doc: Add RFC documents

1 files changed, 59 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc613.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc613.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f995ed9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc613.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group                                   Alex McKenzie
+RFC # 613                                               BBN-NET
+NIC # 21525                                             January 21, 1974
+
+
+             Network connectivity:  A response to RFC #603
+
+Network topology is a complicated political and economic question with
+obvious technical overtones.  I shall not attempt, in this note, to
+cover all the possible arguments which might be made, but merely to
+respond directly to the points raised in RFC #603.
+
+    1.  The important consideration in deciding whether it is good or
+    bad to have a node (AMES) be four connected is not how many circuits
+    are affected by a node failure; rather one should consider how well
+    the network is still connected after a node failure.  For example,
+    if ALL nodes in the network were four-connected I doubt that anyone
+    would argue that this was bad for reliability.  The weaknesses are
+    not the three-connected and four-connected nodes but rather the
+    ONE-connected (Hawaii, London) and two-connected nodes.  I must
+    agree with Burchfiel's implied argument that it is better to have
+    two adjacent three-connected nodes than to have a four-connected
+    node adjacent to a two-connected node;  unfortunately the realities
+    of installing interfaces and common carrier services cause the
+    Network to expand in sub-optimal ways.
+
+    2.  "Loops" are not good per se, they appear good because the act of
+    making loops increases the connectivity and thereby reduces the
+    effect of multiple failures.  Adding more circuits costs ARPA money,
+    both capital cost for IMP interfaces and recurring cost for the
+    circuits. The network group at BBN has suggested to ARPA several
+    times that "connectivity should be increased" but it was only late
+    in December 1973 that we made specific suggestions for the locations
+    of additional circuits.  These recommendations were not based on
+    building loops (although they may have that effect) but were based
+    on breaking the long chains of IMPs which have occurred as the
+    Network has grown.  ARPA and NAC are now presumably in the process
+    of evaluating our suggestions, and perhaps formulating other
+    possibilities.
+
+
+
+
+
+       [ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ]
+       [ into the online RFC archives by Alex McKenzie with    ]
+       [ support from GTE, formerly BBN Corp.            10/99 ]
+
+
+
+
+McKenzie                                                        [Page 1]
+