Subject: need some document related to RFC:1550

From: "Abid Ghufran" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 13:33:45 +0500

In rfc1550 interested parties were invited to submit specific requirements
for IPng. In this regard I have seen one rfc document (rfc1667) that
specified certain IPng requirements for its usage by the Defense Modeling
and Simulation community.

Is there any way that I could get access to an archive comprising of all the
documents that were submitted against rfc 1550?

Thank you,

Abid Ghufran.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Baker Fred <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 07:17:50 -0800

On Mar 21, 2005, at 12:33 AM, Abid Ghufran wrote:
> Is there any way that I could get access to an archive comprising of 
> all the documents that were submitted against rfc 1550?

There were four proposals. One was Paul Tsuchiya's (now Paul Frances) 
PIP (IPv8); a second was Robert Ullman's CATNIP (IPv7). Two were 
similar enough that the authors (Bob Hinden and Steve Deering) merged 
their documents fairly early; this became what today we call IPv6.

          ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1621.txt
1621 Pip Near-term Architecture. P. Francis. May 1994. (Format:
      TXT=128905 bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

         ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1622.txt
1622 Pip Header Processing. P. Francis. May 1994. (Format: TXT=34837
      bytes) (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

         ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1707.txt
1707 CATNIP: Common Architecture for the Internet. M. McGovern, R.
      Ullmann. October 1994. (Format: TXT=37568 bytes) (Status:
      INFORMATIONAL)

In addition, a significant change in the routing architecture was 
proposed, which never was deployed but remains seminal in 
considerations about next generation routing. This was called NIMROD, 
and grew directly out of the Routing and Addressing (ROAD) Group.

          ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1380.txt
1380 IESG Deliberations on Routing and Addressing. P. Gross, P.
      Almquist. November 1992. (Format: TXT=49415 bytes) (Status:
      INFORMATIONAL)

         ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1753.txt
1753 IPng Technical Requirements Of the Nimrod Routing and Addressing
      Architecture. N. Chiappa. December 1994. (Format: TXT=46586 bytes)
      (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

         ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1992.txt
1992 The Nimrod Routing Architecture. I. Castineyra, N. Chiappa, M.
      Steenstrup. August 1996. (Format: TXT=59848 bytes) (Status:
      INFORMATIONAL)

         ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2102.txt
2102 Multicast Support for Nimrod : Requirements and Solution
      Approaches. R. Ramanathan. February 1997. (Format: TXT=50963 bytes)
      (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

         ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2103.txt
2103 Mobility Support for Nimrod : Challenges and Solution Approaches.
      R. Ramanathan. February 1997. (Format: TXT=41352 bytes) (Status:
      INFORMATIONAL)

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:58:46 +0100

Furthermore, there is some comparison of the proposals in

          ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1752.txt
1752 The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation Protocol. S.
      Bradner, A. Mankin. January 1995. (Format: TXT=127784 bytes) (Status:
      PROPOSED STANDARD)

     Brian

Baker Fred wrote:
> PIP (IPv8); a second was Robert Ullman's CATNIP (IPv7). Two were similar 
> enough that the authors (Bob Hinden and Steve Deering) merged their 
> documents fairly early; this became what today we call IPv6.
> 
> proposed, which never was deployed but remains seminal in considerations 
> about next generation routing. This was called NIMROD, and grew directly 
> out of the Routing and Addressing (ROAD) Group.
>

---

From: Baker Fred <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 08:04:20 -0800

Another goody...

      ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc1726.txt
1726 Technical Criteria for Choosing IP The Next Generation (IPng). C.
      Partridge, F. Kastenholz. December 1994. (Format: TXT=74109 bytes)
      (Status: INFORMATIONAL)

---

From: Bob Hinden <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 10:12:33 -0800

>There were four proposals. One was Paul Tsuchiya's (now Paul Frances) PIP 
>(IPv8); a second was Robert Ullman's CATNIP (IPv7). Two were similar 

The merged proposal is documented in:

     ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc1710.txt

     Hinden, R., "Simple Internet Protocol Plus White Paper", RFC 1710,
     October 1994.

Bob