diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc514.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc514.txt | 227 |
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] + |