home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
-
-
-
-
-
- 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 ]
-
-
- [Page 1]
-
-