What we hope is an official list of host names
A proposed list of formal host names, nicknames, and network addresses.
Watson, R.W., "What we hope is an official list of host names", RFC 289, DOI 10.17487/RFC0289, December 1971, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc289>.
@misc{rfc289,
series = {Request for Comments},
number = 289,
howpublished = {RFC 289},
publisher = {RFC Editor},
doi = {10.17487/RFC0289},
url = {https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc289},
author = {R.W. Watson},
title = {{What we hope is an official list of host names}},
pagetotal = 3,
year = 1971,
month = dec,
} RFC text
NWG/RFC #289 21-DEC-71 16:29 8295
What We Hope Is An Official List of Host Names Richard W. Watson
SRI-ARC
The enclosed is what we hope will be accepted as a list of
official formal host names and nicknames. As no other subject
worked on by the NWG has generated so much comment, it is
worthwhile to review briefly how this list came into being.
The need for some standard set of names recognized by NCP's and
Telnets and usable on hardcopy to designate a persons affiliation
had been recognized for some time and several sets of names were
in use.
Peggy Karp issued the first formal proposal of a set of standard
names in RFC 226, NIC 7625. This proposal was answered by a
number of counter proposals and culminated in RFC 247, NIC 7688.
People still were not happy with this proposal as names normally
associated with hosts or projects were not used.
At the last NWG meeting a number of people discussed the name
problem and agreed that the only reasonable compromise solution
was to have both formal names and nicknames and to let the people
at the hosts choose their own names within the guideline which the
previous dialog had seemed to agree on.
The guidelines were summarized in RFC 273, NIC 7837 and the NIC
agreed to collect and publish the names that the people at each
host indicated they desired. A number of names were received and
a tentative list was published as RFC 280, NIC 8060. More people
responded with their desired names or changed the ones in the
above list.
Almost all sites have since responded and the following list
resulted.
I think people should feel free to change their host name when
ever the situation warrants.
Formal Name Nickname Network Address
AMES-67 16
AMES-ILLIAC I4
AMES-TIP 144
BBN-NCC NCC 5
NWG/RFC #289 21-DEC-71 16:29 8295
What We Hope Is An Official List of Host Names
BBN-TENEX BBN 69
BBN-TENEXB BBNB 133
BBN-TESTIP 158
BURR 15
BURR-TEST 79
CASE-10 13
CMU-10 14
ETAC-TIP 148
GWC-TIP 152
HARV-1 PDP1 73
HARV-10 ACL 9
HARV-11 137
ILL-ANTS ANTS 12
ILL-CAC CAC 76
LL-67 10
LL-TSP 138
LL-TX-2 TX-2 74
MCCL-418 22
MIT-AI 134
MIT-DMCG DMCG 70
MIT-MULTICS MIT-M 6
MITRE-TIP 145
NBS-CCST NBS 19
NWG/RFC #289 21-DEC-71 16:29 8295
What We Hope Is An Official List of Host Names
NBS-TIP 147
NCAR-7600 25
NCAR-TIP 153
RADC-645 18
RADC-TIP 146
RAND-CSG 71
RAND-RCC 7
SDC-ADEPT SDC 8
SRI-AI 66
SRI-ARC 2
SU-AI 11
TINK-418 21
UCLA-CCN CCN 65
UCLA-NMC SEX 1
UCLA-MOD75 UCSB 3
USC-44 23
USC-TIP 151
UTAH-10 4
[ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ]
[ into the online RFC archives by BBN Corp. under the ]
[ direction of Alex McKenzie. 12/96 ]
ISO Plain Language
On this page
§1How the Proposed List Was Created
The RFC says several sets of host names were in use and that NCPs and Telnets needed a standard set. Earlier proposals had led to counterproposals, and participants were dissatisfied when names normally associated with hosts or projects were not used.
The compromise was to have both formal names and nicknames, with people at each host choosing names within guidelines. The NIC collected the choices and published the resulting list.
After earlier naming proposals drew objections, participants agreed that each host could choose a formal name and a nickname. The NIC gathered those choices into this list.
§2Formal Names, Nicknames, and Addresses
Each row gives a formal name and network address; some rows also include a nickname. For example, BBN-NCC has nickname NCC and address 5; UCLA-CCN has nickname CCN and address 65; and SRI-ARC has address 2.
The author says people should feel free to change a host name when the situation warrants. The list reflects the names received from almost all sites at the time.
The table connects each host's formal name with its network address and sometimes a nickname. The author says sites may change their names when needed.
§3Status of the List
The RFC describes the list as one that its authors hoped would be accepted as official. It is a directory of names and addresses, not a protocol for resolving a name to a host.
The unit metadata records RFC 384 as the RFC that later obsoleted this list.
This document proposed a shared directory; it did not define a name-resolution protocol. A later list replaced it.