Address tables
Network address directory for ARPANET sites
McKenzie, A.M., "Address tables", RFC 208, DOI 10.17487/RFC0208, August 1971, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc208>.
@misc{rfc208,
series = {Request for Comments},
number = 208,
howpublished = {RFC 208},
publisher = {RFC Editor},
doi = {10.17487/RFC0208},
url = {https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc208},
author = {A.M. McKenzie},
title = {{Address tables}},
pagetotal = 3,
year = 1971,
month = aug,
} RFC text
Contents
Network Working Group A. McKenzie
Request for Comments: 208 Bolt Beranek and Newman
NIC: 7181 9 August 1971
Categories: B.l, C.2
Updates: none
Obsoletes: none
ADDRESS TABLES
Attached is a copy of a revision to Appendix A of BBN Report No.
1822; the revised version of the Appendix is our first attempt to
make the list of sites attached to the ARPA Network prospective
rather than retrospective. We are adopting this approach because of
the large number of sites scheduled for attachment in the near
future, and because many Hosts apparently require a site's address to
be in some local table before their NCPs will permit communication
with the site. Therefore, we urge such Hosts to add the new sites to
their lists of addresses as soon as possible. Also, please note the
address change which will be made at BBN on exactly September first.
Incidentally, it seems to us that it is irrational for an NCP to
discard otherwise valid messages, simply because the sender's address
doesn't appear in a local table. Similarly, it seems almost as
irrational for an NCP to prevent a local user from trying to
communicate with a remote site, the address of which is known to the
user but not stored in the NCP's tables.
Report No. 1822 Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc.
APPENDIX A
IMP AND HOST SITE IDENTIFICATION
Bit 9-16 of the leader of most Host-to-IMP or IMP-to-Host messages
define a network address related to the message (these bits are not
meaningful for message types 1, 2, and 4). In a Host-to-IMP message
the network address identifies a particular Host to which the message
should be delivered. In an IMP-to-Host message the network address
identifies the Host from which the message originated.
A network address consists of six bits (bits 11-16 of the leader)
which specify an IMP number, preceded by two bits (bits 9-10 of the
leader) which specify the Host number of a particular Host connected
to that IMP. The table below gives the decimal values of IMP number,
Host number, and network address for each Host currently connected to
the ARPA Network or scheduled for connection in the near future.
Scheduled installation dates are also shown for Hosts not currently
connected; these dates, however, are subject to change without
notice.
IMP SITE HOST NETWORK SCHEDULED
NUMBER NAME NUMBER HOST ADDRESS INSTALLATION
------ ---- ------ ---- ------- ------------
1 UCLA 0 SIGMA-7 1
1 IBM 360/91 65
2 SRI 0 PDP-10 (NIC) 2
1 PDP-10 (Al) 66
3 UCSB 0 IBM 360/75 3
4 UTAH 0 PDP-lO 4
5 BBN 0 DDP-516 5 ) See Note 1
1 PDP-10 (A) 69 )
2 PDP-1O (B) 133
Note 1: Prior to September 1, 1971 the BBN PDP-1O (A) will be Host
number 0 (network address 5) and the BBN DDP-516 will be Host number
1 (network address 69). The address change is to be made during the
day on 9/1/71.
IMP SITE HOST NETWORK SCHEDULE
NUMBER NAME NUMBER HOST ADDRESS INSTALLATION
------ ---- ------ ---- ------- ------------
6 MIT 0 Honeywell 645 6
1 PDP-10 70
7 RAND O 360/65 7
1 PDP-1O 71
8 SDC O IBM 360/75 8
9 HARVARD O PDP-1O 9
1 PDP-1 73
2 PDP-11 137
10 LINCOLN O IBM 360/67 10
1 TX2 74
11 STANFORD O PDP-1O 11
12 ILLINOIS O PDP-11 12
13 CASE O PDP-1O 13
14 CARNEGIE O PDP-1O 14
15 PAOLI O B6500 15
16 NASA/AMES O IBM 360/67 16 8/3/71
2 TIP 144
17 MITRE 2 TIP 145 8/31/71
18 RADC O H 635/645 18 10/5/71
2 TIP 146
19 NBS O PDP-11 19 11/2/71
20 ETAC 2 TIP 148 11/30/71
21 TINKER O 418 III 21 1/4/71
22 McCLELLAN O 418 III 22 2/1/72
23 USC 0 IBM 360/44 23 2/29/72
2 TIP 151
24 GWC 2 TIP 152 3/14/72
25 NCAR O CDC 7600 25 3/28/72
2 TIP 153
30 BBN/TIP 2 TIP 158
AI ELI5
On this page
§1Address Assignment and Tables
RFC 208 publishes the first comprehensive ARPANET host address directory. A network address in the ARPA Network is encoded in the Host-to-IMP message leader: bits 9-10 specify a host number (0-3) attached to an IMP, and bits 11-16 specify the IMP number (1-31). Together they form an 8-bit network address that identifies each host.
BBN recommended treating this directory as prospective rather than retrospective: it includes sites scheduled for imminent connection, not just those currently online. This allows hosts to add new sites to their local tables immediately, reducing delays when a new site comes online.
Each computer on the ARPANET gets a number made of two parts: which machine it is plugged into (IMP number) and which port on that machine (host number). The note lists all of them.
§2The Site Directory
RFC 208 tabulates the IMP numbers, host numbers, network addresses, and scheduled installation dates. At publication in August 1971, fifteen sites are connected: UCLA (IMP 1), SRI (2), UCSB (3), Utah (4), BBN (5), MIT (6), RAND (7), SDC (8), Harvard (9), Lincoln (10), Stanford (11), Illinois (12), CASE (13), Carnegie-Mellon (14), and Burroughs/Illiac (15). Additional sites from NASA/Ames through BBN/TIP are scheduled through March 1972.
The RFC also notes a critical address change at BBN: prior to September 1, 1971, the PDP-10 (A) will be Host 0; after that date it becomes Host 1, and the DDP-516 moves from Host 1 to Host 0.
Fifteen computers are on the net in August 1971. Ten more are about to join. Every few weeks, a new one plugs in.
§3Argument Against Address Filtering
RFC 208 argues that it is irrational for an NCP (Network Control Program) to discard valid messages simply because the sender's address does not appear in the local table. It is equally irrational to prevent a local user from attempting communication with a remote site whose address is known to the user but missing from the NCP's tables.
This critique foreshadows the later shift toward more open network routing and dynamic discovery, rather than requiring prior knowledge of all possible peers.
The note argues: do not reject mail from addresses not in your table. Let people talk even if the other person is new.