Browse Prior Art Database

Of what quality be the UCSB resources evaluators? (RFC0545)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000006033D
Original Publication Date: 1973-Jul-23
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2001-Nov-28
Document File: 3 page(s) / 4K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

J.R. Pickens: AUTHOR

Abstract

In RFC 531, M.A. Padlipsky complains that the UCSB resource evaluators were derelict in not consulting the Resource Notebook for available documentation. In addition, Padlipsky equates the goals of the resource evaluators to the goals of the software repository advocaters. A misunderstanding exists and perhaps, with this note, may be cleared.

This text was extracted from an ASCII text file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 50% of the total text.

Network Working Group                                         J. Pickens

Request for Comments: 545               UCSB Computer Systems Laboratory

NIC:  17791                                                 23 July 1973

References: RFC 531,369. 519

            OF WHAT QUALITY BE THE UCSB RESOURCE EVALUATORS?

                    A Response to "Feast of Famine"

   In RFC 531, M.A. Padlipsky complains that the UCSB resource

   evaluators were derelict in not consulting the Resource Notebook for

   available documentation.  In addition, Padlipsky equates the goals of

   the resource evaluators to the goals of the software repository

   advocaters.  A misunderstanding exists and perhaps, with this note,

   may be cleared.

   To respond to Padlipsky's example of UCSB botching login attempts let

   me make two comments.  First, more people than the resource

   evaluators were accessing the ARPANET.  The group of evaluators, at

   least, knew the login procedure from the Resource Notebook. (By the

   way, we do have a Multics Programmers Manual.) Second, the OLS TELNET

   echoes no lower case, which can generate confusion.  Even UCSB's

   technical liaison, after consulting the Resource Notebook, managed to

   botch his login.

   The first law of resource evaluation, at least for UCSB evaluators,

   is "read the Resource Notebook!" (RFC 369, incidentally, was based on

   a Resource Notebook that was barren compared to the notebook of

   today.)  Questions left unanswered by the Notebook are resolved by

   accessing online documentation first at the NIC and second at the

   site being evaluated.  If, after all this effort, questions still

   exist, then a consultant is contacted.  Consultation may be either

   online or by telephone and may entail purchasing appropriate user

   manuals (for some of the resources we...