GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools

Problem, Formatting or Query -  Send Feedback

Was this page helpful?-10+1


Writing /data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/cache/8/8ed790a3398cd7163dc4ac64dc101bf6.metadata failed
rfc:rfc130
Writing /data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/cache/8/8ed790a3398cd7163dc4ac64dc101bf6.xhtml failed

Network Working Group J. Heafner Request for Comments: 130 Rand NIC 5848 22 April 1971

         RESPONSE TO RFC #111 (PRESSURE FROM THE CHAIRMAN)
 The purpose of RFC #111, as I interpret it, is two-fold:  1) To
 establish realistic implementation schedules and to make them known
 to the Network community so as to expedite everyone's planning of
 productive use of Network Services.  2) To uncover implementation
 techniques and strategies that were most successful and might be
 useful in future implementations.
 RFC #111 asks for implementation schedules.  I have not "prodded"
 host teams yet because an integral part of those schedules includes
 TELNET for which no specification is known to everyone.  Tom
 O'Sullivan, Raytheon (TELNET Chairman) and John Melvin, SRI (TELNET
 Committee Member) advise me that a TELNET RFC will be generated soon.
 I will subsequently contact site liaisons concerning a schedule.
 I will talk with Alex McKenzie, BBN about the form of publication of
 these schedules.  Alex and I agree that they should be published as
 an RFC updating NIC Memo #5767 (ARPA Network Site Status).  I will
 collect and compile the information via phone, mail or NIC and send
 it to Alex for technical editing and subsequent NIC RFC publication.
 Alex informed me that the forthcoming Resource Notebook (see NIC
 #5760) includes much of the information on use of services, obtaining
 job numbers, etc.  RFC #111 schedules will be an update of NIC #5767
 and may reference, but will not duplicate, the Resource Notebook.
 One begins to wonder why I'm in this loop since Alex has the
 responsibility to periodically update NIC #5767.  The reason, as RFC
 #111 states, is that Rand will assist in testing implementations
 remotely.  To facilitate testing, I would like first-hand information
 on schedules and comments on how we might be of service in this
 respect.  Testing will be short-term and will not go beyond what is
 included in RFC #111.  I will contact site liaisons shortly to find
 out if and how we can be of assistance in this capacity.
 Please feel free to contact either me or Eric Harslem regarding this
 RFC or RFC #111.
      [ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry]
    [into the online RFC archives by Alison M. De La Cruz 12/00]

Heafner [Page 1]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc130.txt · Last modified: 2000/12/05 20:20 (external edit)