As per Relevance of the word solution, we have this rfc below:
Network Working Group Mark
Request for Comments: 849
May 1983
SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVED HOST TABLE
This RFC may be something unique among modern-day RFC's, an
that actually is a request for comments. The issue dealt with is
of a naming registry update procedure, both as exists currently and
could exist in the future. None of the proposed solutions are
as standards at this time; rather it is hoped that a general
will emerge as the appropriate solution, leaving eventually to
adoption of standards
THE
I am somewhat dissatisfied with the current level of Internet
service and name registry updating. Each site is expected
individually maintain a copy of the [SRI-NIC]HOSTS.TXT file
and in fact has to, since SRI-NIC is simply not reliable enough
depend upon as a name server. Neither the Tenex operating system
the Foonly computer are known for exceptional reliability
performance. Probably they serve the NIC's internal operations well
that is not at issue. What is needed is a name service that
available at all times. Only then could a site sacrifice
its own local copy of "the host table".
The NIC indirectly acknowledges this, by providing a service
which the entire Internet name registry can be dumped, as well
ANONYMOUS FTP access to the HOSTS.TXT file. The problem is
some individual has to know to retrieve the latest version of the
from the NIC. The NIC has not always been careful to announce
to the name registry. My experience with maintaining an
name registry from the NIC's in the past leads me to appreciate
NIC's problems
There also seems to be no good automated way to cross-check
version at the local site with the NIC's. It is clearly inefficient
go to the effort of retrieving the same version of the host table
already has been installed on site
SOME
One could argue that a solution is to replace or augment
present SRI-NIC system with VAX Unix system(s) dedicated to name
and network information. A reliable and highly-responsive name
would ultimately lead to the elimination of the necessity to
copies of the registry locally. This solution requires money, time,
effort, which may or may not be immediately available; it must
be considered a longer-term solution
Crispin [Page 1]
A more short-term solution is to make possible faster and
thorough updating of the various local copies of the name tables.
have several suggestions in this area, and would like to hear
(I said this was an RFC that requested comments!):
(1) a new protocol by which the NIC could ship updated
registries to the hosts itself. This would take the form of a
process on each site listening on a registered port for updates
certain "trusted" sites (specifically SRI-NIC but possibly other
as well). This would allow for nearly immediate updates for
sites, provided that the hosts in question are up. There should be
sort of checksum applied to the updated name registry, to make sure
arrived complete and intact
(2) a new protocol by which the NIC will report the
"version" of the host table. Tenex and TOPS-20 sites would find the
of the file generation number natural. I presently maintain
SYSTEM:HOSTS.TXT with the same generation as it existed on the NIC,
just check at the NIC from time to time to see if the generation
changed there. I would like to automate this
(3) A variation on (1), whereby the NIC would mail the updated
table to a mailing list of "host table update" recepients and each
would establish its own update procedures. This is the simplest
implement for the NIC, but is fraught with all sorts of problems.
is not a good means for bulk-shipping files to many recepients
especially when the files are likely to become hugh
I like (1) best of these three, because that would
immediate updating without a local necessity to periodically poll
NIC. That does place the burden on the NIC to make sure all
receive the update, and also requires that the NIC remember which
are dead to retry the update later. This leads me to what I think
the best solution, which is
(4) A combination of (1) and (2). The NIC will ship updates to
hosts which are registered with it to receive the updates, and will
only once. Each site, as part of its system startup procedure, will
a program to poll the NIC for a possible update and if one is
retrieve it. As a backup, there could also be a periodic poll on, say
a daily basis
Crispin [Page 2]
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
