[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]

Tweet
This is a modified version of the Internet RFC suitable for machine-translating. Original version is available here: RFC302
Ad

UNKNOWN
NWG/RFC #302                               UCSB Computer
NIC  9074                                  Research Laboratory
                                           Roland F. Bryan
                                           8 February 1972
EXERCISING THE ARPANET


Questions ---------

1. Can a technically competent person, initially uninformed as to network operation and naive as to the capabilities of various time-shared terminal systems attached to the Network, be able to develop problem solving competence at server sites on the ARPANET?

2. What inherent user problems exist that complicate such adaptation?

3. Once proficient in the use, what aspects of the various sites limit the usability and what modifications should be considered at both server and user sites to meet various needs?

4. Should a user select a given site for composing and editing all of his files for subsequent transfer to other sites for processing or should he learn to compose and edit at each of the sites doing his processing?

5. What are the problems in starting cooperating processes at several sites? How does a user control such processes?
                                                                [Page 1]

Obtaining the Answers
---------------------

Under the direction of UCSB Professor James Howard, a test
group of 14 graduate students was formed to pursue the questions above, and any other aspect of ARPANET operation that they might uncover.

The test group has been given access to the 16 console On-Line
System classroom in the E.E. Department at UCSB. The 16 consoles produce graphic and alphanumeric displays and are tied into the UCSB Host 360-75 which gains them access to the network. Old style Culler-Fried keyboards are being used which provide a limited key set Jim White has managed to program around most of the protocol problems brought about by these keyboards, but some still remain.

Seminars were given to the test group to familiarize them
with software and hardware aspects of the ARPANET, the local NIC file has been made available to the group, and the group has been allowed to sign onto the Network to pursue any available system.

Following the initial period of two weeks, during which the
group developed some familiarity with the network, the test group has been divided into working groups with emphasis as follows:


Patric Timlick } BBN-TENEX Dave Stearns } BBN-TENEX B

John Pickens } SRI-ARC (NIC) Doug Beaubien }

Dave Whittington } Richard Haraguchi } MIT-Multics Maria deGraaf } MIT-DMCG Richard Melton } Su Sung Won }

Ronald Varekamp } Jeoff Benson } UCLA-CCN HARV-10 Hasan A. El. Hasan } UCLA-NMC UTAH-10 George Engelberg } RAND-CSG LL-67 Rodney Skinner }
                                                                [Page 2]

Some Initial Results
--------------------
The first real encounters with the ARPANET at large produced
a series of questions and comments. Test group comments are itemized below with additional comments by the author {In braces}. We plan subsequent reports on a periodic basis.

1. We find that we need further information about access to the NCPs at various sites. User manuals from the sites might provide this. {Site response is solicited}

2. We sometimes cannot sign into UCLA-NMC directly from UCSB, but can do so readily by way of BBN. {Protocol?}

3. After running a Fortran or PL-1 program at some net location we can only display the results on our consoles but cannot store them as files. {UCSB programming need?}

4. When communications break down how can a user be assured that he is logged out of some remote site? {Need for automatic Log-out?}

5. How do we make contact with programmers at other sites to develop cooperative programs for file transfer, etc? {Jim White?}

6. Is there a best time of day for operation at each site? Should contact be made with the site operator prior to user sessions? {Server sites please comment}

7. UCLA-NMC has assigned a separate user identification for test group use. Would other sites prefer to do likewise? {Comments?}

8. Is there information regarding uses made of the various time shared systems by internal users at each site? Does a bibliography exist to allow contact with such users? {Check the Resource Notebook}

9. MIT-DMCG and BBN provide very good user service, especially the site survey. Also these sites have good responses to define events. Can UCSB provide local users with similar information? {Jim White?}

[ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ] [ into the online RFC archives by BBN Corp. under the ] [ direction of Alex McKenzie. 12/96 ]




[Page 3]


Ad
Translate documents to 日本語, svenska, Nederlands, Deutsch, français, русский, italiano, español, Tiếng Việt, polski, português, 中文, українська, català, norsk, فارسی, suomi, Bahasa Indonesia, العربية, čeština, 한국어, Bahasa Melayu, magyar, română, српски and other languages.
inserted by FC2 system