RFC 1498: On the Naming and Binding of Network Destinations
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This brief paper offers a perspective on the subject of names of destinations in data communication networks. It suggests two ideas: First, it is helpful to distinguish among four different kinds of objects that may be named as the destination of a packet in a network. Second, the operating system concept of binding is a useful way to describe the relations among the four kinds of objects. This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC1498
- Published
- August 1993
- Authors
- J. Saltzer
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- Legacy
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 10
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 606Host names on-lineCurrent
December 1973
- RFC 1439The Uniqueness of Unique IdentifiersCurrent
March 1993
- RFC 1712DNS Encoding of Geographical LocationCurrent
November 1994
- RFC 1713Tools for DNS debuggingCurrent
November 1994
- RFC 2009GPS-Based Addressing and RoutingCurrent
November 1996
- RFC 2050Internet Registry IP Allocation GuidelinesObsoleted
November 1996
- RFC 2142Mailbox Names for Common Services, Roles and FunctionsCurrent
May 1997
- RFC 2368The mailto URL schemeObsoleted
July 1998
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?