Browse Prior Art Database

Response to RFC 597: Host status (RFC0603)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000003677D
Original Publication Date: 1973-Dec-31
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2000-Sep-13
Document File: 1 page(s) / 1K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

J.D. Burchfiel: AUTHOR

Abstract

I have several questions about the November 1973 ARPANET topographical map:

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

Network Working Group J.D. Burchfiel

RFC # 603 BBN-TENEX

NIC # 21022 31 December, 1973

Response to RFC # 597: Host Status

I have several questions about the November 1973 ARPANET

topographical map:

1. AMES is 4-connected, i.e. four network connections will go down

if the IMP fails. Is there some aspiration that IMPs should be

no more than three connected?

2. The seven IMPS in the Washington area are arranged into a loop.

This guarantees that local communication can take place even if

one connection fails, and is probably a worthwhile preparation

for area routing. On the other hand, for example, a break

between MIT-IPC and MIT-MAC will require them to communicate

through a 12-hop path through Washington. This can be remedied

by a short (inexpensive) connection between Harvard and Lincoln

Labs. Is there a plan to pull the Boston area, the San

Francisco area, and the Los Angeles area into loops like the

Washington area?

[ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ]

[ into the online RFC archives by Alex McKenzie with ]

[ support from GTE, formerly BBN Corp. 10/99 ]