the REAL gems of the IETF into one spot!

And the truly sad thing is that RFC 1925, for all its humor, holds a lot of
truths I run into, not just in networking but in life in general. But then
again, it's one of my all-time favorites.

That along with RFC 3514 always bringa smile to my face. ;)


[ Reply to This | # ]

A high latency, low bandwidth Internet service.
Authored by: Toon Moene on Thursday, March 15 2007 @ 10:59 AM EDT
I'm sorry, but this is still the very best to me. It is so chockful of Internet/Ethernet jargon, yet applicable, it's just amazing:
Avian carriers can provide high delay, low throughput, and low altitude service. The connection topology is limited to a single point-to-point path for each carrier, used with standard carriers, but many carriers can be used without significant interference with each other, outside of early spring [....] The carriers have an intrinsic collision avoidance system, which increases availability. Unlike some network technologies, such as packet radio, communication is not limited to line-of-sight distance. Connection oriented service is available in some cities, usually based upon a central hub topology.

Besides, there's the oblique, but very obvious, reference to Monty Python's coconut carriers.

Toon Moene (A GNU Fortran maintainer and physicist at large)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Perfect. A retired stroke victim.
Authored by: Yossarian on Thursday, March 15 2007 @ 12:53 PM EDT
It seems like the RIAA found the perfect way to success in
hunting - shoot rabbits that can't run away. (And if any
rabbit manages to run away, whine to the press that the
rabbits don't play fair.)

[ Reply to This | # ]

I guess the Valley Protocol never made it to RFC status
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 15 2007 @ 01:04 PM EDT
The starting and ending delimiter is 'like' as in "like I went to the store
like." It was going around in the early 80's.

[ Reply to This | # ]

When will you write a book, PJ?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 15 2007 @ 01:58 PM EDT
I am sure that you will have gathered enough material during these years, like
the dirty things of Alexis de Toqueville institute. Will we ever have a book
about that?

[ Reply to This | # ]

Alas, RFC 1927 is obsolete
Authored by: filker0 on Thursday, March 15 2007 @ 05:57 PM EDT
Well, not so much obsolete as out of date. The recommendations in that RFC are
that the cost of staples be charged via First Virtual transactions. First
Virtual Holdings went away a while ago.

(I used to work for them, so it's a bit nostalgic for me to come across that

The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not reflect those of my current
or previous employers. IaNaL.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Roman Unix
Authored by: vruz on Thursday, March 15 2007 @ 08:49 PM EDT
This may be handy for Roman Unix/Linux users:

tail -n XXIV /var/log/messages



Also, Utah/Yarro law will allow us to use more than
XXXXXXV Unix ports for television.

--- the vruz

[ Reply to This | # ]

A New Salus Book: "The Complete April Fools' Day RFCs"
Authored by: iraskygazer on Friday, March 16 2007 @ 12:46 AM EDT

Remember the statement from one of the lawyers who wanted to pick Groklaw's
brain? The lawyer was concerned that the media industry was attempting to
establish case law in their favor and they didn't care who they attacked. It is
a shame that the government doesn't intervene in cases like this and stop the
bully in its tracks.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )