Proposal to consider a network program resource notebook
A proposal to catalog what programs and resources are available on the ARPANET.
Deutsch, L.P., "Proposal to consider a network program resource notebook", RFC 446, DOI 10.17487/RFC0446, January 1973, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc446>.
@misc{rfc446,
series = {Request for Comments},
number = 446,
howpublished = {RFC 446},
publisher = {RFC Editor},
doi = {10.17487/RFC0446},
url = {https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc446},
author = {L.P. Deutsch},
title = {{Proposal to consider a network program resource notebook}},
pagetotal = 2,
year = 1973,
month = jan,
} RFC text
Network Working Group L. Peter Deutsch
RFC # 446 SRI
NIC # 14068 January 25, 1973
Proposal to consider a Network Program Resource Notebook
The recent requests by Jean Iseli of MITRE for information about all
resources of type X available on the network (where X=macro processors,
data management systems, and electromagnetic wave analysis programs)
lead me to suggest that the NIC be a repository for the replies.
Since the exchange of knowledge and techniques (not to mention
programs) is a central motivating factor in the development of the
ARPANET, it seems only reasonable that we begin to systematize the
process now that someone (MITRE and the government agencies on whose
behalf it is acting) feels there is enough information to be worth
collecting.
Obviously, the network community should be in a position to profit
from such compilation at least as much as outside agencies.
The NIC already has catalog and keyword capabilities for the Journal and
a large index of computer-related documents which are not on-line. I
would presume that extending this system to include programs and
documentation would not be a major task and would probably bring
immediate payoffs in terms of increased effectiveness of research sites.
This suggestion does not touch on the important larger issue, namely,
what obligations does the network community have to act as a service and
information resource to the outside world (government agencies in
particular) as opposed to its presumed major function of learning about
how to build and use computer networks and its actual major function of
research in many areas of computing which have nothing to do with
networks at all.
I feel that the confusion between the ARPANET as a service network
and the ARPANET as an experiment in the line of network research,
and the frustrations and communication failures resulting from
superimposing network responsibilities on top of existing research
projects, have not received adequate contemplation by the network
community.
I also feel that the ambiguous status of the network has lead to a
sharp division between research/maintenance sites and government
agency user sites, a situation which only can exacerbate my own
feeling that to some extent the former are being exploited for non-
research purposes in a manner that has been fairly rare in the
history or ARPA/IPT.
[ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ]
[ into the online RFC archives by Alex McKenzie with ]
[ support from GTE, formerly BBN Corp. 9/99 ]
AI ELI5
On this page
§1The Problem and the Proposal
RFC 446 documents a proposal by L. Peter Deutsch of SRI. When researchers at MITRE asked for information about what kinds of programs and tools were available on the ARPANET (such as macro processors, data management systems, and wave analysis programs), it became clear that there was no central place to find this information. Deutsch proposed that the Network Information Center (NIC) become a repository for such answers, building a catalog that the entire network community could search.
When someone needed a special computer tool, no one knew where to find it. The proposal was to keep a central catalog.
§2The NIC as a Repository
The NIC already maintained a catalog and index system for the ARPANET Journal and computer-related documents. Deutsch argued that extending this system to include programs and documentation would not be a major undertaking, and it would bring immediate payoffs by making research sites more effective in discovering and sharing resources.
The NIC already organized information, so adding a programs catalog seemed like a natural next step.
§3The Broader Question
Deutsch also raised a broader issue: what obligations does the ARPANET community have to serve as a resource to the outside world (particularly government agencies) versus its primary role as a research network? This tension between serving as a research platform and serving external information needs would shape network policy for years to come.
The RFC asks whether the network should focus on helping researchers talk to each other or also serve other organizations.