Сделать домашней страницей | Добавить в избранное
База RFC-документов




Request for Comments number 603

Главная / RFC0603

Поиск RFC:

RFC0603 Response to RFC 597: Host status

RFC0603   Response to RFC 597: Host status    J.D. Burchfiel [ December 1973 ] ( TXT = 1482 bytes)(Updates RFC0597)(Updated by RFC0613)

Скачать PDF версию >>>

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 ]

Burchfiel                                                       [Page 1]



Анализ сайта
Rambler's Top100
Render time: 0.011900901794434 sec