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/rfc967.txt | 114 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 114 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/rfc/rfc967.txt (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc967.txt') 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] + -- cgit v1.2.3