As per Relevance of the word primarily, we have this rfc below:
Network Working Group D.
Request for Comments: 1775 Brandenburg
Category: Informational March 1995
To Be "On" the
Status of this
This memo provides information for the Internet community. This
does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution
this memo is unlimited
The Internet permits different levels of access for consumers
providers of service. The nature of those differences is
important in the capabilities They afford. Hence, it is
to provide terminology that distinguishes among the range, so
the Internet community can gain some clarity when
whether a user (or an organization) is "on" the Internet.
document suggests four terms, for distinguishing the major classes
access
1.
The Internet is many things to many people. It began as a
and has grown into a global service. With the growth has
increased complexity in details of the technology and service
resulting in confusion when trying to determine whether a given
is "on" the Internet. Who is on the Internet? What capabilities
they have? This note is an attempt to aid Internet consumers
providers in determining the basic types of end-user access
distinguish critical differences in Internet attachment
The list was developed primarily for the perspective of users,
than for the technical community. The definitions in this list
the perspective that users are primarily interested in
services. A curious implication is that some of the definitions
not rely on the direct use of the underlying Internet
protocols, TCP/IP. For many technical discussions, therefore,
terms will not be appropriate
Crocker [Page 1]
RFC 1775 To Be "On" the Internet March 1995
2. LABELS FOR INTERNET
The following definitions move from "most" to "least"
access, from the perspective of the user (consumer). The first
is primarily applicable to Internet service providers. The
terms are primarily applicable to consumers of Internet service
FULL
This is a permanent (full-time) Internet attachment
TCP/IP, primarily appropriate for allowing the Internet
to access application servers, operated by Internet
providers. Machines with Full access are directly visible
others attached to the Internet, such as through the
Protocol's ICMP Echo (ping) facility. The core of the
comprises those machines with Full access
CLIENT
The user runs applications that employ Internet
protocols directly on their own computer platform, but might
be running underlying Internet protocols (TCP/IP), might not
full-time access, such as through dial-up, or might
constrained access, such as through a firewall. When active
Client users might be visible to the general Internet, but
visibility cannot be predicted. For example, this means that
Client access users will not be detected during an
probing of systems "on" the Internet at any given moment, such
through the ICMP Echo facility
MEDIATED
The user runs no Internet applications on their own platform.
Internet service provider runs applications that use
protocols on the provider's platform, for the user. User
simplified access to the provider, such as dial-up
connectivity. For Mediated access, the user is on the Internet
but their computer platform is not. Instead, it is the
of the mediating service (provider) which is on the Internet
MESSAGING
The user has no Internet access, except through electronic
and through netnews, such as Usenet or a bulletin board service
Since messaging services can be used as a high-latency -- i.e.,
slow -- transport service, the use of this level of access
mail-enabled services can be quite powerful, though
interactive
Crocker [Page 2]
RFC 1775 To Be "On" the Internet March 1995
3. SAMPLE
The test of a nomenclature is, of course, its application to real
life situations. Two simple cases involve home users. If a
accesses the Internet by running a terminal program on their PC
then dials up a public service which provides the
applications, then that user has Mediated Internet access.
public service has Client or Full access, but the user does not.
the other hand, users who access via SLIP or PPP are running
applications on their own PCs and they have Client Internet access
Many corporations now have a full-time link to the Internet.
link is based on TCP/IP and usually has a number of Internet
running, for email exchange and for making public corporate
available to the rest of the world, such as through the World
Web and Gopher. Clearly, the corporation is "on" the Internet,
Full Internet access
What about a user in that corporation? Many corporations
separate their internal internet from the public Internet via
firewall. If a user from the internal internet has a
computer and reaches out to the Internet, through the firewall,
running any Internet applications, such as a Web browser, then
user has Client Internet access
Some corporations will not allow this, instead requiring all
which touches the public Internet to be run on specially-
machines which are part of the corporation's firewall suite
services. Hence, users must make a terminal connection to
special machines, from there running the Internet applications.
users have Mediated Internet access, the same as home users who
up a public service
4. SECURITY
This specification does NOT, itself, provide or define any security
related mechanisms. However it does describe scenarios
different security implications for users and providers. Readers
this discussion are cautioned to consider those implications
choosing a service
5.
Development of these definitions was spurred by many public
private discussions in which confusion over Internet access reigned
Convergence on an initial set of three terms was the result
discussion on the Big-Internet mailing list, particularly
comments made by Alan Barret, Howard Berkowitz, Noel Chiappa,
Crocker [Page 3]
RFC 1775 To Be "On" the Internet March 1995
Goldstein, Iain Hanson, Gary Malkin, Bob McKisson, Tim O'Reilly,
Piscitello and Bill Simpson. Eventually, the need for a
category became evident and was discussed further with
participants on the list. This does not mean that any of
necessarily endorses the terms and definitions provided, merely
their notes assisted my thinking on the topic. After the
round of public discussion, Smoot Carl-Mitchell and John
of Texas Internet Consulting developed terminology for
categories and served to prompt modification of this set, described
here, to distinguish between provider and consumer forms of
and emphasize the role of Full access in defining the Internet core
6. Security
Security issues are not discussed in this memo
7. Author's
David H.
Brandenburg
675 Spruce Dr
Sunnyvale, CA 94086
Phone: +1 408 246 8253
Fax: +1 408 249 6205
EMail: dcrocker@mordor.stanford.
Crocker [Page 4]
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
