@Natanox @librecast @EU_Commission @dentangle regarding big, "fundamental" hurdles: I stumbled over the following 2 issues:
https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/149630944
And: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pim/ULFLgUK2tBTGkFu6lv9jjknaMsk/
The former finally seems to have a fix but it will need some years until people have updated or replaced their Android phones.
The latter does not seem to have a solution yet, someone needs to write an #IETF #RFC for that.
(and stumbled over many issues with the Linux bridge over 15yrs, but they are hopefully solved now)

GuMo #Fedi,
ich habe eine Herausforderung. Ich möchte ein GastWiFi mit Disclaimer bauen. In dem WiFi soll der Disclaimer aufgehen, wenn sich mit dem WLAN verbindet. Laut #RFC soll das der #rfc8910 (?) sein. Ich auch im #ipv4 Option 114 mit https://example.com konfiguriert. Aber der Disclaimer wird nicht auf mobilen Endgeräten angezeigt. Was mache ich falsch? Muss ich anders vorgehen? Gibt es irgendwo eine Anleitung wie es korrekt sein muss?

【PHP8.5】PHP8.5の新機能
https://qiita.com/rana_kualu/items/76e4ff0ec6b277a38594?utm_campaign=popular_items&utm_medium=feed&utm_source=popular_items

#qiita #PHP #rfc #PHP8 #PHP8_5

This is the first Request For Comment released on the 7th of April 1969

RFC 1

https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1.txt

#RFC #RFC1 #Request #For #Comment #IEEE #networking #programming #Standards

RFC None: None, None, None #RFC None

Menschen, die sich selbst organisieren wollen, werden bei der Auswahl an freien Alternativen und Standards doch geradezu in Microsoft Outlook hineingetrieben 😩

#OpenSource #Taskmanagement #Outlook #tasks #rfc #ical #thunderbird

Working with the new #Idempotency Keys #RFC

https://httptoolkit.com/blog/idempotency-keys/

3) And why invent a new name [Base Load Power Hub #BLPH] for the old, classic name:

Regenerative Fuel Cell #RFC !

NB: #RFC is the general name, and does not mean a unitized regenerative fuel cell #URFC, which uses a single combo electrolyzer stack which can also run as a #fuelcell

#Hydrogen101

RFC 9825: Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Prefix Administrative Tags, A. Lindem, Ed., et al., https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9825 #RFC It is useful for routers in OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 routing domains to be able to associate tags with prefixes. Previously, OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 were relegated to a single tag and only for Autonomous System (AS) External and Not-So-Stubby-Area (NSSA) prefixes. 1/3

RFC 9808: Content Delivery Network Interconnection (CDNI) Capacity Capability Advertisement Extensions, A. Ryan, et al., https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9808 #RFC This specification defines a set of additional Capability Objects that provide information about current downstream CDN (dCDN) utilization and specified usage limits to the delegating upstream CDN (uCDN) in order to inform 1/2

So, what about this: FASP exists. DHTs exist. Let's build a FASP that does user discovery while maintaining a DHT node. Every Mastodon instance could host their own node, and those nodes could share this common state of all users while being fully distributed. We could write it in something fast like #Rust to reduce the memory footprint. Thoughts anyone? Is this stupid?

FASP: https://github.com/mastodon/fediverse_auxiliary_service_provider_specifications

#RFC #askfedi

RFC 9811: Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure -- HTTP Transfer for the Certificate Management Protocol (CMP), H. Brockhaus, et al., https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9811 #RFC This document describes how to layer the Certificate Management Protocol (CMP) over HTTP. It includes the updates to RFC 6712 specified in Section 3 of RFC 9480; these updates introduce CMP URIs using a 1/2

RFC 9810: Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure -- Certificate Management Protocol (CMP), H. Brockhaus, et al., https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9810 #RFC This document describes the Internet X.509 Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) Certificate Management Protocol (CMP). Protocol messages are defined for X.509v3 certificate creation and management. CMP provides interactions between client 1/3

【PHP8.5】OPcacheが常に使用可能になる
https://qiita.com/rana_kualu/items/93532e7ac221cf99b958?utm_campaign=popular_items&utm_medium=feed&utm_source=popular_items

#qiita #PHP #rfc #日本語訳 #PHP8 #PHP8_5

RFC 9818: DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation on IPv6 Customer Edge (CE) Routers in LANs, T. Winters, https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9818 #RFC This document defines requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge (CE) routers to support DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation for distributing available prefixes to LAN devices that were delegated to an IPv6 CE router. This document updates RFC 7084. This document is a 1/2

Spent some useful time digging into an IETF #RFC regarding Certificate Authority Authorization or #CAA (RFC6844 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6844 ) *and* checking security guidelines on the use of specific cipher suites because the Dutch National Cyber Security Center (#NCSC) recently released new TLS guidelines. https://www.ncsc.nl/wat-kun-je-zelf-doen/documenten/publicaties/2025/juni/01/ict-beveiligingsrichtlijnen-voor-transport-layer-security-2025-05

#Security is never dull 😀

#WeekITtip

Davie at El Reg posits that DNSSEC might have gone titsup.

https://www.theregister.com/2025/07/25/systems_approach_column_dns_security/

#dns #rfc

@b4ux1t3 @zachweinersmith.bsky.social I guess this has to do with no clear separation between data and instructions? (☎️ The 90s are calling and want their bugs back.) If untrusted sources could be marked as un-actionable data, even an LLM could understand that, for example by special boundary tokens. Or, even more high-level, using the concept of multipart (https://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc1341/7_2_Multipart.html) messages which use a pseudo-random string to tell data chunks apart.
#security #llm #rfc

> 2022年6月公開された『RFC 9110 HTTP Semantics』にて、418は Unusedになりました
とのこと

HTTPで「418 I’m a tea pot」を実装してはいけない(2018/10/18追記) #rfc - Qiita
https://qiita.com/flano_yuki/items/ea251ac6b53bc54677d2