rfc960.txt
来自「RFC 的详细文档!」· 文本 代码 · 共 1,482 行 · 第 1/5 页
TXT
1,482 行
13 BRL-AS [RBN1]
14 COLUMBIA-GW [BC14]
15 NET DYNAMICS EXP [ZSU]
16 LBL [WG]
17 PURDUE-CS [KCS1]
18 UTEXAS [JSQ1]
19 CSS-DOMAIN [RR2]
20 UR [LB16]
21 RAND [JDG]
22 NOSC [RLB3]
23 RIACS-AS [DG28]
24 AMES-NAS-GW [MF31]
25 UCB [MK17]
26 CORNELL [BN9]
27 UMDNET [JWO1]
28 DFVLR-SYS [HDC1]
29 YALE-AS [JG46]
30 SRI-AICNET [PM4]
31 CIT-CS [AD22]
32 STANFORD [PA5]
33 DEC-WRL-AS [RKJ2]
34 UDEL-EECIS [NMM]
35 MICATON [WDL]
36 EGP-TESTOR [BP17]
Reynolds & Postel [Page 21]
Assigned Numbers RFC 960
Autonomous System Numbers
37 NSWC [MXP1]
38 UIUC [AKC]
39 NRL-ITD [AP]
40 MIT-TEST [NC3]
41 AMES [MSM1]
42 THINK-AS [BJN1]
43 BNL-AS [GC]
44 S1-DOMAIN [LWR]
45 LLL-TIS-AS [GP10]
46 RUTGERS [RM8]
47 USC-OBERON [DRS4]
48 NRL-AS [WF3]
49 ICST-AS [JCN2]
50 ORNL-MSRNET [THD]
51 USAREUR-EM-AS [WXD]
52 UCLA [BXL]
53-65534 Unassigned [JBP]
65535 Reserved [JBP]
Reynolds & Postel [Page 22]
Assigned Numbers RFC 960
Domain System Parameters
DOMAIN SYSTEM PARAMETERS
The Internet Domain Naming System (DOMAIN) includes several
parameters. These are documented in RFC 883 [72]. The CLASS
parameter is listed here. The per CLASS parameters are defined in
separate RFCs as indicated.
Domain System Parameters:
Decimal Name References
------- ---- ----------
0 Reserved [PM1]
1 Internet [72,PM1]
2 Unassigned [PM1]
3 Chaos [PM1]
4-65534 Unassigned [PM1]
65535 Reserved [PM1]
Reynolds & Postel [Page 23]
Assigned Numbers RFC 960
ARPANET Logical Addresses
ASSIGNED ARPANET LOGICAL ADDRESSES
The ARPANET facility for "logical addressing" is described in
RFC 878 [65]. A portion of the possible logical addresses are
reserved for standard uses.
There are 49,152 possible logical host addresses. Of these, 256 are
reserved for assignment to well-known functions. Assignments for
well-known functions are made by Joyce Reynolds. Assignments for
other logical host addresses are made by the NIC.
Logical Address Assignments:
Decimal Description References
------- ----------- ----------
0 Reserved [JBP]
1 The BBN Core Gateways [MB]
2-255 Unassigned [JBP]
256 Reserved [JBP]
Reynolds & Postel [Page 24]
Assigned Numbers RFC 960
ARPANET Link Numbers
ASSIGNED ARPANET LINK NUMBERS
The word "link" here refers to a field in the original ARPANET
Host/IMP interface leader. The link was originally defined as an
8-bit field. Later specifications defined this field as the
"message-id" with a length of 12 bits. The name link now refers to
the high order 8 bits of this 12-bit message-id field. The Host/IMP
interface is defined in BBN Report 1822 [10].
The low-order 4 bits of the message-id field are called the sub-link.
Unless explicitly specified otherwise for a particular protocol,
there is no sender to receiver significance to the sub-link. The
sender may use the sub-link in any way he chooses (it is returned in
the RFNM by the destination IMP), the receiver should ignore the
sub-link.
Link Assignments:
Decimal Description References
------- ----------- ----------
0 Reserved [JBP]
1-149 Unassigned [JBP]
150 Xerox NS IDP [129,LLG]
151 Unassigned [JBP]
152 PARC Universal Protocol [15,HGM]
153 TIP Status Reporting [JGH]
154 TIP Accounting [JGH]
155 Internet Protocol [regular] [39,92,JBP]
156-158 Internet Protocol [experimental] [39,92,JBP]
159 Figleaf Link [JBW1]
160-194 Unassigned [JBP]
195 ISO-IP [58,RXM]
196-247 Experimental Protocols [JBP]
248-255 Network Maintenance [JGH]
Reynolds & Postel [Page 25]
Assigned Numbers RFC 960
IEEE 802 SAP Numbers
IEEE 802 SAP NUMBERS OF INTEREST
Some of the networks of all classes are IEEE 802 Networks. These
systems may use a Service Access Point field in much the same way the
ARPANET uses the "link" field. For further information and SAP
number assignments, please contact: Mr. Maris Graube, Chairman, IEEE
802, Route 1, 244 H, Forest Grove, Oregon, 97116.
Assignments:
Service Access Point Description References
-------------------- ----------- ----------
decimal binary
127 01111111 ISO DIS 8473 [JXJ]
96 01100000 DOD IP [39,91,JBP]
The IEEE 802.3 header does not have a type field to indicate what
protocol is used at the next level. As a work around for this
problem, one can put the Ethernet type field value in the IEEE 802.3
header's length field and use the following test to determine the
appropriate processing on receipt.
If the value in the length field of the IEEE 802.3 header is greater
than the Ethernet maximum packet length, then interpret the value as
an Ethernet type field. Otherwise, interpret the packet as an IEEE
802.3 packet.
The proposed standard for transmission
⌨️ 快捷键说明
复制代码Ctrl + C
搜索代码Ctrl + F
全屏模式F11
增大字号Ctrl + =
减小字号Ctrl + -
显示快捷键?