<?xml version='1.0'?>

<reference anchor='RFC0175'>

<front>
<title>Comments on "Socket Conventions Reconsidered"</title>
<author initials='E.' surname='Harslem' fullname='E. Harslem'>
<organization>The Rand Corporation</organization></author>
<author initials='J.' surname='Heafner' fullname='J. Heafner'>
<organization>The Rand Corporation</organization></author>
<date month='June' day='11' year='1971' />
<abstract>
<t>We agree with the conclusions reached by Abhay, Bob, and Joel in RFC #167, "Socket Conventions Reconsidered," (see RFC #129, scheme #4) - especially the necessity for a major NCP overhaul.</t>
<t>Our main departure in thinking from RFC #167 concerns the socket length. (See RFC #164, page 21.)  Since there is an apparently serious TIP storage consideration, Rand- assigned sockets will have the high-order 16 bits zero.</t>
<t>For the particular programs (current and pending) that Rand must access, repeatability of socket name (RFC #167, page 3) is not necessary for the user process and also not necessary for the server process except for initial contact (ICP) sockets.</t></abstract></front>

<seriesInfo name='RFC' value='175' />
</reference>
