doc: Add RFC documents

1 files changed, 227 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc514.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc514.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..eb12237
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc514.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,227 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group                                      W. Kantrowitz
+Request for Comments: 514                                        LL TX-2
+NIC: 16445                                                   5 June 1973
+Updates: RFC 459
+
+
+                           NETWORK MAKE-WORK
+
+
+   The ARPA Network seems to have developed the proclivity of dragging
+   compulsive collectors and organizers out of the woodwork and placing
+   them in the forefront to annoy everybody.
+
+   Recent occurrences have been:
+
+   1. A set of charts on characteristics of the hosts.  The orientation
+      seems to have been:  If you can come up with names for the
+      horizontal and vertical nodes and if it has to do with the hosts,
+      make a chart out of it.  This collection of charts goes under the
+      euphemism "ARPA Network handbook".  Information on a host is
+      scattered over all the pages which is a questionable organizing
+      scheme.  Additionally, since the charts contain much of what is
+      already in the Resource Notebook, we now have the delightful task
+      of maintaining two documents when changes are necessary.
+
+   2. A telephone call asking for hourly loads on the TX-2 computer for
+      every hour of the months April and May.  One can easily imagine
+      all this information being keypunched in some computer (on the
+      network, of course) and then lovely bar graphs, curves, plots,
+      etc., being generated.  Probably in triplicate.
+
+   3. A mailbox message about a "central software repository" and a
+      personnel file. (Copy of the message is attached).  This was just
+      too much and is the immediate precursor of this RFC.
+
+   My first reaction to the "central software repository" was that this
+   has got to be some kind of prank.  But when the second message
+   (identical to the first) arrived an hour later and when I learned
+   that others had also received it, I reluctantly accepted its
+   legitimacy.  Actually, sending the message in duplicate fits in very
+   nicely with the general bureaucratic syndrome evidenced by the
+   contents of the message.
+
+   This RFC addresses itself merely to the idea of listings of every
+   program.  That does not mean that I think that the rest of the
+   request is better, just that I don't have the time to write a
+   treatise on the general subject.  It should be noted (if not obvious)
+   that what follows is being written with almost unbearable restraint.
+
+
+
+Kantrowitz                                                      [Page 1]
+
+RFC 514                    NETWORK MAKE-WORK                5 June 1973
+
+
+   Listings of every program available to network users?  Has anybody
+   calculated how much paper would be generated?  How many trees would
+   have to be cut down for this paper?  How many filing cabinets are
+   going to be needed?  How is this massive amount of information in its
+   totality going to be of use anyone?  Is there going to be an
+   answering service which will answer such questions as to what is on
+   the third line of page 5 of the listings of the editor at a given
+   host?  Will one be "required" to send a new listing in order to
+   change a program?
+
+         This material has not been reviewed for public release and is
+         intended only for use with the ARPA network.  It should not be
+         quoted or cited in any publication not related to the ARPA
+         network.
+
+         plf-2256
+
+   From the point of view of a site such as TX-2, the questions become
+   even more intriguing.  Many of our programs are written in assembly
+   language.  Should we, therefore, also send along a copy of our
+   (incomplete) assembly language manual?  Or should we drop everything
+   else and complete the manual?  What about listings of our operating
+   system since the programs make calls upon the system for input-
+   output, file management, etc.?  (I could go on and on, but the
+   readers should get the idea by now.)  Much of this applies to any
+   host, but for a host which has a one-and-only computer,the problems
+   are more acute.
+
+   Once again, may I repeat my plea from RFC 459.  There are small
+   research sites on the network.  TX-2 is one of them.  Please, network
+   community, don't drown us in a sea of make-work.  We might get
+   nothing done just keeping up with it.  Or is that no longer
+   important?
+
+   In particular, the network community ought to be glad that in the mid
+   1960's we at TX-2 weren't bombarded with tons of make-work and were
+   able to get something done.  What I have in mind is the initial
+   experimentation with a small-scale network prototype with SDC which
+   demonstrated the feasibility of networks and led to the ARPA Network.
+   (Please see reference.)  Who knows what we, or some other site, will
+   come up with if given the chance?
+
+   Some people have suggested that I not write this RFC reasoning that
+   if I just ignore it, the problem will go away.  But the problem is
+   not going away.  If anything, it seems to be getting worse.  Silence
+   becomes in effect tacit consent.  I do not intend to sit by and
+   sacrifice useful work to satisfy bureaucratic compulsiveness.
+
+
+
+
+Kantrowitz                                                      [Page 2]
+
+RFC 514                    NETWORK MAKE-WORK                5 June 1973
+
+
+   It says someplace that one should end on a positive note.  OK, here
+   goes: May I respectfully suggest that the next potential perpetrator
+   of network (make) work for someone else think very hard about the
+   justification for it.  Also, think about how much time it will take,
+   remembering that not everybody is as fast or brilliant as you are.
+   If you would like positive responses from others, you should consider
+   why someone else should feel motivated to do the work you request.
+   Then put all this down on paper as the introduction to the "work
+   order."  Then think some more.  Try it on some colleagues.  If it has
+   still survived then maybe you have something.  Just maybe.
+
+REFERENCE
+
+   T. Marill and L. Roberts, "Toward a Cooperative Network of Time-
+   Shared Computers" in AFIPS Conference Proceedings, November 1966.
+
+   WK:sja
+
+   attachment
+
+                                   COPY
+
+   NET MAIL FROM SITE USC-ISI RCVD AT  30-MAY-73  10:59:44
+   -------
+   DATE   30-MAY-73   0740-PDT
+   FROM   RML AT USC-ISI
+   RE:    RML CENTRAL SOFTWARE REPOSITORY
+   - - - -
+
+RML CENTRAL SOFTWARE REPOSITORY
+
+   RML IN THE CAPACITY OF ARPANET MANAGER IS INTERESTED IN ESTABLISHING
+   AT RML A CENTRAL REPOSITORY OF PROGRAMS ADVERTISED IN THE NETWORK
+   RESOURCES NOTEBOOK BY THE HOST SERVER SITES AS AVAILABLE FOR USE BY
+   NETWORK MEMBERS.  IT IS ALSO DESIRED THAT PROGRAMS GENERALLY
+   AVAILABLE FOR USE BY NETWORK MEMBERS BUT NOT LISTED IN THE RESOURCE
+   NOTEBOOK ALSO BE INCLUDED.  AVAILABLE DOCUMENTATION ON THE PROGRAMS
+   IS ALSO REQUIRED.  THE TYPE OF PROGRAM DOCUMENTATION DESIRED INCLUDES
+   BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO -
+   1.  PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
+   2.  LISTINGS
+   3.  RUNNING INSTRUCTIONS
+      A.  OPERATION INSTRUCTIONS
+      B.  INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PREPARATION OF THE DATA TO BE PROCESSED
+   4.  PROGRAM LIMITATIONS
+   5.  ANY OTHER AVAILABLE DOCUMENTATION IN THE ABSENCE OF THE ABOVE.
+   YOUR COOPERATION IS THEREFORE SOLICITED IN PROVIDING COPIES OF THOSE
+   PROGRAMS WITH THE ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTATION ADVERTISED BY YOUR SITE AS
+
+
+
+Kantrowitz                                                      [Page 3]
+
+RFC 514                    NETWORK MAKE-WORK                5 June 1973
+
+
+   AVAILABLE FOR USE BY NETWORK.  IF THERE IS A CHARGE FOR THE MATERIAL
+   PLEASE PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION BEFORE INITIATING ANY ACTION.  IN
+   THOSE CASES WHERE THE PROGRAM RESIDES AT A GIVEN HOST SITE AND THE
+   DOCUMENTATION IS LOCATED ELSEWHERE SIMPLY PROVIDE THE LOCATION
+   INFORMATION.
+   RML IS ALSO ESTABLISHING A FILE OF HOST SITE PERSONNEL OR STAFF
+   INTERESTED IN OR POSSESSING PARTICULAR TECHNICAL TALENTS OR
+   CAPABILITIES IN ANY SCIENTIFIC FIELDS.  THE PERSONS NAME, CREDENTIALS
+   AND A SHORT SUMMARY OF PARTICULARS IS DESIRED AND WILL BE
+   APPRECIATED.  PLEASE MAIL COPIES OF THE PROGRAMS, DOCUMENTATION AND
+   PERSONNEL
+   INFORMATION TO -
+   LT.  COL.  E.P. SCHELONKA
+   RANGE MEASUREMENTS LABORATORY
+   ENLD
+   PATRICK AIR FORCE BASE, FLORIDA  32925
+   PLEASE SEND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF THIS MESSAGE INDICATING IF YOUR
+   SITE WILL PROVIDE THE REQUESTED MATERIAL AND INFORMATION.  SEND
+   REPLY TO RML->ISI ATTENTION G. CLARKE
+   -------
+
+
+         [ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ]
+           [ into the online RFC archives by Bill Vance 12/97 ]
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Kantrowitz                                                      [Page 4]
+