Browse Prior Art Database

Host mnemonics proposed in RFC 226 (NIC 7625) (RFC0239)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000002962D
Original Publication Date: 1971-Sep-23
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2000-Sep-13
Document File: 1 page(s) / 2K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

R.T. Braden: AUTHOR

Abstract

(Note from NIC: These are comments sent by R.Braden to P. Karp in NIC 7626, and are now issued as NIC 7664, RFC 239 to include them in the dialogue along with RFC 226, 229, 236)

This text was extracted from a ASCII document.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 100% of the total text.

Network Working Group R. Braden

Request for Comments: #239 UCLA-CCN

NIC 7664 23 September 1971

Categories: D.3

Related: #226, 229, 236

HOST MNEMONICS PROPOSED IN RFC #226

(Note from NIC: These are comments sent by R.Braden to P. Karp in NIC

7626, and are now issued as NIC 7664, RFC 239 to include them in the

dialogue along with RFC 226, 229, 236)

CCN is in full agreement that a standard set of host mnemonics

should be selected. However, your proposed set is not fully

satisfactory.

1. The set you suggest was created, I assume, by the systems

programmer(s) who wrote TELNET in TENEX. It is a set of

historical accidents, and shows it.

2. A better source for standard mnemonics might be the NIC site

codes, since these have been chosen with more care and will

become familiar as we begin to use the NIC on-line. Surely

the NIC is a more reasonable source for a defacto standard

than a particular system programmer.

3. Should mnemonics be limited to 6 characters?

4. The most recent list from BBN (NIC #7181, RFC #208,

August 9, 1971) shows 40 hosts. You show only 20. Your

proposed standard should include known hosts at this time.

5. The mnemonic "UCLA36" seems a particularly bad choice; "UCLA91"

would be much better.

6. Also, we at CCN object to the short form "UCLA" for the NMC

Sigma 7; that also is historical. We propose the following:

host 1: UCLAS7 or UCLANM; host 65: UCLA91.

7. "SRIARC" is a poor choice; everybody calls it the NIC. So we

suggest "SRINIC" for host 2.

Please, let's not perpetrate systems programmers' midnight

decisions on all future Network users! Standards are vital, and

deserve a little care.

[ 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 ]

9