1 files changed, 114 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc967.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc967.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0df0673
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc967.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
+
+
+Network Working Group                                    M. A. Padlipsky
+Request for Comments: 967                              Mitre Corporation
+                                                           December 1985
+
+                          All Victims Together
+
+
+STATUS OF THIS MEMO
+
+   This RFC notes a significant omission from the networking literature
+   and proposes to remedy it.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
+
+DISCUSSION
+
+   An interesting thing happened the other day. Some people were up
+   visiting from IBM Federal Systems Division and, during the course of
+   the conversation, one of them pointed out that they had just as much
+   if not more trouble with the operating system purveyors about making
+   OS "changes" in behalf of networking as anyone else. At the time I
+   just observed that it looked as if we were all victims together and
+   went on to the next point, but further reflection prompts me to offer
+   a few thoughts on the topic to the RFC community:
+
+   o   To us, it's axiomatic that networking code is system code when it
+       has to be.
+
+   o   To Them, it's anathema.
+
+   o   We haven't really hit very hard on the point in the literature
+       (although I guess I have made a few strong assertions along those
+       lines, here and there, and it's at least implicit in some of Dave
+       Clark's stuff), unless in my usual slipshod fashion I've just
+       missed seeing it.
+
+   o   It would probably be responsible of us to rectify the omission
+       (assuming there is one) since the literature is supposed to be
+       the way the researchers educate the practioners.
+
+   o   Therefore, I propose a new subseries of RFCs on how the
+       networking code was integrated with various OSs, with an eye
+       toward subsequent publication of the collection in the open
+       literature (RFCs being only semi-open, after all). I'll even
+       volunteer to coordinate, at least to the extent of taking offers
+       from people who are willing to tackle various systems and telling
+       them who else is having a bash at the same one for purposes of
+       possible collaboration--and possibly even merging the results of
+       separate efforts if people just send in things they've already
+       done. (I suppose I even have to offer to do a bit of editing, if
+       people want.)
+
+
+
+
+Padlipsky                                                       [Page 1]
+
+
+
+RFC 967                                                    December 1985
+All Victims Together
+
+
+   What I'd like to see emerge is a bunch of little essays along the
+   lines of what I attempted to do on Multics in RFC 928, pp.14-21,
+   which would probably be a waste of electrons to reproduce here, but I
+   will if Jon thinks it's worthwhile at some level. With luck,
+   volunteers will emerge to discuss all of the major operating systems
+   currently on the net and most of the minor ones as well, since one of
+   the most interesting philosophical aspects of the exercise is to see
+   just what cuts and pastes get made to any OS if it's networked. My
+   guess is that given more modern systems' tendencies to make adding
+   device drivers more straightforward and to offer interprocess
+   communication primitives at the system level, the likeliest
+   difficulties to encounter would be getting on the process creation
+   path appropriately for Telnet--but that's reasoning ahead of the
+   data. Suffice it to say that each piece should address Host-Host
+   protocol interpreter(s) integration as well as Host-Comm Subnet
+   Processor PI (including device driver, if one), plus something about
+   Telnet and something else about FTP (at least to the extent of
+   whether it's per-user or "monolithic"--on the server side, that is),
+   and, of course, some relevant anatomizing of the OS itself.
+
+   The moral, it seems to me, is that we have a chance to strike back at
+   the oppressors by showing them what they should be furnishing with
+   their silly off-the-rack systems if they are going to continue to
+   object to our alterations to make the bloody things fit anywhere near
+   right. It's a little extra effort on our part, but it's probably a
+   worthy goal. Indeed, if anybody from IPTO is watching I suppose I'd
+   even go so far as to suggest a pro tem System Integration Task force
+   if I hadn't already volunteered once in this thing and used up my
+   quota.
+
+   Think about it.
+
+EDITOR'S NOTE
+
+   The editor recalls a session at the 5th Data Communication Symposium
+   (the one at Snowbird) titled "Impact of Networks on Host-System
+   Design and Architecture". (1977)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Padlipsky                                                       [Page 2]
+