From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,MIME_QP_LONG_LINE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 32603 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2021 21:08:57 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 11 Mar 2021 21:08:57 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 153A29BD3E; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 07:08:57 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 849869B550; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 07:08:23 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key; secure) header.d=mxes.net header.i=@mxes.net header.b="uY/anzLz"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id CB2D09B550; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 07:08:21 +1000 (AEST) Received: from smtp-out-4.mxes.net (smtp-out-4.mxes.net [198.205.123.69]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9849D95074 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 07:08:20 +1000 (AEST) Received: from Customer-MUA (mua.mxes.net [10.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4DxM415rfQz3cBR; Thu, 11 Mar 2021 16:08:17 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mxes.net; s=mta; t=1615496899; bh=qAydfX6LlNtBQ+pbh2xBdUCSCntl25r8sb3ilU2xAAA=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References:Reply-To: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=uY/anzLzRGjgy8Z6v1aZYJicONYFHdtEsimHOTMWmovxEInfIISQrIf9rmOwQL+0c s9fRCIOjjbdzlMQfZtx81VDiHz6ovd7W1pg/UqHamU8kt4MLRo5SAvAS1mi8cLDBDL xNLIew4u2F2CIMxQpLgOPqip+nvRGwUYeMaVtz7g= From: "Ron Natalie" To: "Bakul Shah" Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 21:08:15 +0000 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <555F9514-DD67-41F1-8151-480F0D9D0EAC@iitbombay.org> References: <02d10a8e-2f39-4f88-f4c9-ecb295e0f01e@spamtrap.tnetconsulting.net> <555F9514-DD67-41F1-8151-480F0D9D0EAC@iitbombay.org> User-Agent: eM_Client/8.1.1054.0 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------=_MB8F7C1BA5-CCC3-4F8B-B385-3A6582404506" X-Sent-To: Subject: Re: [TUHS] [COFF] Pondering the hosts file X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Ron Natalie Cc: The Unix Heritage Society , Internet History Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --------=_MB8F7C1BA5-CCC3-4F8B-B385-3A6582404506 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The "name" in this context the host/network/gateway name such as=20 SRI-NIC.ARPA. 3COM.COM would not have been legal back then. Nowhere does it imply that any of the other fields are so restricted. ------ Original Message ------ From: "Bakul Shah" To: "Ron Natalie" Cc: "The Unix Heritage Society" ; "Internet=20 History" Sent: 3/11/2021 4:02:50 PM Subject: Re: [TUHS] [COFF] Pondering the hosts file >On Mar 11, 2021, at 12:32 PM, Ron Natalie wrote: >> >>Amusingly one day we got an Imagen ethernet-connected laser printer. =20 >> Mike Muuss decided the thing should be named BRL-ZAP and since I=20 >>didn't know what to put down as the machine type, and it did have a=20 >>68000 in it, I had Jake put 68000 in the entry in the host table. >> >>The next day I got all kinds of hate mail from other BSD sites who=20 >>assumed I had intentionally sabotaged the host table. Apparently,=20 >>the BSD systems used a YACC grammar to parse the NIC table into the=20 >>Berkeley one. The only problem is they got the grammar wrong and=20 >>assumed the CPU type always began with a letter. There parse blew=20 >>up on my "ZAP" host and they assumed that was the desired effect. > >This is understandable as >a) All the "official machine names" in various assigned numbers RFCs=20 >start with a letter. >b) the BNF syntax for the "host table specification" entries in RFC 952=20 >or 810 are not precise enough. >> ::=3D PDP-11/70 | DEC-1080 | C/30 | CDC-6400...etc. >> >>NOTE: See "Assigned Numbers" for specific options and acronyms >> for machine types, operating systems, and protocol/services. >> >> for machine types, operating systems, and protocol/services. >> >c) 68000 was not an official name! >:-) :-) :-) > >>I countered back that using a YACC grammar for this was rediculous. =20 >>There was already a real popular file on UNIX that had a bunch of=20 >>fields separated by colons and commas (/etc/passwd anybody) that it=20 >>was never necessary to use YACC to parse. > >Can't argue with that! Though that doesn't mean a handwritten parser=20 >wouldn't have complained about 68000. > --------=_MB8F7C1BA5-CCC3-4F8B-B385-3A6582404506 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The "name" in this co= ntext the host/network/gateway name such as SRI-NIC.ARPA.=C2=A0 =C2=A0 3COM= .COM would not have been legal back then.
Nowhere does it imply that a= ny of the other fields are so restricted.

------ Original Message ------
From: "Bakul Shah" <bakul@ii= tbombay.org>
To: "Ron Natalie" <ron@ronnat= alie.com>
Cc: "The Unix Heritage Society" <tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org>; "Internet History" <internet-history@postel.org>
Sent: 3/11/2021 4:02:50 PM
Subject: Re: [TUHS] [COFF] Pondering the hosts file

On Mar 11, 2021, at 12:32 PM, Ron Natalie <ron@ronnatalie.com> wrote:
=

Amusingly one day we got an Imagen ethernet-con= nected laser printer.=C2=A0 =C2=A0 Mike Muuss decided the thing should be n= amed BRL-ZAP and since I didn't know what to put down as the machine type,= and it did have a 68000 in it, I had Jake put 68000 in the entry in the hos= t table.

The next d= ay I got all kinds of hate mail from other BSD sites who assumed I had inte= ntionally sabotaged the host table.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Apparently, the BSD systems = used a YACC grammar to parse the NIC table into the Berkeley one.=C2=A0= =C2=A0The only problem is they got the grammar wrong and assumed the CPU type = always began with a letter.=C2=A0 =C2=A0 There parse blew up on my "ZAP" h= ost and they assumed that was the desired effect.
<= div>
This is understandable as
a) All= the "official machine names" in various assigned numbers RFCs start with a= letter.
b) the BNF syntax for the "host table specification= " entries in RFC 952 or 810 are not precise enough.
	<cputype> ::=3D PDP-11/70 | DEC-=
1080 | C/30 | CDC-6400...etc.

NOTE:  S=
ee "Assigned Numbers" for specific options and acronyms
         for machine types, operating systems, and protocol/services.

         for machine types, operating system=
s, and protocol/services.

c) 68000 was not an official name!
:-) :-) :-)

I countered back that using a YACC grammar for t= his was rediculous.=C2=A0 =C2=A0There was already a real popular file on UN= IX that had a bunch of fields separated by colons and commas (/etc/passwd a= nybody) that it was never necessary to use YACC to parse.

Can't argue with that! Though that doesn= 't mean a handwritten parser wouldn't have complained about 68000.

--------=_MB8F7C1BA5-CCC3-4F8B-B385-3A6582404506--