doc: Add RFC documents

1 files changed, 232 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc795.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc795.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e13b2db
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc795.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,232 @@
+
+
+Network Working Group                                          J. Postel
+Request for Comments:  795                                           ISI
+                                                          September 1981
+                            SERVICE MAPPINGS
+                            ----------------
+
+
+This memo describes the relationship between the Internet
+Protocol (IP) [1] Type of Service and the service parameters of specific
+networks.
+
+The IP Type of Service has the following fields:
+
+   Bits 0-2:  Precedence.
+   Bit    3:  0 = Normal Delay,      1 = Low Delay.
+   Bits   4:  0 = Normal Throughput, 1 = High Throughput.
+   Bits   5:  0 = Normal Relibility, 1 = High Relibility.
+   Bit  6-7:  Reserved for Future Use.
+
+      0     1     2     3     4     5     6     7
+   +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
+   |                 |     |     |     |     |     |
+   |   PRECEDENCE    |  D  |  T  |  R  |  0  |  0  |
+   |                 |     |     |     |     |     |
+   +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
+
+   111 - Network Control
+   110 - Internetwork Control
+   101 - CRITIC/ECP
+   100 - Flash Override
+   011 - Flash
+   010 - Immediate
+   001 - Priority
+   000 - Routine
+
+The individual networks listed here have very different and specific
+service choices.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Postel                                                          [Page 1]
+
+
+                                                          September 1981
+RFC 795                                                 Service Mappings
+
+
+
+AUTODIN II
+
+   The service choices are in two parts: Traffic Acceptance Catagories,
+   and Application Type.  The Traffic Acceptance Catagories can be
+   mapped into and out of the IP TOS precedence reasonably directly.
+   The  Application types can be mapped into the remaining IP TOS fields
+   as follows.
+
+      TA    DELAY    THROUGHPUT    RELIABILITY
+      ---   -----    ----------    -----------
+      I/A     1           0             0
+      Q/R     0           0             0
+      B1      0           1             0
+      B2      0           1             1
+
+      DTR    TA
+      ---   ---
+      000   Q/R
+      001   Q/R
+      010    B1
+      011    B2
+      100   I/A
+      101   I/A
+      110   I/A
+      111   error
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Postel                                                          [Page 2]
+
+
+                                                          September 1981
+RFC 795                                                 Service Mappings
+
+
+
+ARPANET
+
+   The service choices are in quite limited.  There is one priority bit
+   that can be mapped to the high order bit of the IP TOS precedence.
+   The other choices are to use the regular ("Type 0") messages vs. the
+   uncontrolled ("Type 3") messages, or to use single packet vs.
+   multipacket messages.  The mapping of ARPANET parameters into IP TOS
+   parameters can be as follows.
+
+      Type   Size   DELAY    THROUGHPUT    RELIABILITY
+      ----   ----   -----    ----------    -----------
+        0      S      1           0             0
+        0      M      0           0             0
+        3      S      1           0             0
+        3      M      not allowed
+
+      DTR   Type   Size
+      ---   ----   ----
+      000     0      M
+      001     0      M
+      010     0      M
+      011     0      M
+      100     3      S
+      101     0      S
+      110     3      S
+      111       error
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Postel                                                          [Page 3]
+
+
+                                                          September 1981
+RFC 795                                                 Service Mappings
+
+
+
+PRNET
+
+   There is no priority indication.  The two choices are to use the
+   station routing vs. point-to-point routing, or to require
+   acknowledgments vs. having no acknowledgments.  The mapping of PRNET
+   parameters into IP TOS parameters can be as follows.
+
+      Routing   Acks    DELAY    THROUGHPUT    RELIABILITY
+      -------   ----    -----    ----------    -----------
+        ptp      no       1           0             0
+        ptp      yes      1           0             1
+      station    no       0           0             0
+      station    yes      0           0             1
+
+      DTR   Routing   Acks
+      ---   -------   ----
+      000   station    no
+      001   station    yes
+      010   station    no
+      011   station    yes
+      100     ptp      no
+      101     ptp      yes
+      110     ptp      no
+      111     ptp      yes
+
+SATNET
+
+   There is no priority indication.  The four choices are to use the
+   block vs. stream type, to select one of four delay catagories, to
+   select one of two holding time strategies, or to request one of three
+   reliability levels.  The mapping of SATNET parameters into IP TOS
+   parameters can thus quite complex there being 2*4*2*3=48 distinct
+   possibilities.
+
+References
+----------
+
+   [1]  Postel, J. (ed.), "Internet Protocol - DARPA Internet Program
+        Protocol Specification," RFC 791, USC/Information Sciences
+        Institute, September 1981.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Postel                                                          [Page 4]
+