From 4bfd864f10b68b71482b35c818559068ef8d5797 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Voss Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 20:54:24 +0100 Subject: doc: Add RFC documents --- doc/rfc/rfc164.txt | 1795 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 1795 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/rfc/rfc164.txt (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc164.txt') diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc164.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc164.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..7c79edd --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc164.txt @@ -0,0 +1,1795 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group J. F. Heafner +Request for Comments: 164 Rand +NIC 6778 + + MINUTES OF NETWORK WORKING GROUP MEETING + 5/16 through 5/19/71 + + Preface + + These notes are for reference and recall by those in attendance of + the NWG meetings. No attempt has been made toward completeness to + make this an understandable document for those not in attendance. + + The notes are ordered chronologically. You may notice discrepancies + for particular schedules and tasks within the notes; the + discrepancies represent a revision of those schedules and tasks, thus + those dates given more recent in time are assumed to apply. + + If you detect any gross errors in this report, please make + corrections via the accepted NIC procedures. + + CONTENTS + + I. SUNDAY EVENING SESSION (5/10/71) ................. 4 + + Introduction of Attendees ........................ 4 + Site Status Reports .............................. 6 + + UCLA-Sigma 7 ................................... 6 + UCLA-CCN ....................................... 6 + UCSB ........................................... 7 + SRI-ARC/NIC .................................... 7 + SRI-AI ......................................... 7 + Rand ........................................... 8 + SDC ............................................ 8 + Illinois-CAC ................................... 9 + AMES ........................................... 9 + CCA ............................................ 10 + Case Western ................................... 10 + Carnegie ....................................... 10 + Harvard ........................................ 11 + IBM Research ................................... 11 + RADC ........................................... 11 + MIT-DM and MULTICS ............................. 11 + Lincoln ........................................ 12 + BBN-NCC ........................................ 12 + BBN/TENEX ...................................... 13 + Mitre .......................................... 13 + + + +Heafner [Page 1] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + NBS ............................................ 14 + ETAC ........................................... 14 + Air Force Sites ................................ 14 + + Other Reports ..................................... 15 + + Dept. Comm., Canada ............................. 15 + U. of Chicago ................................... 15 + United Kingdom .................................. 15 + Merit-Univ. Michigan ............................ 15 + EDUCOM .......................................... 16 + Raytheon ........................................ 16 + + Miscellaneous Topics .............................. 16 + + Graphics ........................................ 16 + NCP Protocols ................................... 16 + IMLAC Users Group ............................... 17 + Official Document Formats ....................... 17 + + II. MONDAY MORNING SESSION (5/17/71) ................. 18 + + Network Information Center ....................... 18 + + Plans for NIC .................................. 18 + Concepts & Recommendations for Documentation ... 18 + + TELNET ........................................... 19 + + III. MONDAY AFTERNOON SESSION (5/17/71) ............... 20 + + File Transfer Protocol (RFC #114) ................ 20 + File Protocol Status Report ...................... 20 + Miscellaneous Topics ............................. 20 + + Sockets ........................................ 20 + Initial Connection Protocol .................... 21 + Testing and Validation ......................... 21 + + IV. MONDAY EVENING SESSION (5/17/71) ................. 22 + + Operating Systems and Networks ................... 22 + + V. TUESDAY MORNING SESSION (5/18/71) ................ 24 + + DRS Working Group Meeting with Open Attendance ... 24 + Data Management on Computer Networks ............. 24 + Open Discussion on Data Management ............... 25 + + + +Heafner [Page 2] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + VI. TUESDAY EVENING SESSION (5/18/71) ................ 27 + + Terminal IMP ..................................... 27 + Comments by Dr. Roberts .......................... 27 + + VII. WEDNESDAY MORNING SESSION (5/19/71) .............. 30 + + VIII. WEDNESDAY EVENING SESSION (5/19/71) .............. 31 + + Miscellaneous Issues ............................. 32 + NWG Organization ................................. 32 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 3] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + I. SUNDAY EVENING SESSION (5/10/71) + +INTRODUCTION OF ATTENDEES + + Attendees introduced themselves and stated their affiliation. The + following list includes persons attending any of the sessions. + + + SITE NAME + + AMES-ILLIAC John McConnell + + AMES-67 Wayne Hathaway + + ARPA Bruce Dolan + Cordell Green + Larry Roberts + + BBN-NCC Will Crowther + Frank Hart + Robert Kahn + Alex McKenzie + + Carnegie William Broadley + H. Van Zoeren + + Case Patrick Foulk + + CCA Richard Winter + + Dept. Comm., Canada Terry Shepard + + EDUCOM Henry Chauncey + John LeGates + + Harvard R. Metcalfe + R. Sundberg + + IBM Research Douglas McKay + + Illinois-CAC Jack Bouknight + G. R. Grossman + Jim Madden + + Lincoln Labs Richard Kalin + Joel Winett + + + + + +Heafner [Page 4] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + Merit Al Cocanower + Brian S. Read + + Merit-Univ. Mich. W. Scott Gerstenberger + + MIT-DM Abhay Bhushan + Robert Fleischer + Albert Vezza + + MIT-MULTICS J. C. R. Licklider + Mike Padlipsky + + Mitre P. Karp + David Wood + Gene Raichelson + + NBS G. Lindamood + T. N. Pyke + + RADC Tom Lawrence + Bob Walker + + Rand E. F. Harslem + J. F. Heafner + + Raytheon T. O'Sullivan + + SDC Robert Long + Arie Shoshani + + SRI-ARC-NIC Charles Irby + John Melvin + R. W. Watson + + Stony Brook Ralph Akkoyunlu + Art Bernstein + M. Inam Ul Haq + Richard Schantz + + Univ. of Chicago R. Ashenhurst + + UCLA-CCN Robert Braden + Steve Wolfe + + + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 5] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + UCLA-NMC Vint Cerf + Steve Crocker + Ari Ollikainen + John Postel + Rollin Weeks + + UCSB Steve Lynch + Jim White + + U. K. Eric Foxley + + Univ. of London Peter Kirstein + + Univ. of Mo. Dan Garigan + + Univ. of Penna. Don Bernard + + Univ. of Waterloo Don Cowan + +SITE STATUS REPORTS + + The following are summaries of reports given by affiliates of the + indicated sites. + + UCLA-Sigma 7 + + o NCP (document 1) and user/server TELNET-like protocol have + been operational for three months. + + o NCP (RFC #107) will be implemented by June 1. + + o TELNET will be implemented within one month of official + specification. + + o Have been and will continue to gather Network measurements. + + o Will use UCSB file protocol in conjunction with above. + + + UCLA-CCN + + o Local hardware has been connected to IMP. + + o NCP (RFC #107) 70% complete. + + o NCP (RFC #107) and NETRJS will be in production on JULY 1. + + o Draft of NETCRT will be issued as RFC soon. + + + +Heafner [Page 6] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + o They can offer APL and are looking for interested users. + + + UCSB + + o UCSB is a service center; 360/75 + 2314 storage. + + o NCP (doc. 1) operational since mid-October 1970. + + o NCP (RFC #107) operational and verified remotely. + + o Services currently offered: + 1) UCSB on-line system + 2) RJE/RJ0 + 3) file system + 4) local interfaces to net via F0RTRAN, PL/1, etc. + + o Short range plans: + 1) DRS implementation and experimental service + 2) Interested in APL + 3) Distributed data base experiment with SRI + + SRI-ARC/NIC + + o Now running NCP (doc. 1) in TENEX. + + o NCP (RFC #107) will be installed when BBN releases it. + + o They are currently examining and tuning TENEX parameters and + resolving interface difficulties. + + o Stage 0 plans include initial work with West Coast sites to + gain experience, in using NIC, with respect to response + times, traffic loads. This will initially look like TENEX to + a user. Later, this will appear as a virtual machine to + remote users via a special NIC subsystem. + + SRI-AI (reported by SRI-ARC personnel) + + o Configuration includes PDP-10, TENEX, high-speed drum, robot. + + o Probable Network connection in July. + + o Software includes various theorem-proving mechanisms. + + o Interested in working on the above over the Network. + + + + + +Heafner [Page 7] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + RAND + + o Current configuration includes 360/65, 1800, IMP, video + graphics system. + + o NCP (RFC #107) in 360/65 in daily production use in + conjunction with UCSB. + + o Network Services Program (NSP) used in above features: + 1) dynamic access to local files + 2) access to video consoles + 3) access to NCP + 4) UCSB RJE/RJ0 protocol + 5) UCLA NETRJS protocol (not operational) + 6) Logger and TELNET-like protocols. + + o PDP-10 to be connected into Net (directly to IMP) in about + two months -- will eventually run TENEX and be a service + center. + + o Short range software development includes TELNET and DRS. + + o Will continue to provide production support for Climate + Dynamics. + + o Hardware is 360/65 connected to Honeywell 516 connected to + IMP. + + o NCP (doc. 1) verified with Rand. + + SDC + + o 360/65 runs Adept timesharing, has 10 users, can do protocols + from a user process. + + o NCP (RFC #107) will be coded by end of month. + + o Logger fairly close to being checked out. + + o Will have TELNET similar to RFC #137 by June 1; will offer it + by 20 August. + + + + + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 8] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + o SDC not meant to be a general service; will allow 1 to 4 + users; can use Adept to run a job. + + o Experimentation plans include: + 1) Voice I/O will use Net to communicate with speech + researchers (will respond to specific programs only) + 2) Eventually graphic I/O + 3) Man/machine synergism + 4) Network data management + 5) Network resources Notebook use and update. + + ILLINOIS-CAC + + o IMP works. + + o Will use B5500 on campus since B6500 doesn't work. + + o Will link to PDP-11 at Paoli for I4 software development -- + not a general link for everyone. + + AMES + + o Probably will be two separate nodes ILLIAC and 360/67. + + o Plans are in rumor stage. + + o Plan TIP by end of summer to gain access to I4 simulator. + + o Duplex 360/67 will be regular host node. + + o Are looking for an NCP implementer. + + o Will use other services; laser store and UCSB. + + o Their general research includes an interest in Network + accounting and management. + + o Will go onto Net as soon as possible to ILLINOIS. + + o Will go on via TIP if it can support two nodes. + + o Will define Net protocol for interactive graphics for I4. + + o Plan to get on Net before I4 comes up. + + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 9] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + CCA + + o CCA is responsible for data computer project. + + o It is special purpose computer with large storage device. + + o Data computer (PDP-10 and laser memory) should be viewed as + one black box. + + o Will have two ports -- high-speed to I4 and low-speed to IMP. + + o Data language and data will pass over ports. This will + include requests of files and portions of files, update, + manipulation, and transformation of data. It will not + include number crunching. Only access to the laser store + will be through the black box data computer. + + o Hardware and communications are specified. + + o Data computer services are beginning to be defined, (600 + questionnaires were sent out, 10 responses were received). + With regard to services please call Dick Winter on (617) + 491-3670. Dick wishes to hear from any potential user. + + o Laser store is one trillion bits of on-line storage packaged + in 40 packs containing 10 mylar strips each. Strips are kept + in a carousel that can be rotated and mounted in 10 seconds. + Access to any track is a maximum of 400 ms. + + o Laser will arrive at CCA in early 1972 and move in late '72. + Services to laser while located at CCA will be offered. + + o CCA will send out plans (as feasible) as RFCs. + + CASE WESTERN + + o Hardware has been built (PDP-10) and starting to test it. + + CARNEGIE + + o Hardware includes PDP-10 240K 36-bit words, TTY, etc. + + o Currently using DEC monitor. + + o Will modify Harvard's version of the monitor. + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 10] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + HARVARD + + o Hardware includes PDP-10 with PDP-1 as graphics devices + handler. + + o Hardware is up, talking back and forth. + + o NCP (RFC #107) for PDP-10 will be completed by the end of the + month. + + o PDP-10 has 48K 36-bit words; expect more core after July; + will then make NCP resident. + + o Interested in file transfer, graphics, extensible languages, + experiments of distributed processes. + + IBM RESEARCH + + o IBM will buy an IMP, now negotiating it. + + o They are designing new concept of Networking. + + o They will become an active node with either a 67 or a 91. + The candidate 91 now has 300-400K. + + RADC + + o TIP is scheduled for delivery in October. + + o They will provide local access to the SRI on-line system. + + o They are interested in the July graphics meeting sponsored by + MIT. (Al Vezza) + + MIT DM AND MULTICS + + o GE-645 runs MULTICS: PDP-10 is for dynamic modeling of + graphics systems. + + o NCP (RFC #107) on PDP-10 by end of week. + + o Logger on PDP-10 available by 15 June. + + o NCP (RFC #107) available on MULTICS by 11 June. + + o Logger and TELNET available on MULTICS by first week of July. + + + + + +Heafner [Page 11] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + o They have been conducting file transfer experiments of + simplified ASCII transfers (not RFC #114). + + o Interests include: + 1) File transfers + 2) E & S processing to IMLAC and ARDS formats + 3) DRS service. + + LINCOLN + + o Three connections are planned. + + o 360/67 has NCP, logger, TELNET, and some file transfer + protocol. + + o TX-2 NCP is being developed. An interim NCP is working with + file transfer experiments, error detection and correction. + + o They are experiencing hardware difficulties with the third + connection. + + o 360/67 has been running NCP (doc. 1) and a TELNET-like + protocol since 1 March. UCLA and Rand have logged in. The + TELNET-like protocol supports ASCII and EBCDIC. + + o NCP (RFC #107), TELNET, and logger will be operational on 67 + by 1 July. + + BBN-NCC + + + o NCC is responsible for maintaining the subnet and interfacing + with Honeywell and AT&T. They are planning a mechanism for + repair of the Net from their homes. The subnet has + experienced a 98% up time. + + o An operational 316 version of the IMP has been hooked into + the Net since February. It is a production item at 1/2 cost + of 516; the IMP programs are identical. + + o The 316 will be incorporated into the TIP. The multi-line + controller has been fabricated and is being debugged. A + common language for the TIP has been developed. TIP will be + delivered to NASA Ames on 1 August. The TIP will handle 64 + lines up to 19.2K bits. BBN is still shaking down the kinds + of terminals that will be compatible (will be bit serial at + least). They are working with sites to determine terminal + requirements. + + + +Heafner [Page 12] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + o The resource notebook has been compiled and distributed. + Twelve of 19 sites are included in the notebook. SDC has + since reported. Stanford, SRI/AI, MIT/DM, UTAH, Carnegie, + LL/67 have not provided an entry. BBN again made a call for + responses and asked that each site stay up-to-date. A + comment was made regarding the Notebook that a mechanism is + needed for a) date of information, b) complaints of + information, c) reporting that advertised procedures do not + work. + + o TIP delivery for the rest of the year is to the following + five sites: Ames, Mitre, Rome, ETAC in Washington, D.C., and + NBS. + + o BBN has been studying performance of Network to learn ways to + improve it. An earlier Rand RFC reported a very low rate for + a total Network experiment -- Rand re-ran the experiment to + examine just the subnet performance and reported the subnet + rate to be in the 13-15K bit range for that test. MIT/DM has + reported a 5KB rate that will be examined further. BBN made + a general offer to the Net community to phone NCC in the + event that such measurements are taken and low data rates are + discovered. + + o The BBN-Honeywell relationship is a straightforward + maintenance contract that includes P.M. and other problems + which arise. BBN stated that a 24-hour delay in service + would be unusually long. BBN would like to be kept informed + of views and opinions of the Honeywell service. BBN asks + that each site keep a maintenance log and copy it to Marty + Thrope at BBN. + + BBN/TENEX (reported by BBN/NCC) + + o BBN has a three-host IMP that includes NCC and two PDP-10s. + One 10 is for operational use, the other for experimentation. + + o Software for the PDP-10 is TENEX. + + o They are interested in getting involved in Network + experimentation. + + MITRE + + o Expect TIP delivery in September. + + o Now using PDP-10 at BBN. + + + + +Heafner [Page 13] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + o Will work on sample data management system using UCSB file + storage. + + NBS + + o Expect TIP delivery in December. + + o Have selected PDP-11 as host; ready by December. + + o Will build from the U. of Illinois operating system. + + o Contemplating attaching their UNIVAC 1108 to Network. + + o Will provide experimental access to Network for services: + 1) measurement (performance) + 2) graphics + 3) personal communication + 4) lab automation + 5) support NBS with services appropriate + 6) provide local hardcopy from PDP-11. + + ETAC (Environmental Technical Application Center + + o ETAC, located in the Washington area, is a branch of Global + Weather Service. + + o Air Weather Service in Omaha, Nebraska, has seven 1108s + providing weather data; one will be connected to Net to + provide daily weather information to ETAC in Washington. + + o ETAC has 1401 and 7040 in Washington to produce summaries for + longer range use; the 7040 may go on the Network. + + AIR FORCE SITES (reported by ARPA) + + o To export technology to other regions, two Air Force sites + (Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and Sacramento, California) will + temporarily join the ARPA Net to talk only to each other in + an operation to parallel their AUTODIN connection. If it + materializes, they will run for the first six months of '72 + but probably won't continue. The motivation is to examine + the Net ideas for developing a wholly autonomous network in + three or four years. + + + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 14] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + +OTHER REPORTS + + DEPT. COMM., CANADA + + The Canadian Government wishes to optimize the use of all + computers in Canada. + + They now have a banking network. + + They are interested in a small net for universities. + + Their largest problem is the size of the country in relation + to the sparseness of population. + + U. OF CHICAGO + + The University of Chicago has no current time schedule but + they have definite ideas about what they wish to accomplish + and they are seeking funding. They are applying to NSF to + support a local net on campus for lab automation. They have + good people and good equipment; the idea is to make it + coherent. + + Their interest in the ARPA Network is to make shared software + available to their people and to a limited extent, make local + services available to other ARPA nodes. Their proposed host + is a PDP-11 to the mini computers and a second host (PDP-10) + as a big software engine to make data available to the mini + computers. The PDP-10 and PDP-11 will perhaps be linked + together. They also expect to get a TIP to provide remote + number crunching for their people. + + UNITED KINGDOM + + They have proposed three main machines and three terminal + nodes. They have in mind the 906A, approximately the 360/75 + in power. + + Their Post Office also has plans for a digital network in the + distant future. + + MERIT + + MERIT-UNIV. MICH. + + Most of the bugs are out of the hardware. + + Most of the software is written. + + + +Heafner [Page 15] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + Will have PDP-11s by the end of the summer that are capable + of transmission from one to another. + + They will need and are now studying a TELNET-like protocol. + + They are concerned with orderly communication of the two + processors; will later become concerned about process-process + communication. + + EDUCOM + + EDUCOM involves 100 major universities including most of + those now in the ARPA Network. For two years, they have been + running a network without wires. They assume the ARPA + Network can resolve the technical issues. They are looking + into marketing, contracts, documenting, etc., for running the + network. They have conducted a survey of 70 universities, + polled about their interests in the ARPA network: 60 of 70 + are interested, 14 have money and are ready to become sites. + + RAYTHEON + + They will access the Net through the four Boston nodes. + + Their interests include: + 1) experiments of file transfer conversions. + 2) indexing behavioral data to allow one to search an index + to see if the body of data of interest is within the + Network. + +MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS + +Graphics + + Al Vezza will host a July meeting of a small group interested in + Network graphics. The price of admission is a sincere interest, + working background, and a prepared talk. + +NCP Protocols + + A new official document will replace document 1 and RFC #107; + implementation should not be held up because of the absence of this + new document. + + The long range protocol committee chaired by Carnegie has been + disbanded. + + + + + +Heafner [Page 16] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + +IMLAC Users Group + + A quick survey was taken to determine which sites had or planned to + get an IMLAC. The plan is to form an IMLAC users group. The + following sites have or plan to get one: UCLA-S7, AMES-67, BBN, + SRI-ARC, Stanford, MIT-DM, MIT-MULTICS, Mitre, Case, Raytheon, U. of + Illinois. + +Official Document Formats + + The notion of a functional document was suggested, one of which would + be the document of official protocols with divisions of levels of + protocols. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 17] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + II. MONDAY MORNING SESSION (5/17/71) + +NETWORK INFORMATION CENTER + +Plans for NIC + + Two activities are planned for this summer, off-line mail and on-line + access. The off-line service will continue after the on-line service + has come into being. Plans for getting on the Net via PDP-10 + (replaced XDS-940) are almost complete. Response times for display + use are marginal. + + The activities will be developed in stages. Stage 0 (June 18) NIC + will work with West Coast sites. This will involve providing NLS + facilities to allow people to create messages with initial delivery + as hardcopy, etc., with automatic generation of catalog entry and NIC + #. This system has been used locally for about a month. Stage 1 + (August 2) NIC will be open to the Net community as a whole. Remote + users will come in directly to the on-line system and will have on- + line access to the catalog. Users will be trained either at SRI or + at their own sites before coming on. Four to eight concurrent + terminals will be supported. Stage 2 will include file transfer + protocol, on-line delivery of messages, remote editing of SRI-located + text. Prior to stage 0, a course will be offered (on June 16, 17) + for UCLA, Rand, SDC, UCSB, Ames, and RADC for the use of Stage 0. + The second group of users (after stage 0) will use NIC to do their + own site documentation. + +Concepts & Recommendations for Documentation + + The NIC # is a unique "name" for reference -- it has no other + meaning. Other numbering schema such as RFC numbers will eventually + go away. However, the subgroups, such as RFCs, will remain. + Appropriate set manipulators will be provided for assisting in + storage and retrieval. + + The notion of functional documents was introduced (see RFC #115). + This is to be a document whose purpose is reasonably stable over + time. It can have subdocuments that change more frequently. A + current list of functional documents includes the NIC Catalog, + Directory of People, Resources Notebook, Protocols, and Site + Facilities (one for each site). + + The mechanism of documentation is the responsibility of NIC; the + document contents are the responsibility of the author. There are + two cases of document revision; replace part of the document and + replace the entire document. In general, NIC would like the document + + + + +Heafner [Page 18] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + to be re-issued in its entirety with a new NIC # rather than issuing + errata. The functional documents are in looseleaf form, new pages + can be issued with the same number and a revision date. + + Documents are reproduced and mailed to site liaisons 24-48 hours + after receipt. They are mailed to station agents on a weekly basis. + When mailing is handled directly by a site, a copy of the document + and a distribution list should also be sent to NIC. In the past, NIC + has supplied abstracts of documents for the catalog; NIC requests + that the authors include an abstract. + +TELNET + + The purpose of TELNET is to provide an immediate mechanism for + communication between keyboard terminals and serving processes, with + sufficient platform for later expansion and sophistication. + + Tom O'Sullivan described TELNET as delineated in RFC #137. (Later in + these NWG meetings, Tom issued RFC #158, a new TELNET protocol.) + After the description, many issues and questions were raised, viz., + can TELNET expect "recovery" from NCP, 128 vs. 256 character set, DLE + + 7-bit code vs. high-order bit on, should protocol extend service + beyond what level consoles see, human factors, if information is + available at second level should it be passed to TELNET, TWX-like + service from NIC, mailbox protocol, etc. + + In large part, these issues were raised but not resolved. It was + agreed that an RFC would be forthcoming (RFC #158, published later at + the meetings) followed by a functional document. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 19] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + III. MONDAY AFTERNOON SESSION (5/17/71) + +FILE TRANSFER PROTOCOL (RFC #114) + + The file transfer protocol (RFC #114) was described. See also RFC + #133 and RFC #141. + + A simplified version of RFC #114 is being implemented by MIT/DM and + MIT/MULTICS in order to: 1) allow Dynamic Modeling access to MULTICS + file storage facility and 2) conduct a pilot project to gain + understanding of such protocols. + + It was noted that RFC #114 was not simple enough to implement for + TIPs. + + A group was formed to meet Wednesday morning for more discussion and + to exactly define the problems. The group would include + representatives from UCLA, UCSB, BBN, MIT, Rand, SRI, Harvard. + +FILE PROTOCOL STATUS REPORT + + UCSB described the status of RFC #122, A Simple Minded File System, + as an operational program; not a proposal. The basic concepts of the + file system were described; the design objective was to provide a + simple service quickly. + + Currently one 2314 drive and pack is available. At most four drives + will be made available during the next year. It is also not clear + how long space will remain available. The storage is currently free. + + Sites that will use the file system are Mitre, via BBN, UCLA, SRI, + and Raytheon via one of the Boston hosts. + +MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS + +Sockets + + Socket name structure was briefly discussed. Relevant RFCs that were + mentioned were 1) RFC #129 whose purpose was to describe socket + structures enumerated at the February NWG meetings, and 2) RFC #147, + a recently proposed structure. + + It was pointed out that there was a definite need to reduce the + socket length from 32 to 16 bits (a TIP storage problem) regardless + of its structure. + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 20] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + A committee (Bob Metcalfe, Chairman with Abhay Bhushan and Joel + Winett) was appointed to produce a report in two weeks. The + committee is to address the following three issues: + + 1) is a socket structure needed + 2) are more than 16 bits needed + 3) what procedures are recommended for managing socket numbers. + +Initial Connection Protocol + + Race conditions and time out problems were elucidated. See RFC #123, + 127, and 151. + + A committee (chaired by Jon Postel and including Steve Wolfe, Eric + Harslem, and Arie Shoshani) was appointed to clean up the ICP + specification. + +Testing and Validation + + Sites wishing a remote partner to exchange NCP, TELNET, and logger + protocols can contact Rand. Rand was to collect status information + before and during these exercises. Information was to be forwarded + to Alex McKenzie to maintain and update status reports. (NOTE: A + later steering committee decision reflects on the way in which this + information is gathered, however. Rand is still available for + testing and validation.) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 21] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + IV. MONDAY EVENING SESSION (5/17/71) + + NOTE: Minutes of this session were kindly prepared by Bob Walker, + RADC. + +OPERATING SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS + + An attempt was made to study the ARPA Networks from an academic point + of view. An analogy was drawn on the basis that the ARPA Network + with its hosts and protocols is in a sense an "operating system" and + that a study of what makes a good operating system might help define + what makes a good ARPA Network. + + Professor Art J. Bernstein of Stony Brook gave a presentation + abstracting what he considered to be the features of a flexible + operating system, the techniques for obtaining such; and when + appropriate, a discussion of those aspects where a difference in + techniques is required between dealing with an internal operating + system and dealing with a network. + + The features of a flexible operating system were cited as: (1) a + flexible file structure, (2) a process hierarchy, and (3) an + interprocess communication facility (IPC). The terminology and + techniques described to obtain these three features were essentially + those developed for the MULTICS system. + + A file structure capability was defined in terms of hierarchy of + directories, tree names, active file table, hold count, known file + table, and reference number. + + A process hierarchy was discussed in terms of father-son relationship + and a father-node spawning a son node, creating an entry in the known + file table and assigning resources, all embodied in the SPAWN + primitive. Implementation of primitives as time independent was + stressed as being crucial to Network activity whereas not necessarily + so for an internal operating system. This lead into the concept + subcontracting process, where executive type functions are treated on + the same basis as user processes and as such are swappable. The + "link process" was then described as the interface mechanism between + two cooperating machines. + + Interprocess communication was discussed in terms of channels, status + return and software interrupts. Appropriate primitives were defined + in detail as well as control type problems. + + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 22] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + The discussion then went to file handling and a specification of the + required primitives and thence to directory handling, specification + of related primitives, and the mechanics of directory handling, + specifically the outstanding operation entry table in the executive. + + After a short recess, Bob Metcalfe gave a presentation from the ARPA + Network point of view with reference to various points of Professor + Bernstein's presentation. He noted the all pervasive tree structure + in Bernstein's presentation which appears to be most efficient to + internal operating systems (i.e., file system, process hierarchy, + etc.), but that the ARPA Network is not a tree structure but rather a + directed graph and that we should be careful not to impose tree + structure thinking on a directed graph type situation. + + A number of questions and problem areas were elicited from the group + and listed on the blackboard: + 1) How much does the operating system need to know about the + Network to get how much and vice versa? + 2) Degree of transparency to the user? + 3) "Optimal" resource allocation on the Network? + 4) Autonomy versus centralization of control. + 5) Resiliency. + + The group discussed the need for a committee on Theory, how it should + function, how often should they meet, requirements for attendance, + etc. Dave Walden was mentioned as a possible organizer of a related + effort. Bob Metcalfe agreed to chair such a committee. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 23] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + V. TUESDAY MORNING SESSION (5/18/71) + +DRS WORKING GROUP MEETING WITH OPEN ATTENDANCE + + The purpose of the Data Reconfiguration Service meeting was to + resolve several lingering syntax and semantics issues and also to + receive comments and discuss the DRS with the entire Net community. + + A brief overview of the DRS (see RFC #138) was given. + + Remaining technical issues were resolved. An implementation + specification (replacing RFC #138) will be issued soon. + + Initial implementers and users were polled for schedules and initial + experiments, results are shown below. + + MIT No dates currently provided + U. of Ill. One or two months will be required to reformat from remote + formats to GOULD printer; also conversion of ARDS to + COMPUTEC strings. + UCSB Implementation of service in two months; will provide + system forms for remote TTY-like devices to access UCSB + on-line system. + MITRE Will compare performance of DRS to current software of + UCSB file experiment. + Rand implement service by September; initial use to specify + UCSB RJE/RJ0 and UCLA NETRJS formats for local users. + UCLA will have a compiler of forms within one month unless + serious difficulties arise. + +DATA MANAGEMENT ON COMPUTER NETWORKS + + SDC presented RFC #144 (see also RFC #146). Arie Shoshani presented + considerations and approaches that can be taken to achieve data + sharing. The considerations were common language, sharing of + existing data, evolutionary/revolutionary, future and use facility, + further development, implementation, and speed. + + Approaches given were: + 1) centralized + a) new data only + b) existing data + 2) standardized data + 3) integrated - common languages + interfaces + a) interface on different nodes + b) interface on service node + c) Data Reconfiguration Service + 4) Unified + + + +Heafner [Page 24] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + Dick Winter described the CCA approach. With several data computers + it becomes decentralized. All data computers have identical hardware + and software. Their objective is to dispose and restructure data + throughout the Net to optimize its use, i.e., relocate it close to + where it is used most heavily. For small files of wide interest + multiple copies can be maintained. + + Dr. Roberts commented that with respect to the Network, no + distance/cost relationship exists if data is retrieved more than one + link away. The reason for putting files in several places is + reliability. He views the CCA approach as a Net-level language, thus + the unified approach. Also the natural language approach is suitable + as a research project but not suitable for data management for real + Net experiments. + + CCA will present a proposal of data language at the next NWG meeting. + +OPEN DISCUSSION ON DATA MANAGEMENT + + This time period was initially allocated to the description of a + particular data management system being constructed by Mitre. It + became, in fact, an open discussion of general principles and + requirements for data management in the Network. The following were + among the most recurrent comments made. + + 1. DRS, file protocol, and data management should be examined in a + comprehensive way. + + 2. Important considerations of data management are to allow users to + define and restructure files logically, to move towards + transparency of the Net, and to move toward natural language. + + 3. A data management system should include functions for define, + access, manipulate, analyze, store of files. For example, the + data computer doesn't do formatting for output (like an RPG), it + can take a number of conditions and do conditional retrieval but + not RPG. + + 4. A data management system could be developed in stages where a) + the user explicitly moves data around the Net, b) the user + specifies the location but the access is integrated + automatically, c) location is maintained by the service. + + 5. An area should be defined between file handling and application + specific manipulation, and the area should be treated in a system + wide way. + + + + + +Heafner [Page 25] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + 6. The super file (too large for any one individual to economically + own) never came up before but it is reasonable for the Net. + However it is just one use and there still will be need of many + 10^9 files. + + 7. Privacy and security criteria should be applied at output rather + than input, which is an argument for having processing capability + at the location of the file. + + 8. Dr. Roberts indicated that the things that are important are what + things are on the Net, and what things are there to say. The + structure depends on what there is to say. Thus, one should + concentrate on the language and not the structure. + + 9. The data management system can be viewed as having two parts: 1) + the request, 2) the response and format. On the response side + (operand side) there is the taxonomy of data types and a template + of data followed by the data. A template is a string in which + data types or their descriptions are given with knowledge of + iteration, recursion, and data types. On the request (operator) + side, templates can be used to precisely specify the data to be + retrieved, assuming the structure of the file is already + specified. + + 10. The disposition and request are over structures to the response. + + A small group was established to continue discussion on data + management. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 26] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + VI. TUESDAY EVENING SESSION (5/18/71) + +TERMINAL IMP + + The TIP can either be configured with 1) one host and two phone lines + or 2) three phone lines. Interfaces will provide 19.2KB to lowest + TTY speeds for each line. It can handle various terminals and + devices. + + Normally the user speaks through the TIP but a primitive language + exists for talking to the TIP. Commands will exist to do the + particular protocols such as logger. Other commands will be present + for terminate on line feed, on character, now, on nth char., at end + of message, i.e., class of things to determine when message is sent. + There is another class to determine echoing. Device rates can be set + up. The serving site can also set up command such as capturing a + printer. + + The TIP is currently trying to comply with all second and third level + protocols such as TELNET, file transfer (when defined). + + Current plans are that the TIP cannot be reloaded through the + Network. + + When new terminals are added, BBN will supply the TIP routines as + part of the service. + + The TIP is intended to be used for RJE, terminal to process, and + later tape to tape. The TIP is intended to be a switch rather than + an operating system, under the assumption that power will reside in + terminals and service centers. + + The program limits the bandwidth -- the sum of input and output is + 100KB. + + Potential for TIP delivery is about one every three weeks after + August. An upper figure for the TIP is $100K; the leasable terms are + $40K/yr. for three years plus a residual of $5K to own it, with a + two-year minimum. This was designed as an alternate method of + purchase. + +"COMMENTS BY DR. ROBERTS" + + The major cost benefit in the near term to getting on the Network + will be to use other physical systems to access new resources. It + will be a number of years before people enter the Network in order to + get rid of machines or to boost CPU usage. + + + + +Heafner [Page 27] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + Regarding future Network growth, the University of California has + proposed to enter seven universities into the Network. We should + have the data and program sharing protocols fixed by that time. ETAC + will be working on the past 10 years weather in 10^11 store. NCAR + will be trading time (a 6600 and a 7600) with them and with ILLIAC; + use is restricted to weather work. January or February are probable + dates. This will be a third cross country connection through UTAH + perhaps (second is via Omaha weather). SC will be added in March or + April '72 for picture processing. England will join about February ' + 72. There are other plans to tie in Mexico, France, Israel, + Australia, Japan, Hawaii, Canada, etc. that could possibly all happen + in '72. + + With regard to operating the Network, ARPA will not operate it + indefinitely. One plan is to have AT&T operate it since they can + legally sell the services; this will not come about soon. A + commercial organization (not a common carrier) can only operate the + Net under Government sponsorship. The current plan is to have BBN + run the Net as a service for the Government; this will be settled + within the coming year. + + On the question of resources, setting up contracts with the service + people at each site to get one agent to ship money for various + subcontracts is a basic legal framework; for ARPA purposes it is + sufficient to have only one connection with each site. + + On software development, the NCP progress has been extremely poor and + slow. The second iteration should have been defined by now from + experiences with the first. Towards the end of the year a new + protocol should be defined to last for a couple of years. Accounting + and billing protocol should also be defined. The NCP protocol is + getting to be a critical problem -- everyone should be complete and + consistent with the current protocol by July 1. Without it, there + will be serious problems of bringing new people onto the Net. For + example, the I4 and the laser store will be on the Net by March or + April of '72 with serious people wanting to use it (80% of its use + will be remote). By early '72 the Net must be a solid working + entity. + + The question of profit making time-sharing companies on the Net + depends on whether or not AT&T takes over Net operations. + + The capital arrangement for non-ARPA users to be on the Net is as + follows. A federal agency can donate $76K and get a TIP. Non- + federal agencies can pay $36K per year for the TIP for three years + plus the $5K residual to own it. ARPA will not decide casually to + allow non-federal agencies on. + + + + +Heafner [Page 28] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + Regarding software support services, documentation will be upgraded + so all sites need not keep complete NIC documentation (except service + sites). In service centers it makes sense to add one or two + personnel to work on net service programs, work with users, etc., if + needed. Research centers will now have to concern themselves with + reliability, integrity, and problems of access. + + Regarding the charging mechanism for the data computer, the 10^12 + store cost one million, plus the cost of the PDP-10; thus 10^-4 + cents/bit is reasonable for permanent storage. The rate for short + term storage strips (like two weeks) will be about the same. If + medium term storage is needed, a rate will be worked out. ARPA will + pay for this storage as backup for the sites. + + The on-lineness of NIC is very important for initial use, but we must + have something better than TTY or CRT. The Net is cheaper than the + mails. (Electrostatic hard-copy devices were briefly mentioned). + + Regarding new developments for AI symbolic processing, a plan hatched + by Alan Kay is to have lots of processor, lots of core and a big + switch with the capability of serving users in the Net. It is to + provide low cost core space (economics of processing are not known). + This may become associated with some experimental hardware + development facility since the desire is to be able to build new + architecture in a reasonable amount of time. It should be 10 to 100 + times faster than the PDP-10 with earliest delivery in '73. + + The speech effort is on the order of three million per year. The + concern now is to be able to tie together pieces at various sites for + comparative evaluation. The cross-testing can have an impact on the + researcher, but everybody must maintain compatible interfaces. + + The climatology program is for predicting future long-range climate + of the World that comes about by perturbations. Various sites are + involved at various levels and it is hard to get these people to big + computers, to the data bases, and with each other. The Network + provides their total communication path with the I4. Direct and + effective use of the Network can be made without much more of an + investment; the Rand/UCSB work is a good example. + + + + + + + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 29] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + VII. WEDNESDAY MORNING SESSION (5/19/71) + + This session began with discussion of file transfer protocol, led by + Abhay Bhusan. It was decided that the current file transfer protocol + should be parsed into two pieces -- a data transfer protocol front- + end that could be used for file transfer and other protocols, and the + file mechanism protocol. This problem was referred to the committee + which met for the remainder of the day to specify the data transfer + and file protocols. An RFC will be forth-coming, describing these + protocols. + + The data management group met in parallel Wednesday. An RFC will be + forthcoming on their results. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 30] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + VIII. WEDNESDAY EVENING SESSION (5/19/71) + + The following information was summarized by Steve Crocker. + + Committees Publication Date Approval Date + + ICP - Postel 5/27 6/3 + File Transfer - Bhusan 6/7 --- + Data Mgmnt. - McKay (7/21) --- + Socket Struc. - Metcalfe 6/22 --- + Telnet - O'Sullivan 5/19 6/10 + Theory - Metcalfe --- --- + DRS - Heafner 6/1 --- + Graphics - Vezza (7/18) --- + + The following inputs were provided to Steve Crocker on implementation + dates of NCP (RFC #107) and TELNET (RFC #158). + + Service Hosts NCP + TELNET + + CCN 7/1 + LL/67 6/15 + SRI/NIC (6/18) + MIT/MULTICS 7/1 + BBN/10X ? + UCSB/75 Up + + __Host__ NCP (RFC #107) TELNET (RFC #158) + + UCLA/S7 6/1 6/15 + Rand Up 6/15 + Utah Up 6/15 + U. of Ill. 7/1 7/1 + Harvard ? ? + MIT/DM 5/25 6/25 + + The following inputs were provided to Steve Crocker on schedules for + current and pending work. + + Users Tasks + + Mitre data management in progress + + Raytheon data sharing (August) + + NBS PDP-11 via low-speed phone line + (July) + + + + +Heafner [Page 31] + +RFC 164 Minutes of Network Working Group Meeting May 1971 + + + BBN validation of resource notebook + (July 15) + + UCLA data store, retrieval, reduction + (July 1) + + DM/MULTICS/Harvard graphics, file transfer (July 1) + + Ames/67 I4 simulator (July 15) + climate with UCSB (now) + climate with UCLA (July 1) + DRS (September) + SRI/NIC (August) + LL LISP (?) + + LL TX2 speech data + TX2 data transfer (now) + TSP compiler (September) + + U. of Ill. remote use (July 1) + link to Paoli (July 1) + +Miscellaneous Issues + + Alex McKenzie will generate the NCP functional document in one month + as an experiment. + + Service documents to be sent to NIC include normal user documentation + you would use at the site plus special conventions (if any) for + remote users. Read RFC #115 and RFC #118. + +NWG Organization + + There is some concern over the size of the NWG. Its functions and + reorganization were discussed. Nothing definitive resulted + immediately. It was suggested by Steve Crocker that another NWG + meeting would be held in August. + + Dr. Roberts and Steve Crocker created a steering committee to examine + this and other problems. More will be said about the steering + committee by Steve Crocker, at a later date. + + + [ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ] + [ into the online RFC archives by Nicholas Barnes 08/99 ] + + + + + + +Heafner [Page 32] + -- cgit v1.2.3