Browse Prior Art Database

Official Protocol Proffering (RFC0054)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000003650D
Original Publication Date: 1970-Jun-18
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2000-Sep-13
Document File: 8 page(s) / 19K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

S.D. Crocker: AUTHOR [+4]

Abstract

As advertised in NEW/RFC #53, we are submitting the protocol herein for criticism, comments, etc. We intend for this protocol to become the initial official protocol, and will, therefore, be happiest if no serious objections are raised. Nevertheless, we will entertain all manner of criticism until July 13, 1970, and such criticism should be published as a NWG/RFC or directed to the first author.

This text was extracted from a ASCII Text document.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 16% of the total text.

Network Working Group Steve Crocker (UCLA)

Request for Comments # 54 Jon Postel (UCLA)

June 18, 1970 John Newkirk (Harvard)

Mike Kraley (Harvard)

An Official Protocol Proffering

I. INTRODUCTION

As advertised in NEW/RFC #53, we are submitting the protocol herein

for criticism, comments, etc. We intend for this protocol to become

the initial official protocol, and will, therefore, be happiest if no

serious objections are raised. Nevertheless, we will entertain all

manner of criticism until July 13, 1970, and such criticism should be

published as a NWG/RFC or directed to the first author.

After July 13, a decision will be made whether to adopt this protocol

(or slight variation) or whether to redesign it and resubmit it for

criticism.

Only the Protocol

In preceding discussions of protocol, no clear distinction has been

made between the network-wide specifications and local strategies.

We state here that the only network-wide issues are message formats

and restrictions on message content. Implementation of a Network

Control Program (NCP) and choice of system calls are strictly local

issues.

This document is constrained to cover only network-wide issues and

thus will not treat system calls or NCP tables; nevertheless, a

protocol is useless without an NCP and a set of system calls, so we

have expended a great deal of effort in deriving a protypical NCP.

This effort is reported in NWG/RFC #55, and the reader should

correlate the protocol presented here with the suggestions for using

it presented there. It is important to remember, however, that the

content of NWG/RFC #55 is only suggestive and that competitive

proposals should be examined before choosing an implementation.

Flow Control

In the course of designing this current protocol, we have come to

understand that flow control is more complex than we imagined. We

now believe that flow control techniques will be one of the active

areas of concern as the network traffic increases. We have,

therefore, benefitted from some ideas stimulated by Richard Kaline

and Anatol Holt and have modified the flow control procedure.

(Defects in our scheme are, of course, only our fault). This new

procedure has demonstrable limitations, but has the advantages that

it is more cleanly implementable and will support initial network

use. This is the only substantive change from the protocol already

agreed upon.

The new flow control mechanism requires the receiving host to

allocate buffer space for each connection and to notify the sending

host of how much space in bits is available. The sending host keeps

track of how much room is available and never sends more text than it

believes the receiving host can accept.

To implement this mechanism, the sending host keeps a counter

ass...