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


NWG/RFC #295 JBP 2-JAN-72 15:35 8355 Protocol Workshop Report

Report of the Protocol Workshop

 12 October, 1971
 By Jon Postel.


 This is a report on the decisions reached at the protocol workshop
 held in conjunction with the Network Working Group meeting held in
 Cambridge from 10 to 14 October, 1971.
 The workshop addressed itself to protocols of four types: IMP-Host,
 Host-Host, Initial Connection, and Process-Process.

IMP-Host Protocol

 The idea of IMP provided status reports to be exchanged via new
 IMP-Host protocol messages was discussed and rejected because it was
 felt that the level of state information which could be reported was
 not sufficient to be worth the trouble of implementing this mechanism.

Host-Host Protocol

 The Host-Host Protocol was discussed and several problems were brought
 to light, among them were the following listed together with the
 group's recommendations.
    The GVB - RET mechanism may prove useful sometime in the
    future so it will be retained though no one appears to be
    using it now, however spontaneous RET commands are
    explicitly prohibited.
    The ECO - ERP commands are useful and should be supported,
    but spontaneous ERP commands are explicitly prohibited.  A
    further restriction is that a second ECO will not be sent
    until the first ECO has been answered.  Note that any of
    the following may be an answer to an ECO: ERP, RST,
    "Destination dead", or "Incomplete Transmission".
    The RST - RRP commands are useful, but the proper use of
    these commands for determining the status of host software
    is still open for discussion (please direct comments to Jon
    Postel), however spontaneous RRP commands are explicitly
                                                              [Page 1]

NWG/RFC #295 JBP 2-JAN-72 15:35 8355 Protocol Workshop Report

 The problem of unmatched CLS commands are discussed and four
 "solutions" were proposed:
    Hold forever
    Send a RST and clear the entry
    Clear the entry and possibly mess up a future connection
    Assign socket numbers in a sequential fashion to reduce
    the possibility of confusion and clear the entry.
 Note that the first two suggestions follow the protocol while the last
 two do not.
 The idea of flow control on the control link was suggested.  A Request
 for Comments is to be prepared exploring this idea more fully.
 The usefulness of the ERR command is compromised if the receiver
 mearly throws it out.  Thus ERR's are to be logged, if at all
 possible, and checked out with the sending site.
 The NCP document should make clear the implications of queueing or not
 queueing STR & RTS commands.

Initial Connection Protocol

 The Initial Connection Protocol (ICP) was discussed and found to be
 satisfactory however the following points were stressed:
   The socket number sent by the logger (S) must be in
   agreement with the socket numbers used in the STR & RTS
   sent by the logger.
   The implications of queueing or not queueing of RTS & STR
   commands should be made clear in the ICP document.  This is
   particularly important if the user chooses the "listen"
                                                              [Page 2]

NWG/RFC #295 JBP 2-JAN-72 15:35 8355

 Protocol Workshop Report

Telnet Protocol

 The Telnet committee has been reactivated to consider the following
   Clarification of the terminology half duplex, full duplex,
   character mode, line mode, ASCII, and echoing.
   Clarification of the end of line convention. Especially to
   answer the question "Should there be a special end-of-line
   Clarification of the conditions for leaving Hide-your-input mode.
   Clarification of the operation of Break and Synch.
   Specification of a server-to-user Synch.
   Clarification of the definition of the Network Virtual Terminal.
   Preparation of a new document defining the Telnet protocol
   with the above improvements.

The protocol workshop did agree that:

It is the servers option for disconnection to imply logout
or not.
It is the servers option for logout to imply disconnection
or not.
Extra characters used locally to fill the time for format
effectors to take effect should not be sent over the
Synch means to examine the data stream from the current
point to a data mark (x'80').  If any break type characters
(e.g. etx, sub, Break) are found they are to have their
normal effect.
Upper and lower case are to be available to all Telnet users.

Data and File Transfer Protocol

 The Data and File Transfer Committee will report separately.
                                                              [Page 3]

NWG/RFC #295 JBP 2-JAN-72 15:35 8355 Protocol Workshop Report

     [ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ]
     [ into the online RFC archives by BBN Corp. under the   ]
     [ direction of Alex McKenzie.                   12/96   ]
                                                              [Page 4]
/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc295.txt · Last modified: 1997/03/05 20:01 (external edit)