DECLARATION OF SANDY GINOZA FOR TFTF
`RFC 791: Internet Protocol
`
`I, Sandy Ginoza, based on my personal knowledge and information, hereby declare as
`
`follows:
`
`1.
`
`I am an employee of Association Management Solutions, LLC (AMS), which
`
`acts under contract to the Internet Society (ISOC) as the operator of the RFC Production
`
`Center. The RFC Production Center is part of the "RFC Editor" function, which prepares
`
`documents for publication and places files in an online repository for the authoritative
`
`Request for Comments (RFC) series of documents (RFC Series), and preserves records
`
`relating to these documents. The RFC Series includes, among other things, the series of
`
`Internet standards developed by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), an organized
`
`activity of ISOC. I hold the position of Director of the RFC Production Center. I began
`
`employment with AMS in this capacity on 6 January 2010.
`
`2.
`
`Among my responsibilities as Director of the RFC Production Center, I act as
`
`the custodian of records relating to the RFC Series, and I am familiar with the record keeping
`
`practices relating to the RFC Series, including the creation and maintenance of such records.
`
`3.
`
`From June 1999 to 5 January 2010, I was an employee of the Information
`
`Sciences Institute at University of Southern California (ISI). I held various position titles with
`
`the RFC Editor project at ISI, ending with Senior Editor.
`
`4.
`
`The RFC Editor function was conducted by ISI under contract to the United
`
`States government prior to 1998. In 1998, ISOC, in furtherance of its 1E11, activity, entered into
`
`the first in a series of contracts with ISI providing for ISI's performance of the RFC Editor
`
`function. Beginning in 2010, certain aspects of the RFC Editor function were assumed by the
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 1
`
`

`

`RFC Production Center operation of AMS under contract to ISOC (acting through its IETF
`
`function and, in particular, the IETF Administrative Oversight Committee). The business records
`
`of the RFC Editor function as it was conducted by ISI are currently housed on the computer
`
`systems of AMS, as contractor to ISOC.
`
`5.
`
`I make this declaration based on my personal knowledge and information
`
`contained in the business records of the RFC Editor as they are currently housed at AMS, or
`
`confirmation with other responsible RFC Editor personnel with such knowledge.
`
`6.
`
`Prior to 1998, the RFC Editor's regular practice was to publish RFCs, making
`
`them available from a repository via FTP. When a new RFC was published, an announcement
`
`of its publication, with information on how to access the RFC, would be typically sent out
`
`within 24 hours of the publication.
`
`7.
`
`Any RFC published on the RFC Editor website or via FTP was reasonably
`
`accessible to the public and was disseminated or otherwise available to the extent that persons
`
`interested and ordinarily skilled in the subject matter or art exercising reasonable diligence could
`
`have located it. In particular, the RFCs were indexed and placed in a public repository.
`
`8.
`
`The RFCs are kept in an online repository in the course of the RFC Editor's
`
`regularly conducted activity and ordinary course of business. The records are made pursuant to
`
`established procedures and are relied upon by the RFC Editor in the performance of its functions.
`
`9.
`
`10.
`
`It is the regular practice of the RFC Editor to make and keep the RFC records.
`
`Based on the business records of the RFC Editor and the RFC Editor's course of
`
`conduct in publishing RFCs, I have determined that the publication date of RFC 791 was no later
`
`than October 1992, at which time it was reasonably accessible to the public either on the RFC
`
`2
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 2
`
`

`

`Editor website or via FTP from a repository. A copy of that RFC is attached to this declaration
`
`as an exhibit.
`
`Pursuant to Section 1746 of Title 28 of United States Code, I declare under penalty of
`
`perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct
`
`and that the foregoing is based upon personal knowledge and information and is believed to be
`
`true.
`
`Date:
`
`11
`
`e)9k. Pleb
`
`4813-1341-1185A
`
`ATTACHED CALIF. ACKNOWLEDGMENT St
`
`By:
`lI t`g
`
`3
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 3
`
`

`

`CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
`
`CIVIL CODE § 1189
`
`A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the
`document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
`
`State of California
`County of LS
`S C)Plar
`Date
`personally appeared
`
`On
`
`ct-cc
`
`r
`
`before me,
`
`Dei50&dmu— wrig-N
`
`k
`
`, Here Insert Name and Title of the Officer
`Vt.047f
`
`x , Name‘s,f of Signer(if
`
`n94) whose name 4f. qare. -
`who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the pe
`subsc ibed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she hey executed the sarrle in
`the instrument the person*,
`-hie h r heir authorized capacity(pd), and that b h+s-ther their signature
`or t e entity upon behalf of which the person acte , executed the instrument.
`I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws
`of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph
`is true and correct.
`WITNESS my hand and official seal.
`
`S. S. DELGADILLO
`Notary Public - California
`Los Angeles County
`Commission # 2224120
`My Comm. Expires Dec g, 2021
`
`Signature
`
`6
`-Ss0040
`Signature -6f Notary Public
`
`Place Notary Seal Above
`
`OPTIONAL
`Though this section is optional, completing this information can deter alteration of the document or
`fraudulent reattachment of this form to an unintended document.
`Description of Attached Document
`Vatc-111-(1010- frotocv0
`Title or Type of Document:fr Or ctrtMil Ot SCOI CAYlv2-44
`[t\s
`Number of Pages:
`Document Date:
`ql
`NdifU2.
`Signer(s) Other Than Named Above:
`
`Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
`Signer's Name:
`D Corporate Officer — Title(s):
`q General
`D Partner — D Limited
`q Attorney in Fact
`D Individual
`D Guardian or Conservator
`0 Trustee
`0 Other:
`Signer Is Representing:
`
`Signer's Name:
`El Corporate Officer — Title(s):
`q Partner — 0 Limited D General
`q Attorney in Fact
`f: Individual
`D Guardian or Conservator
`q Trustee
`0 Other:
`Signer Is Representing:
`
`©2016 National Notary Association • www.NationalNotary.org • 1-800-US NOTARY (1-800-876-6827)
`
`Item #5907
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 4
`
`

`

`RFC: 791
`
` INTERNET PROTOCOL
`
` DARPA INTERNET PROGRAM
`
` PROTOCOL SPECIFICATION
`
` September 1981
`
` prepared for
`
` Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
` Information Processing Techniques Office
` 1400 Wilson Boulevard
` Arlington, Virginia 22209
`
` by
`
` Information Sciences Institute
` University of Southern California
` 4676 Admiralty Way
` Marina del Rey, California 90291
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 5
`
`

`

`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 6
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 6
`
`

`

`
`
`September 1981
` Internet Protocol
`
` TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
` PREFACE ........................................................ iii
`
`1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................... 1
`
` 1.1 Motivation .................................................... 1
` 1.2 Scope ......................................................... 1
` 1.3 Interfaces .................................................... 1
` 1.4 Operation ..................................................... 2
`
`2. OVERVIEW ......................................................... 5
`
` 2.1 Relation to Other Protocols ................................... 9
` 2.2 Model of Operation ............................................ 5
` 2.3 Function Description .......................................... 7
` 2.4 Gateways ...................................................... 9
`
`3. SPECIFICATION ................................................... 11
`
` 3.1 Internet Header Format ....................................... 11
` 3.2 Discussion ................................................... 23
` 3.3 Interfaces ................................................... 31
`
`APPENDIX A: Examples & Scenarios ................................... 34
`APPENDIX B: Data Transmission Order ................................ 39
`
`GLOSSARY ............................................................ 41
`
`REFERENCES .......................................................... 45
`
` [Page i]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 7
`
`

`

`
` September 1981
`Internet Protocol
`
`[Page ii]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 8
`
`

`

`
`September 1981
` Internet Protocol
`
` PREFACE
`
`This document specifies the DoD Standard Internet Protocol. This
`document is based on six earlier editions of the ARPA Internet Protocol
`Specification, and the present text draws heavily from them. There have
`been many contributors to this work both in terms of concepts and in
`terms of text. This edition revises aspects of addressing, error
`handling, option codes, and the security, precedence, compartments, and
`handling restriction features of the internet protocol.
`
` Jon Postel
`
` Editor
`
` [Page iii]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 9
`
`

`

`
` September 1981
`
`RFC: 791
`Replaces: RFC 760
`IENs 128, 123, 111,
`80, 54, 44, 41, 28, 26
`
` INTERNET PROTOCOL
`
` DARPA INTERNET PROGRAM
` PROTOCOL SPECIFICATION
`
` 1. INTRODUCTION
`
`1.1. Motivation
`
` The Internet Protocol is designed for use in interconnected systems of
` packet-switched computer communication networks. Such a system has
` been called a "catenet" [1]. The internet protocol provides for
` transmitting blocks of data called datagrams from sources to
` destinations, where sources and destinations are hosts identified by
` fixed length addresses. The internet protocol also provides for
` fragmentation and reassembly of long datagrams, if necessary, for
` transmission through "small packet" networks.
`
`1.2. Scope
`
` The internet protocol is specifically limited in scope to provide the
` functions necessary to deliver a package of bits (an internet
` datagram) from a source to a destination over an interconnected system
` of networks. There are no mechanisms to augment end-to-end data
` reliability, flow control, sequencing, or other services commonly
` found in host-to-host protocols. The internet protocol can capitalize
` on the services of its supporting networks to provide various types
` and qualities of service.
`
`1.3. Interfaces
`
` This protocol is called on by host-to-host protocols in an internet
` environment. This protocol calls on local network protocols to carry
` the internet datagram to the next gateway or destination host.
`
` For example, a TCP module would call on the internet module to take a
` TCP segment (including the TCP header and user data) as the data
` portion of an internet datagram. The TCP module would provide the
` addresses and other parameters in the internet header to the internet
` module as arguments of the call. The internet module would then
` create an internet datagram and call on the local network interface to
` transmit the internet datagram.
`
` In the ARPANET case, for example, the internet module would call on a
`
` [Page 1]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 10
`
`

`

`
` September 1981
`Internet Protocol
`Introduction
`
` local net module which would add the 1822 leader [2] to the internet
` datagram creating an ARPANET message to transmit to the IMP. The
` ARPANET address would be derived from the internet address by the
` local network interface and would be the address of some host in the
` ARPANET, that host might be a gateway to other networks.
`
`1.4. Operation
`
` The internet protocol implements two basic functions: addressing and
` fragmentation.
`
` The internet modules use the addresses carried in the internet header
` to transmit internet datagrams toward their destinations. The
` selection of a path for transmission is called routing.
`
` The internet modules use fields in the internet header to fragment and
` reassemble internet datagrams when necessary for transmission through
` "small packet" networks.
`
` The model of operation is that an internet module resides in each host
` engaged in internet communication and in each gateway that
` interconnects networks. These modules share common rules for
` interpreting address fields and for fragmenting and assembling
` internet datagrams. In addition, these modules (especially in
` gateways) have procedures for making routing decisions and other
` functions.
`
` The internet protocol treats each internet datagram as an independent
` entity unrelated to any other internet datagram. There are no
` connections or logical circuits (virtual or otherwise).
`
` The internet protocol uses four key mechanisms in providing its
` service: Type of Service, Time to Live, Options, and Header Checksum.
`
` The Type of Service is used to indicate the quality of the service
` desired. The type of service is an abstract or generalized set of
` parameters which characterize the service choices provided in the
` networks that make up the internet. This type of service indication
` is to be used by gateways to select the actual transmission parameters
` for a particular network, the network to be used for the next hop, or
` the next gateway when routing an internet datagram.
`
` The Time to Live is an indication of an upper bound on the lifetime of
` an internet datagram. It is set by the sender of the datagram and
` reduced at the points along the route where it is processed. If the
` time to live reaches zero before the internet datagram reaches its
` destination, the internet datagram is destroyed. The time to live can
` be thought of as a self destruct time limit.
`
`[Page 2]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 11
`
`

`

`
`September 1981
` Internet Protocol
` Introduction
`
` The Options provide for control functions needed or useful in some
` situations but unnecessary for the most common communications. The
` options include provisions for timestamps, security, and special
` routing.
`
` The Header Checksum provides a verification that the information used
` in processing internet datagram has been transmitted correctly. The
` data may contain errors. If the header checksum fails, the internet
` datagram is discarded at once by the entity which detects the error.
`
` The internet protocol does not provide a reliable communication
` facility. There are no acknowledgments either end-to-end or
` hop-by-hop. There is no error control for data, only a header
` checksum. There are no retransmissions. There is no flow control.
`
` Errors detected may be reported via the Internet Control Message
` Protocol (ICMP) [3] which is implemented in the internet protocol
` module.
`
` [Page 3]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 12
`
`

`

`
` September 1981
`Internet Protocol
`
`[Page 4]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 13
`
`

`

`
`September 1981
` Internet Protocol
`
` 2. OVERVIEW
`
`2.1. Relation to Other Protocols
`
` The following diagram illustrates the place of the internet protocol
` in the protocol hierarchy:
`
` +------+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+
` |Telnet| | FTP | | TFTP| ... | ... |
` +------+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+
` | | | |
` +-----+ +-----+ +-----+
` | TCP | | UDP | ... | ... |
` +-----+ +-----+ +-----+
` | | |
` +--------------------------+----+
` | Internet Protocol & ICMP |
` +--------------------------+----+
` |
` +---------------------------+
` | Local Network Protocol |
` +---------------------------+
`
` Protocol Relationships
`
` Figure 1.
`
` Internet protocol interfaces on one side to the higher level
` host-to-host protocols and on the other side to the local network
` protocol. In this context a "local network" may be a small network in
` a building or a large network such as the ARPANET.
`
`2.2. Model of Operation
`
` The model of operation for transmitting a datagram from one
` application program to another is illustrated by the following
` scenario:
`
` We suppose that this transmission will involve one intermediate
` gateway.
`
` The sending application program prepares its data and calls on its
` local internet module to send that data as a datagram and passes the
` destination address and other parameters as arguments of the call.
`
` The internet module prepares a datagram header and attaches the data
` to it. The internet module determines a local network address for
` this internet address, in this case it is the address of a gateway.
`
` [Page 5]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 14
`
`

`

`
` September 1981
`Internet Protocol
`Overview
`
` It sends this datagram and the local network address to the local
` network interface.
`
` The local network interface creates a local network header, and
` attaches the datagram to it, then sends the result via the local
` network.
`
` The datagram arrives at a gateway host wrapped in the local network
` header, the local network interface strips off this header, and
` turns the datagram over to the internet module. The internet module
` determines from the internet address that the datagram is to be
` forwarded to another host in a second network. The internet module
` determines a local net address for the destination host. It calls
` on the local network interface for that network to send the
` datagram.
`
` This local network interface creates a local network header and
` attaches the datagram sending the result to the destination host.
`
` At this destination host the datagram is stripped of the local net
` header by the local network interface and handed to the internet
` module.
`
` The internet module determines that the datagram is for an
` application program in this host. It passes the data to the
` application program in response to a system call, passing the source
` address and other parameters as results of the call.
`
` Application Application
` Program Program
` \ /
` Internet Module Internet Module Internet Module
` \ / \ /
` LNI-1 LNI-1 LNI-2 LNI-2
` \ / \ /
` Local Network 1 Local Network 2
`
` Transmission Path
`
` Figure 2
`
`[Page 6]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 15
`
`

`

`
`September 1981
` Internet Protocol
` Overview
`
`2.3. Function Description
`
` The function or purpose of Internet Protocol is to move datagrams
` through an interconnected set of networks. This is done by passing
` the datagrams from one internet module to another until the
` destination is reached. The internet modules reside in hosts and
` gateways in the internet system. The datagrams are routed from one
` internet module to another through individual networks based on the
` interpretation of an internet address. Thus, one important mechanism
` of the internet protocol is the internet address.
`
` In the routing of messages from one internet module to another,
` datagrams may need to traverse a network whose maximum packet size is
` smaller than the size of the datagram. To overcome this difficulty, a
` fragmentation mechanism is provided in the internet protocol.
`
` Addressing
`
` A distinction is made between names, addresses, and routes [4]. A
` name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
` route indicates how to get there. The internet protocol deals
` primarily with addresses. It is the task of higher level (i.e.,
` host-to-host or application) protocols to make the mapping from
` names to addresses. The internet module maps internet addresses to
` local net addresses. It is the task of lower level (i.e., local net
` or gateways) procedures to make the mapping from local net addresses
` to routes.
`
` Addresses are fixed length of four octets (32 bits). An address
` begins with a network number, followed by local address (called the
` "rest" field). There are three formats or classes of internet
` addresses: in class a, the high order bit is zero, the next 7 bits
` are the network, and the last 24 bits are the local address; in
` class b, the high order two bits are one-zero, the next 14 bits are
` the network and the last 16 bits are the local address; in class c,
` the high order three bits are one-one-zero, the next 21 bits are the
` network and the last 8 bits are the local address.
`
` Care must be taken in mapping internet addresses to local net
` addresses; a single physical host must be able to act as if it were
` several distinct hosts to the extent of using several distinct
` internet addresses. Some hosts will also have several physical
` interfaces (multi-homing).
`
` That is, provision must be made for a host to have several physical
` interfaces to the network with each having several logical internet
` addresses.
`
` [Page 7]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 16
`
`

`

`
` September 1981
`Internet Protocol
`Overview
`
` Examples of address mappings may be found in "Address Mappings" [5].
`
` Fragmentation
`
` Fragmentation of an internet datagram is necessary when it
` originates in a local net that allows a large packet size and must
` traverse a local net that limits packets to a smaller size to reach
` its destination.
`
` An internet datagram can be marked "don’t fragment." Any internet
` datagram so marked is not to be internet fragmented under any
` circumstances. If internet datagram marked don’t fragment cannot be
` delivered to its destination without fragmenting it, it is to be
` discarded instead.
`
` Fragmentation, transmission and reassembly across a local network
` which is invisible to the internet protocol module is called
` intranet fragmentation and may be used [6].
`
` The internet fragmentation and reassembly procedure needs to be able
` to break a datagram into an almost arbitrary number of pieces that
` can be later reassembled. The receiver of the fragments uses the
` identification field to ensure that fragments of different datagrams
` are not mixed. The fragment offset field tells the receiver the
` position of a fragment in the original datagram. The fragment
` offset and length determine the portion of the original datagram
` covered by this fragment. The more-fragments flag indicates (by
` being reset) the last fragment. These fields provide sufficient
` information to reassemble datagrams.
`
` The identification field is used to distinguish the fragments of one
` datagram from those of another. The originating protocol module of
` an internet datagram sets the identification field to a value that
` must be unique for that source-destination pair and protocol for the
` time the datagram will be active in the internet system. The
` originating protocol module of a complete datagram sets the
` more-fragments flag to zero and the fragment offset to zero.
`
` To fragment a long internet datagram, an internet protocol module
` (for example, in a gateway), creates two new internet datagrams and
` copies the contents of the internet header fields from the long
` datagram into both new internet headers. The data of the long
` datagram is divided into two portions on a 8 octet (64 bit) boundary
` (the second portion might not be an integral multiple of 8 octets,
` but the first must be). Call the number of 8 octet blocks in the
` first portion NFB (for Number of Fragment Blocks). The first
` portion of the data is placed in the first new internet datagram,
` and the total length field is set to the length of the first
`
`[Page 8]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 17
`
`

`

`
`September 1981
` Internet Protocol
` Overview
`
` datagram. The more-fragments flag is set to one. The second
` portion of the data is placed in the second new internet datagram,
` and the total length field is set to the length of the second
` datagram. The more-fragments flag carries the same value as the
` long datagram. The fragment offset field of the second new internet
` datagram is set to the value of that field in the long datagram plus
` NFB.
`
` This procedure can be generalized for an n-way split, rather than
` the two-way split described.
`
` To assemble the fragments of an internet datagram, an internet
` protocol module (for example at a destination host) combines
` internet datagrams that all have the same value for the four fields:
` identification, source, destination, and protocol. The combination
` is done by placing the data portion of each fragment in the relative
` position indicated by the fragment offset in that fragment’s
` internet header. The first fragment will have the fragment offset
` zero, and the last fragment will have the more-fragments flag reset
` to zero.
`
`2.4. Gateways
`
` Gateways implement internet protocol to forward datagrams between
` networks. Gateways also implement the Gateway to Gateway Protocol
` (GGP) [7] to coordinate routing and other internet control
` information.
`
` In a gateway the higher level protocols need not be implemented and
` the GGP functions are added to the IP module.
`
` +-------------------------------+
` | Internet Protocol & ICMP & GGP|
` +-------------------------------+
` | |
` +---------------+ +---------------+
` | Local Net | | Local Net |
` +---------------+ +---------------+
`
` Gateway Protocols
`
` Figure 3.
`
` [Page 9]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 18
`
`

`

`
` September 1981
`Internet Protocol
`
`[Page 10]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 19
`
`

`

`
`September 1981
` Internet Protocol
`
` 3. SPECIFICATION
`
`3.1. Internet Header Format
`
` A summary of the contents of the internet header follows:
`
` 0 1 2 3
` 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` |Version| IHL |Type of Service| Total Length |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | Identification |Flags| Fragment Offset |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | Time to Live | Protocol | Header Checksum |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | Source Address |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | Destination Address |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | Options | Padding |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
`
` Example Internet Datagram Header
`
` Figure 4.
`
` Note that each tick mark represents one bit position.
`
` Version: 4 bits
`
` The Version field indicates the format of the internet header. This
` document describes version 4.
`
` IHL: 4 bits
`
` Internet Header Length is the length of the internet header in 32
` bit words, and thus points to the beginning of the data. Note that
` the minimum value for a correct header is 5.
`
` [Page 11]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 20
`
`

`

`
` September 1981
`Internet Protocol
`Specification
`
` Type of Service: 8 bits
`
` The Type of Service provides an indication of the abstract
` parameters of the quality of service desired. These parameters are
` to be used to guide the selection of the actual service parameters
` when transmitting a datagram through a particular network. Several
` networks offer service precedence, which somehow treats high
` precedence traffic as more important than other traffic (generally
` by accepting only traffic above a certain precedence at time of high
` load). The major choice is a three way tradeoff between low-delay,
` high-reliability, and high-throughput.
`
` Bits 0-2: Precedence.
` Bit 3: 0 = Normal Delay, 1 = Low Delay.
` Bits 4: 0 = Normal Throughput, 1 = High Throughput.
` Bits 5: 0 = Normal Relibility, 1 = High Relibility.
` Bit 6-7: Reserved for Future Use.
`
` 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
` +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
` | | | | | | |
` | PRECEDENCE | D | T | R | 0 | 0 |
` | | | | | | |
` +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
`
` Precedence
`
` 111 - Network Control
` 110 - Internetwork Control
` 101 - CRITIC/ECP
` 100 - Flash Override
` 011 - Flash
` 010 - Immediate
` 001 - Priority
` 000 - Routine
`
` The use of the Delay, Throughput, and Reliability indications may
` increase the cost (in some sense) of the service. In many networks
` better performance for one of these parameters is coupled with worse
` performance on another. Except for very unusual cases at most two
` of these three indications should be set.
`
` The type of service is used to specify the treatment of the datagram
` during its transmission through the internet system. Example
` mappings of the internet type of service to the actual service
` provided on networks such as AUTODIN II, ARPANET, SATNET, and PRNET
` is given in "Service Mappings" [8].
`
`[Page 12]
`
`Apple Inc.
`Ex. 1022, Page 21
`
`

`

`
`September 1981
` Internet Protocol
` Specification
`
` The Network Control precedence designation is intended to be used
` within a network only. The actual use and control of that
` designation is up to each network. The Internetwork