Network Working Group
RFC # 603
NIC # 21022
RFC # 603
NIC # 21022
J.D. Burchfiel
BBN-TENEX
31 December, 1973
BBN-TENEX
31 December, 1973
Response to RFC # 597: Host Status
I have several questions about the November 1973 ARPANET
topographical map:
-
1. AMES is 4-connected, i.e. four network connections will go down if the IMP fails. Is there some aspiration that IMPs should be no more than three connected?
- The seven IMPS in the Washington area are arranged into a loop. This guarantees that local communication can take place even if one connection fails, and is probably a worthwhile preparation for area routing. On the other hand, for example, a break between MIT-IPC and MIT-MAC will require them to communicate through a 12-hop path through Washington. This can be remedied by a short (inexpensive) connection between Harvard and Lincoln Labs. Is there a plan to pull the Boston area, the San Francisco area, and the Los Angeles area into loops like the Washington area?
[ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ] [ into the online RFC archives by Alex McKenzie with ] [ support from GTE, formerly BBN Corp. 10/99 ]