As per Relevance of the word establish, we have this rfc below:











Network Working Group Bill
Request for Comments: 2


[unknown title


[page 1 missing

1

1a Control

1a1 Logical link 0 will be a control link between any two HOSTs
the

1a1a Only one control link may exist between any two HOSTs
the network. Thus, if there are n HOSTs on the network,
are n-1 control links from each HOST

1a2 It will be primarily used for communication between HOSTs
the purposes of

1a2a Establishing user

1a2b Breaking user

1a2c Passing interrupts regarding the status of links and/
programs using the

1a2d Monitor

1a3 Imps in the network may automatically trace all messages
on link 0.

1b Primary

1b1 A user at a given HOST may have exactly 1 primary link to
of the other HOSTs on the network

1b1a The primary link must be the first link
between a HOST user and another HOST

1b1b Primary links are global to a user, i.e. a user
may open a primary link, and that link remains open until it
specifically closed





Duvall [Page 1]

RFC 2


1b1c The primary link is treated like a teletype connected
a normal data-phone or direct line by the remote HOST, i.e.
remote HOST considers a primary link to be a normal
user

1b1d The primary link is used for passing (user)
information to the remote HOST, e.g. it will be used
logging in to the remote host (using the remote hosts
login procedure).

1c Auxilliary

1c1 A user program may establish any number of auxilliary
between itself and a user program in a connected HOST

1c1a These links may be used for either binary or
transmission

1c1b Auxilliary links are local to the sub-system
establishes them, and therefore are closed when that
is left

2 MANIPULATION OF

2a Control

2a1 The control link is established at system load time

2a2 The status of a control link may be active or

2a2a The status of the control link should reflect
relationship between the HOSTs

2b Primary

2b1 Primary links are established by a user or executive call
the

2b1a The network identification number of the HOST to be
to must be included in the

2b1b An attempt to establish more than one primary link to
particular HOST will be regarded as an error, and the
will be

2b1c Standard Transmission Character





Duvall [Page 2]

RFC 2


2b1c1 There will be a standard character set
transmission of data over the primary links and
links

2b1c1a This will be full (8 bit) ASCII

2b1d (get link) The protocol for establishing a link to HOST
from HOST A is as

2b1d1 A selects a currently unused link to HOST B from
allocation

2b1d2 A transmits a link-connect message to B over link 0.

2b1d3 A then waits for

2b1d3a A communication regarding that link from

2b1d3b A certain amount of time to

2b1d4 If a communication regarding the link is received
B, it is examined to see if it is

2b1d4a A verification of the link from B

2b1d4a1 This results in a successful return from
monitor to the requestor. The link number is
to the requestor, and the link is established

2b1d4b A request from B to establish the link.
means: that B is trying to establish the same link as
independently of A

2b1d4b1 If the network ID number of A(Na) is
than that of B(Nb), then A ignores the request,
continues to await confirmation of the link from B

2b1d4b2 If, on the other hand, Na
2b1d4b2a Honors the request from B to establish
link

2b1d4b2b Sends verification as required

2b1d4b2c Aborts its own request, and repeats
allocation process





Duvall [Page 3]

RFC 2


2b1d4c Some other communication from B regarding
link

2b1d4c1 This is an error condition, meaning
either

2b1d4c1a A has faulted by selecting a
allocated link for allocation

2b1d4c1b B is transmitting information over an un
allocated link

2b1d4c1c Or a message regarding allocation from
to A has been garbled in transmission

2b1d4c2 In this case, A's action is to

2b1d4c2a Send a link disconnect message to
concerning the attempted

2b1d4c2b Consider the state of HOST B to be
error and initiate entry to a panic routine(error).

2b1d5 If no communication regarding the link is
from B in the prescribed amount of time, HOST B
considered to be in an error state

2b1d5a A link disconnect message is sent to B from A

2b1d5b A panic routine is called(error).

2c Auxilliary

2c1 Auxilliary links are established by a call to the monitor
a user program

2c1a The request must specify pertinent data about the
link to the

2c1a1 The number of the primary link to B

2c1b The request for an auxilliary link must be made by a
program in each of the HOSTs (A and B).

2c1c If Na > Nb, then HOST A proceeds to establish a link
HOST B in the manner outlined above (getlink).





Duvall [Page 4]

RFC 2


2c1d If Na
2c1d1 For HOST B to establish the link (after looking to
if B has already established the corresponding link).

2c1d2 For a specified amount of time to elapse

2c1d2a This means that HOST B did not respond to
request of HOST A

2c1d2b The program in HOST A and B should be able
specifiy the amount of time to wait for the timeout

3 ERROR

3a All messages sent over the network will be error checked
so as to help isolate software and hardware bugs

3b A checksum will be associated with each message, which is
dependent

3b1 The following algorithm is one which might be used

3b1a A checksum of length 1 may be formed by adding
fields in the string to be checked serially, and adding
carry bit into the lowest bit position of the sum

+--------------+
| |
+---FIELD 1----+

ADD +--------------+
| |
+----FIELD 2---+

+-+--------------+
| | |
+-+--------------+
\
\ +--+
ADD CARRY---> | |
+--+

+--------------+
| |
+----RESULT----+

3b1a1 This process is known as folding



Duvall [Page 5]

RFC 2


3b1a2 Several fields may be added and folded in parallel,
they are folded appropiately after the addition

+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| FIELD 4 | FIELD 3 | FIELD 2 | FIELD 1 |
+---------+---------+---------+---------+

+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| FIELD 8 | FIELD 7 | FIELD 6 | FIELD 5 |
+---------+---------+---------+---------+

+-+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| | | | | |
+-+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | | +---------+
| | | | | |
| | | | +---------+
| | | |
| | | \ +---------+
| | | `-> | |
| | | +---------+
| | |
| | \ +---------+
| | `-----------> | |
| | +---------+
| |
| \ +---------+
| `--------------------->| |
| +---------+
|
\ +---+
`-----CARRY------------------------>| |
+---+

+---------+---------+
| | |
+--CARRY--+---------+
|
\ +-----+
ADD `-----> | |
+-----+

+---------+
| |
+-RESULT--+




Duvall [Page 6]

RFC 2


3b1a2a Using this scheme, it is assumed that, if
are n fields, the carries from the first n-1
are automatically added into the low order position
the next higher field, so that in folding, one
only add the [n] result fields to the carry from
nth field, and then add in an appropiately sized
from that addition (and repeat the desired number
times to achieve the result

3b1a3 A checksum computed in this manner has the
that the word lengths of different machines may each be
optimally

3b1a3a If a string of suitable length is chosen
computing the checksum, and a suitable checksum
length is selected, the checksum technique for each
the machines will be relatively optimal

3b1a3a1 Field length: 288 bits (lowest
denomenator of (24,32,36)

3b1a3a2 Checksum length: 8 bits (convenient field
for all machines

3b1b If a message is divided into groups of fields, and
group is checksummed in this manner, an order
checksum may be got by shifting the checksum for each group
and adding it in (successively) to the checksum of the


3c A facility will be provided where two HOSTs may enter a mode
requires positive verification of all messages. This verification
sent over the control link

4 MONITOR

4a Network I/O

4a1

4a1a Input message from IMP

4a1b Do error checking on message

4a1b1 Verify checksum

4a1b2 Send "message recieved" aknowledgement over
link if aknowledge mode is in effect



Duvall [Page 7]

RFC 2


4a1c (trans)character

4a1c1 There is a strong possibility that the
translation may be done in the IMP

4a1c2 This needs to be explored further with BBN

4a1c3 There are two main

4a1c3a Should the translation be done by table
algorithm

4a1c3a1 Initially it seems as though the best way
go is table

4a1c3b How should we decide which messages should
translated, i.e. is it desirable to not
everything (YES!!) and by what means can we use
differentiate

4a1d Decode header, and pass message to correct recipient
identified by source, and link

4a2

4a2a Build

4a2b Character

4a2b1 See remarks under the section on output
(trans).

4a2c Create

4a2d Check status of

4a2d1 If there has not been a RFNM since the last
transmitted out the link, wait for it

4a2e Transmit message to

4a2f If aknowledge mode is in effect,wait

4a2f1 RFNM from destination IMP

4a2f2 Response from destination HOST over control line 0.





Duvall [Page 8]

RFC 2


4b Network

4b1 Maintain status of other HOSTs on

4b1a If an IMP is down, then his HOST is considered to be down

4b2 Maintain status of control lines

4b3 Answer status queries from other HOSTs

4b4 Inform other HOSTs as to status of primary and
links on an interrupt basis

4b5 Inform other HOSTs as to status of programs using primary
secondary

5 EXECUTIVE

5a Primary

5a1 These require the HOST number as a parameter

5a1a Establish primary

5a1b Connect controlling teletype to primary

5a1c INPUT/OUTPUT over primary

5a1d Interrogate status of primary

5a1d1 Don't know what, exactly, this should do, but it
as though it might be useful

5a1e Disconnect controlling teletype from primary

5a1f Kill primary

5b Auxilliary Links

5b1 Establish auxilliary link

5b1a requires the HOST number as a

5b1b It returns a logical link number which is similar to
file index. It is this number which is passed to all of
other Auxilliary routines as a parameter

5b2 INPUT/OUTPUT over auxilliary



Duvall [Page 9]

RFC 2


5b3 Interrogate status auxilliary link

5b3a Don't know what, exactly, this should do, but it seems
though it might be useful

5b4 Kill auxilliary link

5c Special executive

5c1 Transparent. INPUT/OUTPUT over

5c1a This may be used to do block I/O transfers over a

5c1b The function of the monitor in this instance is
transfer a buffer directly to its

5c1c At does not modify it in any

5c1c1 This means that the header and other
information must be in the buffer

5c1d The indended use of this is for network debugging

6 INITIAL

6a The network will be initially checked out using the links in
simulated data-phone mode

6a1 All messages will be one character in length

6a2 Links will be transparent to the monitor, and controlled
user program via a special executive primitive

6a2a The initial test will be run from two user programs
different HOSTs, e.g. DDT to DDT

6a2b It will be paralleled by a telephone link or similar


[ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ]
[ into the online RFC archives by Robbie Bennet 10/1998 ]
[ This RFC was nroffed by Kelly Tardif, Viagenie 10/1999 ]









Duvall [Page 10]








if you see any problems within the linking, don't worry be happy,
this is version 0.1 of the Relevance System and you gotta expect some crappy subroutines sometimes,
just be content we did not write this in Java, which would have made this "bigger and better" HAHAHHA.




RFC documents can be found at I.E.T.F.



Relevance System Copyright © 2002 Spectrum WorldResearch
other technical nosh by ServerMasters Corporation
collaboration of BobX







Spectrum