Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ucbvax!AI.AI.MIT.EDU!PAP4
From: PAP4@AI.AI.MIT.EDU ("Philip A. Prindeville")
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Where to find... supdup and tn3270 specs
Message-ID: <314575.880122.PAP4@AI.AI.MIT.EDU>
Date: 22 Jan 88 05:44:08 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 27


        Some people think SUPDUP is a swell protocol.  Why doesn't one of them

Yes, I think supdup is a great protocol.  That is why I asked.  However,
I didn't realize I was opening up Pandora's box when I asked...

        take the time to write a reasonable protocol RFC on SUPDUP, without
        assuming 36-bit machines.  Then the rest of the Internet world can
        find out how wonderful SUPDUP is.

    As MRC said, SUPDUP does not assume 36-bit machines.  Depending on what
    level of abstraction you choose to take, the RFC either does or does not
    assume 36 bit machines.  What the RFC does is abstract various
    quantities into 36 bit words and uses some PDP-10 notation conventions.
    That's an abstraction, one of many possible abstractions, and in many
    senses just as valid as any other abstraction (e.g., one that assumes
    Vaxen or 68000s) one might use to (re)write the RFC with.

Given that is a networking protocol, the most reasonable representation
would be how the bits (bytes, or octets) appear 'on the wire', not how
they pack into a particular machine's word.

In view of the number of RFCs in print, we should know by now how to
express an idea without reverting to assembly language (for any processor,
whether esoteric or commonplace)...

-Philip