Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!brl-adm!rutgers!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!LOUIE.UDEL.EDU!Mills
From: Mills@LOUIE.UDEL.EDU
Newsgroups: mod.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re:  Re: Gateway Monitoring
Message-ID: <8701191534.a025325@Huey.UDEL.EDU>
Date: Mon, 19-Jan-87 15:34:34 EST
Article-I.D.: Huey.8701191534.a025325
Posted: Mon Jan 19 15:34:34 1987
Date-Received: Tue, 20-Jan-87 05:44:40 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 18
Approved: tcp-ip@sri-nic.arpa

Dennis,

The NSFnet crew is stumbling into this sandbox right now. I suspect they
would be glad to move their discussion to this list if everybody can
stand it. With the exception of the CMCC work done several years ago
at BBN, which was broadly discussed and documented (see IENs at the
NIC), HMPs in recent years have evolved to serve specialized processors,
linke IMPs (aka PSNs), LSI-11 gateways, Buttergates and related insects.
At least with respect to the DoD community, host monitoring has been
considered private business and available only to a closed community
with few subscribers. While this may be wholly appropriate for this
community, it may not be always appropriate for the academic community.
It would be wonderful if consensus could be achieved on a public protocol
which could be implemented widely and with access controls specialized
only as necessary. From the experience of the CMCC days, as well as the
evolution of HMP, I would not rate this as a sure thing.

Dave