Tom Perrine (tom@LOGICON.ARPA)
17 Apr 86 11:18 PST
Several of the latest versions of the hosttable have been imaginative
in the interpretation of RFC952. This has caused problems for some sites
(especially those running BSD).
May I suggest that RFC952 be updated to be a little more precise with
its definition of "host name" and "cpu type"?
The RFC states that host names are "up to 24 characters, drawn from the
alphabet (A-Z), digits (0-9), minus sign (-), and period (.)." Note
that this sort of implies that only uppercase alphabetics will be
allowed. It is later noted that "no distinction is made between upper
and lower case."
As to "cpu type", you are referred to "Assigned Numbers". Could the
SYNTAX for a cpu type be reproduced here? I am not sure that there IS
a syntax for forming cpu type, just the list of known cpu types.
With respect to the BBNCA problem, the rfc states that "single
character names or nicknames are not allowed", so 4. failed on an
illegally-formed HOST line. (Catastrophically, unfortunately.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 09 2000 - 14:36:06 GMT