GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:ien:ien3

IEN # 3 Jon Postel Supercedes: None ISI Replaces: None 18 August 1977

                   1.4.1  INTERNET Meeting Notes
                           15 August 1977

Editors Remarks

Here are some notes from the Internet meeting held at ISI on 15 August
1977.  The notes are incomplete, and remarks attributed to individuals
may be in error.

Agenda

Opening Remarks - Danny Cohen
Meeting Objectives - Vint Cerf
Current Internet Plans - Vint Cerf
Issues in Internetting - Andrew Hinchley & Chris Bennett
Gateway Monitoring - Bob Bressler
International Standards - Vint Cerf
X.25 Gateway Interface Experiment - Peter Kirstein
Type of Service Issues - Danny Cohen
Internet Mail Service - Steve Crocker
Wrap Up - Vint Cerf
Future Meetings - Vint Cerf

Opening Remarks - Danny Cohen

Cohen discussed the agenda and the rules of the meeting, Danny is
moderator and can recognize people to speak or cut people off if
necessary.

Meeting Objectives - Vint Cerf

Cerf presented the following meeting objectives:
  Review the current internet plans
  Raise and discuss internet research issues
  Compose a list of objectives of internet research
  Prepare a prioritized list of internet tasks
  Prepare a prioritized list of internet experiments

Section 1.4.1 [page 1]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

Current Internet Plans - Vint Cerf

Cerf reviewed the current (FY 78) Internet Plan:
  TCP Development
    UCLA - 360/91
    MIT  - Multics
    BBN  - Tenex, Tops 20, Unix
    SRI  - LSI-11
    NDRE - NORD-10
    UCL  - PDP-9 (?)
  Network Development
    BBN     - ARPANET (gateway routing, flow control, broadcasting)
    MIT/LCS - LCSNET, CHAOSNET
    Collins & BBN - Packet Radio Network Broadcasting
    MIT/EE  - Theory (spanning trees...)
  Gateways
    BBN    - Packet Radio / ARPANET
    BBN    - Packet Satellite / ARPANET
    BBN    - ARPANET / RCCNET
    BBN    - Gateway Control Center
    XEROX  - Packet Radio / Ethernet
    MIT    - ARPANET / LCSNET(s)
    UCL    - EPSS / ARPANET
    UCL    - EPSS / Packet Satellite
    UCL    - X.25 Net Issues
    BBN    - Gateway flow control, routing, reporting, checks and
    balances, etc.
    UCLA   - Internet performance modelling and analysis, gateway flow
    and congestion control
    MIT/EE - Relibility of internetworking, alternate routing
    ISI    - Fast network deployment, addressing, authentication

Section 1.4.1 [page 2]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

  Internet Performance Measurement
    UCLA - Internet Measurement Center
    UCL  - Internet Gateway traffic generation and performance
    measurement
  Internet Services
    ISI - Internet Mail
  Protocol Development
    ISI - Internet Types of Service (TOS)
    ISI - Conferencing, multi-connection synchronization
    LL  - Packet Satellite / internet speech [NDRE, UCL, LL, BBN,
    LPCMs]
    SRI - Impact of TOS on Packet Radio
    ISI - Protocol Modelling and Testing/Evaluation System
Cerf: We need a specification for a gateway so that other
inplementations will come out the same.
Cerf reviews related working groups:
  TCP working group ( V. Cerf - ARPA) focuses on TCP as an end to end
  protocol in an internet environment, technical orentation.
  Packet Radio working group (D. Neilson - SRI)
  Packet Satellite working group (I. Jacobs - Linkabit)
  Internet working group (D. Cohen - ISI) focuses on network
  interconnection problems and plans internetwork experiments.

Section 1.4.1 [page 3]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

Cerf reviews the "number czars" for various note series etc:
  PSPWNs - Lin-Nan Lee (Linkabit) [JACOBS@ISIE]
  PRTNs  - Ron Kunzelman (SRI) [PRSETD@ISIC]
  IENs   - Jon Postel (ISI) [POSTEL@ISIB]
  Network Identifiers - Jon Postel (ISI) [POSTEL@ISIB]
  Internet Messages Types - Jon Postel (ISI) [POSTEL@ISIB]
Cerf reviews the forecast of events in interneting:
  TCP Development
    Sep 77 - Experimental small-machine Top20 TCP
    Oct 77 - Unix TCP
    Nov 77 - Operational small-machine Tops20 TCP
    Dec 77 - Nord 10 TCP
    Jan 78 - Tenex TCP
    May 78 - large-machine Tops20 TCP
    Jul 78 - 360/91 TCP
  Network Development
    Sep 77 - 2 node PR test cell in Boston
    Jan 78 - LCS Net
    Jun 78 - PR Net Broadcast
    Dec 78 - ARPANET Broadcast
  Gateways
    Oct 77 - Ethernet/PR net
    Dec 77 - Gateway monitoring center
    Jan 78 - LCSNet/ARPANET
    Jan 78 - X.25 Epss interface / SATNET
    Apr 78 - Gateway flowcontrol, routing etc specification
    Oct 78 - Gateway flow control, routing, etc. Pass 1 implemented
    Jan 79 - PR Net in Army C2 test bed

Section 1.4.1 [page 4]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

  Performance Measurements
    May 78 - SATNET/ARPANET/EPSS/PRNET performance tests (UCL)
    Oct 78 - Internet Measurement Center (UCLA)
    Jan 79 - Internet performance tests
    Mar 79 - Rapid deployment tests
  Protocol Development
    Sep 77 - TCP 2.5 specification
    Jan 78 - Unix telnet
    Mar 78 - Tenex & Tops20 Telnet
    Apr 78 - Draft TOS Specification
    May 78 - Prototype FAX specification from UCL
    Jul 78 - Prototype internet mail service
    Aug 78 - Tenex & Tops20 FTP
    Sep 78 - Internet speech conferencing specification
    Oct 78 - 360/91 telnet & ftp
    Mar 79 - Internet speech conferencing tests
    Jun 79 - Speech & Video conferencing specification
  Demos
    Sep 77 - Point to point raw internet speech demo
    May 79 - Internet services demo
Cerf: We need a specification of how a gateway should behave to
cooperate with a gateway control center.
Kirstein: EPSS and SATNET will have X.25 interfaces but there is no
plan for an X.25 interface to the ARPANET.
Cerf: The issue of secure internetting is postponed.
Cerf: There is consideration of an effort to develop a new ftp, but
there is no plan as yet.
Kirstein: FAX might be worked into the speech and video conferencing
system.

Section 1.4.1 [page 5]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

Kirstein:  Are LLL or Commercial nets to be involved in internet
experiments?
Cerf: LLL is interested in TCP for the local to Livermore Octopus net
not the CTR net.
Cerf: No current plans to get commerical nets involved.
Kirstein: What is happening about AUTODIN II and ARPANET as described
at TCP Meeting?
Cerf: That plan is no longer active, and it is not expected that there
will be any move to get people off the ARPANET until 1980, after that
AUTODIN II service may be offered instead of ARPANET on a customer by
customer basis.
Kirstein: It seems more likely that university type users will have to
go to a commerical net than get on AUTODIN II, so shouldn't we be
exploring internetting with commercial nets now?

Issues in Internetting - Andrew Hinchley & Chris Bennett

Hinchley & Bennett discussed the paper (PSPWN 76, INDRA 637) "Issues
in the Interconnection of Datagram Networks" that was distributed
prior to the meeting.
Hinchley: there are three catagories of interconnections:
  1) ARPA like datagram networks,
  2) PTTs X.25 networks, note that the PTTs are moving very fast with
  a model of an internetwork system composed of a small number of very
  large national networks,
  3) Interconnection of private networks via public X.25 networks.
  The SATNET experience is the basis for these (PSPWN 76) comments.
Cerf: Is a gateway a piece of hardware physically connected to two or

Section 1.4.1 [page 6]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

more networks, or is it pair(s) of software modules connected by
physically complicated networks ?
Kirstein: We should be more aware of what is going to be possible with
PTT provided "virtual call networks".
Bennett: Addressing is a topic discussed in the memo.
Cerf: Up to now we have not had names for gateways, but now we may
need names if gateway control centers are to communicate directly with
gateways.
Cerf and Crocker discuss gateway models, one point was that one should
try a model with a three or more connected gateways since sometimes a
two connected model may make things seem simpler than they really are,
another point is that a gateway is a kind of a forwarder, and Crocker
argues that the forwarder is logically a network.
Postel: An address is just a string of bits, with each address parser
consuming part of the string, to give a gateway an address reserve one
value of the set of values representable in the bits the gateway
parses, that reserved value means "here".
Kirstein expressed concern about the address space in the individual
networks.  Also concerned about translations necessary when going
between datagram and virtual call networks.
Cerf: Does the way a thing is named specify the way one gets to it?
Especially if a thing is multi-hommed?
Shoch: One way is all gates are in the same net and have exactly one
address. Another way is that a gateway has distinct host address on
each net it is connected to.
Cerf: If the gateway control center has to talk to the gateway and the
gateway has two names, which name does the control center use?
Shoch: Someone has to take responsibility for choosing.
Jacobs: Where do the global unique names come from?

Section 1.4.1 [page 7]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

Postel: They are external. We always have a unique description,
usually by location, for objects. The gateway control center will have
to have for each gateway a unique (external) name, and associated with
that a list of internal addresses.
Cerf designates that there be a committee to study addressing and
naming of gateways to (1) figure out what things there are, and (2)
figure out how to address them.  Crocker is chairman.
Bennett: Routing in the Internet is discussed in PSPWN 76.  The main
ideas are that adaptive routing in internet is not likely to be much
good due to the larger delays in information propagation.  Fixed
routing with a number of alternatives (this is also called "Explicit
Path Routing") might be useful. [Naylor says this is explored by IBM
Zurich.] Could use alternate routing in a event driven form to recover
from service outages. One issue is what to base the adaptation on.
Postel: Most of the things normally used could get washed out by local
traffic.
Crocker: Perhaps there are some things...
Postel: for example queue lengths in the gateways.
Cerf: Adaptive routing is not a substitute for congestion control.
Jacobs: The information available to a gateway includs both facts
about its directly attached networks and information received from
other gateways.
Cerf: Gatways may have to exchange information about what paths are
viable. If one packet from a gateway to a host in the ARPANET results
in a "host dead" error what does the gateway do about other packets to
the ARPANET? We should avoid having a lot of state information in the
gateways.
Postel: What happens when the ARPANET says to a gateway "host dead"?
Jacobs: Nothing.

Section 1.4.1 [page 8]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

Cerf: Try to pass an error message back to source TCP. We have no
conventions for this as yet.
Mathis: Out thinking has been: Gateways do routing; TCPs do not do
routing.
Cohen: Routing algorithms need to be smarter.
Hinchley: Flow Control Possibilities
  1) No control at gateway level (expect end-to-end control to take
  care of any problems)
  2) Gatway to Gateway control
  3) Terminating Gateway Control (source - desination  gateways
  control flow)
  4) X7X virtual circuit control
  This is a range of possibilities.
Postel favors a hop by hop (that is gate by gate) flow control.
Cohen: Why should there be a single type of flow control? The type of
service (drops, streams, floods) should get different kinds of flow
control.
Jacobs: In SATNET there are a whole rage of stratagies from try once
to try very hard to get a message through.
There occured at this point a discussion of the cost of hop by hop
acknowledgements.
Jacobs: This should all be in terms of bump to bump, that is  a
gateway consist of a bump for each connected network and a core, any
network is between a pair of bumps, and the bumps should decide how
much error control etc is needed across that network.
There was a discussion of status information, particularly error

Section 1.4.1 [page 9]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

reports. If a gateway  has a problem then it is an internet error and
"the internet" ought to tell the source about it. If a destination
host has a problem then a service center could know the problem and a
query  to the services center could tell the source what is happening.
Hinchley: Gateway Control, Once gateways get above a certain level of
complexity there needs to be a control function, that suggest that the
reshould be a gateway control language which is standard throught the
internet.

Gateway Monitoring - Bob Bressler

Bressler described the current gateway monitoring center as a fairly
simple program that summarized reports from the SIMP and some other
gateway. The information reported was:
  number of messages sent and received on each port of each gateway
  and the number of messages dropped by the gateway
The gateways spontaneously generate the reports to the control center,
the control center curently sends no messages to the gateways.  There
are data generators and data sinks in the gateways now controled by
XNET a ddt like cross net debugger.
Kirstein: One of the simplest services one could provide is reliable
delivery but allow duplicates to be delivered as well.
Hinchley: What common functions can be listed?
  restart
  reload
  run a diagnostic
  update routing information
Shoch: Gateways exchange routing tables perodically gratuitously. Many
processes in a gateway for example time server, name lookup server,
boot loaders, measurement process, echo server, source, sink, trace.
Shoch: There is a distinction between Routing, Addressing, and Naming.

Section 1.4.1 [page 10]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

Kirstein: There will need to be several monitoring centers. There may
be a central control center that forwards suggestion for control to
national control centers.
Burchfiel: No gateway in the ARPANET currently does fragmentation.

International Standards - Vint Cerf

Cerf reviews international standards organizations:
  ITU - International Telecommunications Union (established by treaty)
    CCIR - International Radio Consultative Committee (issues
    recommendations on the use of electromagnetic spectrum)
    CCITT - International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative
    Committee (issues recommendations on telephone and telegraph
    communication)
      PTTs - Government operated Post, Telephone & Telegraph Systems
      ATT - American Telephone and Telegraph Corporation
      IFIP - International Federation for Information Processing
      ANSI - American National Standards Institute
        cats & dogs
        common carriers
        manufacturers
        EIA - Electronic Industry Association
        government
          NBS - National Bureau of Standards
          DCA - Defense Communications Agency
  ISO - International Standards Organization
    ANSI
    PTTs
    manufacturers
    IFIP
  CEPT -
    UK
    France
    DBP

Section 1.4.1 [page 11]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

  ECMA - European Computer Manufacturers Association
    CII
    HB
    Phillips
    ICL
Cerf reviews relevent standards activity:
  Analog
    V.24 (CCITT recomendation) = RS232C (EIA)
  Digital
    X.21 <-> RS232C
    HDLC (ISO) <-> [SDLC (IBM), UDLC (Univac), ADCCP (ANSI)]
    X.25 packet network interface, virtual call, asymetric
    X.C PAD control
    X.7X packet net / packet net interface (virtual circuit)

X.25 Gateway Interface Experiment - Peter Kirstein

Kirstein discussed the work UCL is going to be doing with EPSS and
X.25 interfaces.

Section 1.4.1 [page 12]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

Type of Service Issues - Danny Cohen

Cohen discussed Type of Service issues. He suggests the following
dimensions to service selection:
  priority
  relibility/cost
  delay/cost
  Floods / Streams / Drops
  Message/Wire
  Sort Messages
  Acknowledgement / Negative acknowledgement/ No acknowledgement
  Security
  Synchronization
  Multidestination addressing
  End of Letter
    Buffer Runout
    Receiver Wakeup
Cohen: Whether ACK or NACK or both or neither are used should depend
on statistics.
Jacobs: The Host-SIMP protocol paper may be relevant.
Hoversten: Is the user helping the network by telling it what type of
demands the user is going to make?

Internet Mail Service - Steve Crocker

Crocker discussed a model of how to make mail services available in
the internet system in a straightforward way.  Also of interest is
possibility for authentication and privacy.

Section 1.4.1 [page 13]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

Wrap Up - Vint Cerf

Binders for an Internet Notebook were distributed, and Cerf explaind
the intention to use it to collect the current information for
internet experements.  Jon Postel is the Notebook coordinator.
Cerf summarized as follows:
  Addressing alternatives need to be written down - assigned Steve
  Crocker to coordinate. Please supply him with your thoughts.  What
  objects exist and what names should they have.  John Shoch will
  provide a one page note on nomenclature.  A Gateway Specification is
  to be prepared by Bob Bressler.  Cerf will distribute a current
  version of the X.25 specification.  Kirstein will distribute a
  document on the UCL X.25 experiments.

Future Meetings - Vint Cerf

Cerf reviewed the plans for future meetings:
     15 Aug 77 - Internet meeting at ISI
  17-19 Aug 77 - PSPWG    meeting at Linkabit
  13-14 Oct 77 - TCP      meeting at SRI
  31Oct-2Nov77 - PSPWG    meeting at BBN
      3 Nov 77 - Internet meeting at BBN
  30-31 Jan 78 - TCP      meeting at ISI
   1- 2 Feb 78 - PSPWG    meeting at UCLA
      3 Feb 78 - Internet meeting at UCLA
  20-21 Apr 78 - TCP      meeting at BBN
   1- 2 May 78 - Internet meeting at UCL
   3- 5 May 78 - PSPWG    meeting at UCL
  13-14 Jul 78 - TCP      meeting at PARC
   2- 3 Aug 78 - Internet meeting at LL
      4 Aug 78 - PSPWG    meeting at LL
  12-13 Oct 78 - TCP      meeting at LCS
   2- 3 Nov 78 - Internet meeting at SRI

Section 1.4.1 [page 14]

                                                             18 Aug 77

IEN # 3 INTERNET Meeting Notes

Attendees:

Chris Bennett      UCL          UKSAT@ISIE      (01)387-7059
Bob Bressler       BBN          BRESSLER@BBN    (617)491-1850
Jerry Burchfiel    BBN          BURCHFIEL@BBNA  (617)491-1850
Vint Cerf          ARPA         CERF@ISI        (202)694-3049
Danny Cohen        ISI          COHEN@ISIB      (213)822-1511
Steve Crocker      ISI          CROCKER@ISI     (213)822-1511
Jin Forgie         MIT-LL       FORGIE@BBN      (617)862-5500x7191
Andrew Hinchley    UCL          UKSAT@ISIE      (01)387-7050x817
Estil Hoversten    COMSAT       HOVERSTEN@ISI   (202)554-6092
Irwin Mark Jacobs  LINKABIT     JACOBS@ISIE     (714)453-7007
Peter Kirstein     UCL          KIRSTEIN@ISI    (01)387-7050
Ron Kunzelman      SRI          KUNZELMAN@ISIC  (415)326-6200x4118
Jim Mathis         SRI          MATHIS@SRI-KL   (415)326-6200x5150
Bill Naylor        UCLA         NAYLOR@ISI      (213)825-4864
Jon Postel         ISI          POSTEL@ISIB     (213)822-1511
John Shoch         XEROX-PARC   SHOCH@PARC      (415)494-4000
Paal Spilling      NDRE         PAAL@SRI-KA
Dan Wilhelm        SAMSO        SAMSO@ISI       (213)643-0131

Section 1.4.1 [page 15]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/ien/ien3.txt · Last modified: 2001/06/25 18:23 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki