[ih] Host-Host Protocol documentation [Was: The history of "This" 0.0.0.0/8 network?]

[Alex McKenzie]

Dave,

The community was a work in progress.  Yes, later specifications were
issued as RFCs, by the same people, but we were learning.  As I recall,
Steve Crocker, Jon Postel, and I decided that since the Host-Host Protocol
document was a specification, not a "request". it did not belong in the RFC
series.  Later we all changed our minds, and other specifications were
issued as RFCs.

Of course, as the protocols were being discussed and developed, the ideas
WERE put forward as RFCs because they truly were seeking comments.  Once
the Host-Host Protocol spec was published there were plenty more RFCs
discussing it and proposing changes.

Steve and I decided, 40 years later, that the Host-Host Protocol spec
really belonged in the RFC series, which is why RFC # 6529 was issued.

Cheers,
Alex

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 6:04 PM Dave Crocker <dhc at dcrocker.net> wrote:

> On 2/12/2019 12:37 PM, Alex McKenzie wrote:
> > If you want to know about NCP, see RFC # 6529.  The NCP spec was not
> > originally an RFC, since it was a specification, not a "request" for
> > comments.
>
> Lots of early RFCs were specifications.  FTP and Telnet, for example.
> And NCP was developed by the same community, wasn't it?
>
> And there are 3 sub-100 RFCs talking about NCP.  So it's interesting the
> the protocol itself didn't make it into the series back then.
>
> Methinks there might be something interesting to explore, to improve the
> general sense of activities amongst that community back then.  (I do not
> for a moment expect this to have a political aspect, but suspect there
> might be some group dynamic to understand, or just plain happenstance.)
>
> d/
> --
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20190213/5debc289/attachment.htm>