Network Working Group S. Christey
Request for Comments: 2795 MonkeySeeDoo, Inc.
Category: Informational 1 April 2000
The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS)
Status of this Memo
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does
not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this
memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
This memo describes a protocol suite which supports an infinite
number of monkeys that sit at an infinite number of typewriters in
order to determine when they have either produced the entire works of
William Shakespeare or a good television show. The suite includes
communications and control protocols for monkeys and the
organizations that interact with them.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Objects In The Suite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. IMPS Packet Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Infinite Threshold Accounting Gadget (I-TAG) Encoding . . 5
5. KEEPER Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.1 KEEPER Message Request Codes (ZOO-to-SIMIAN) . . . . . . 7
5.2 KEEPER Message Response Codes (SIMIAN-to-ZOO) . . . . . 8
5.3 Requirements for KEEPER Request and Response Codes . . . 8
5.4 Example ZOO-to-SIMIAN Exchanges using KEEPER . . . . . . 9
6. CHIMP Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.1 SIMIAN Client Requests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.2 ZOO Server Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.3 Example SIMIAN-to-ZOO Session using CHIMP . . . . . . . 11
7. IAMB-PENT SPECIFICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7.1 ZOO Client Requests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7.2 BARD Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7.3 Example ZOO-to-BARD Session using IAMB-PENT . . . . . . 13
8. PAN Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.1 ZOO Requests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8.2 CRITIC Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Christey Informational [Page 1]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
8.3 Table of CRITIC Reject Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8.4 Example ZOO-to-CRITIC Session using PAN . . . . . . . . 16
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
12. Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
13. Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
1. Introduction
It has been posited that if an infinite number of monkeys sit at an
infinite number of typewriters and randomly press keys, they will
eventually produce the complete works of Shakespeare [1] [2]. But if
such a feat is accomplished, how would anybody be able to know? And
what if the monkey has flawlessly translated Shakespeare's works into
Esperanto? How could one build a system that obtains these works
while addressing the basic needs of monkeys, such as sleep and food?
Nobody has addressed the practical implications of these important
questions [3].
In addition, it would be a waste of resources if such a sizable
effort only focused on Shakespeare. With an infinite number of
monkeys at work, it is also equally likely that a monkey could
produce a document that describes how to end world poverty, cure
disease, or most importantly, write a good situation comedy for
television [4]. Such an environment would be ripe for innovation
and, with the proper technical design, could be effectively utilized
to "make the world a whole lot brighter" [5].
The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) is an experimental set of
protocols that specifies how monkey transcripts may be collected,
transferred, and reviewed for either historical accuracy (in the case
of Shakespearean works) or innovation (in the case of new works). It
also provides a basic communications framework for performing normal
monkey maintenance.
2. Objects in the Suite
There are four primary entities that communicate within an IMPS
network. Groups of monkeys are physically located in Zone Operations
Organizations (ZOOs). The ZOOs maintain the monkeys and their
equipment, obtain transcripts from the monkeys' typewriters, and
interact with other entities who evaluate the transcripts.
A SIMIAN (Semi-Integrated, Monkey-Interfacing Anthropomorphic Node)
is a device that is physically attached to the monkey. It provides
the communications interface between a monkey and its ZOO. It is
Christey Informational [Page 2]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
effectively a translator for the monkey. It sends status reports and
resource requests to the ZOO using human language phrases, and
responds to ZOO requests on behalf of the monkey.
The SIMIAN uses the Cross-Habitat Idiomatic Message Protocol (CHIMP)
to communicate with the ZOO. The ZOO uses the Knowledgeable and
Efficient Emulation Protocol for Ecosystem Resources (KEEPER) to
interact with the SIMIAN.
The ZOO obtains typewriter transcripts from the SIMIAN, which is
responsible for converting the monkey's typed text into an electronic
format if non-digital typewriters are used. The ZOO may then forward
the transcripts to one or more entities who review the transcript's
contents. IMPS defines two such reviewer protocols, although others
could be added.
For Shakespearean works, as well as any other classic literature that
has already been published, the ZOO forwards the transcript to a BARD
(Big Annex of Reference Documents). The BARD determines if a
transcript matches one or more documents in its annex. The ZOO sends
the transcript to a BARD using the Inter-Annex Message Broadcasting
Protocol for Evaluating Neoclassical Transcripts (IAMB-PENT). The
transcripts are considered Neoclassical because (a) they are
transferred in electronic media instead of the original paper medium,
and (b) the word "classical" does not begin with the letter N.
For new and potentially innovative works, the ZOO submits a
transcript to a CRITIC (Collective Reviewer's Innovative Transcript
Integration Center). The CRITIC determines if a transcript is
sufficiently innovative to be published. The ZOO uses the Protocol
for Assessment of Novelty (PAN) to communicate with the CRITIC. The
process of using PAN to send a transcript to a CRITIC is sometimes
referred to as foreshadowing.
A diagram of IMPS concepts is provided below. Non-technical readers
such as mid-level managers, marketing personnel, and liberal arts
majors are encouraged to skip the next two sections. The rest of
this document assumes that senior management has already stopped
reading.
Christey Informational [Page 3]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
-+-+-+-+-+- CHIMP -+-+-+-+-+-
| SIMIAN/ | ----------> * *
| MONKEY | * ZOO *
| | <---------- * *
-+-+-+-+-+- KEEPER -+-+-+-+-+-
/ \
/ \
IAMB-PENT / \ PAN
/ \
V V
-+-+-+-+-+- -+-+-+-+-+-
* * * *
* BARD * * CRITIC *
* * * *
-+-+-+-+-+- -+-+-+-+-+-
3. IMPS Packet Structure
All IMPS protocols must utilize the following packet structure.
|-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--|
|Version | Seq # | Protocol # | Reserved | Size |
|-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--|
| Source | Destination |
|-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--|
| Data | Padding |
|-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--|
The Version, Sequence Number, Protocol Number, and Reserved fields
are 32 bit unsigned integers. For IMPS version 1.0, the Version must
be 1. Reserved must be 0 and will always be 0 in future uses. It is
included because every other protocol specification includes a
"future use" reserved field which never, ever changes and is
therefore a waste of bandwidth and memory. [6] [7] [8].
The Source and Destination are identifiers for the IMPS objects that
are communicating. They are represented using Infinite TAGs (see
next section).
The Data section contains data which is of arbitrary length.
The Size field records the size of the entire packet using Infinite
TAG encoding.
The end of the packet may contain extra padding, between 0 and 7
bits, to ensure that the size of packet is rounded out to the next
byte.
Christey Informational [Page 4]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
4. Infinite Threshold Accounting Gadget (I-TAG) Encoding
Each SIMIAN requires a unique identifier within IMPS. This section
describes design considerations for the IMPS identifier, referred to
as an Infinite Threshold Accounting Gadget (I-TAG). The I-TAG can
represent numbers of any size.
To uniquely identify each SIMIAN, a system is required that is
capable of representing an infinite number of identifiers. The set
of all integers can be used as a compact representation. However,
all existing protocols inherently limit the number of available
integers by specifying a maximum number of bytes to be used for an
integer. This approach cannot work well in an IMPS network with an
infinite number of monkeys to manage.
Practically speaking, one could select a byte size which could
represent an integer that is greater than the number of atoms in the
known universe. There are several limitations to this approach,
however: (a) it would needlessly exclude IMPS implementations that
may utilize sub-atomic monkeys and/or multiple universes; (b) there
is not a consensus as to how many atoms there are in this universe;
and (c) while the number is extremely large, it still falls pitifully
short of infinity. Since any entity that fully implements IMPS is
probably very, very good at handling infinite numbers, IMPS must
ensure that it can represent them.
Netstrings, i.e. strings which encode their own size, were
considered. However, netstrings have not been accepted as a
standard, and they do not scale to infinity. As stated in [9],
"[Greater than] 999999999 bytes is bad." Well put.
A scheme for identifying arbitrary dates was also considered for
implementation [10]. While it solves the Y10K problem and does scale
to infinity, its ASCII representation wastes memory by a factor
greater than 8. While this may not seem important in an environment
that has enough resources to support an infinite number of monkeys,
it is inelegant for the purpose of monkey identification. It is also
CPU intensive to convert such a representation to a binary number (at
least based on the author's implementation, which was written in a
combination of LISP, Perl, and Java). The algorithm is complicated
and could lead to incorrect implementations. Finally, the author of
this document sort of forgot about that RFC until it was too late to
include it properly, and was already emotionally attached to the I-
TAG idea anyway. It should be noted, however, that if a monkey had
typed this particular section and it was submitted to a CRITIC, it
would probably receive a PAN rejection code signifying the
reinvention of the wheel.
Christey Informational [Page 5]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
Since there is no acceptable representation for I-TAGs available, one
is defined below.
An I-TAG is divided into three sections:
|-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-|-+-+-+-+-+-+-|-+-+-+-+-+-+|
| META-SIZE | SIZE | ID |
|-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-|-+-+-+-+-+-+-|-+-+-+-+-+-+|
SIZE specifies how many bytes are used to represent the ID, which is
an arbitrary integer. META-SIZE specifies an upper limit on how many
bits are used to represent SIZE.
META-SIZE is an arbitrary length sequence of N '1' bits terminated by
a '0' bit, i.e. it has the form:
11111...1110
where N is the smallest number such that 2^N exceeds the number of
bits required to represent the number of bytes that are necessary to
store the ID (i.e., SIZE).
The SIZE is then encoded using N bits, ordered from the most
significant bit to the least significant bit.
Finally, the ID is encoded using SIZE bytes.
This representation, while clunky, makes efficient use of memory and
is scalable to infinity. For any number X which is less than 2^N
(for any N), a maximum of (N + log(N) + log(log(N)))/8 bytes is
necessary to represent X. The math could be slightly incorrect, but
it sounds right.
A remarkable, elegant little C function was written to implement I-
TAG processing, but it has too many lines of code to include in this
margin [11].
5. KEEPER Specification
Following is a description of the Knowledgeable and Efficient
Emulation Protocol for Ecosystem Resources (KEEPER), which the ZOO
uses to communicate with the SIMIAN. The IMPS protocol number for
KEEPER is 1.
KEEPER is a connectionless protocol. The ZOO sends a request to the
SIMIAN using a single IMPS packet. The SIMIAN sends a response back
to the ZOO with another IMPS packet. The data portion of the packet
is of the following form:
Christey Informational [Page 6]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Version | Type | Message ID | Message Code |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Version, Type, Message ID, and Message are all 16-bit integers.
Version = the version of KEEPER being used (in this document, the
version is 1)
Type = the type of message being sent. '0' is a request; '1' is a
response
Message ID = a unique identifier to distinguish different messages
Message Code = the specific message being sent
When a ZOO sends a KEEPER request, the SIMIAN must send a KEEPER
response which uses the same Message ID as the original request.
5.1 KEEPER Message Request Codes (ZOO-to-SIMIAN)
CODE NAME DESCRIPTION
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | RESERVED | Reserved |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | STATUS | Determine status of monkey |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | HEARTBEAT| Check to see if monkey has a heartbeat |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 3 | WAKEUP | Wake up monkey |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 4 | TYPE | Make sure monkey is typing |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 5 | FASTER | Monkey must type faster |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 6 |TRANSCRIPT| Send transcript |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 7 | STOP | Stop all monkey business |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
|8-512 | FUTURE | Reserved for future use |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
| 513+ | USER | User defined |
+-----------------------------------------------------------+
Christey Informational [Page 7]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
5.2 KEEPER Message Response Codes (SIMIAN-to-ZOO)
CODE NAME DESCRIPTION
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | RESERVED | Reserved |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 | ASLEEP | Status: Monkey is asleep |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| 2 | GONE | Status: Monkey is not at typewriter |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| 3 |DISTRACTED| Status: Monkey is distracted (not typing) |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| 4 |NORESPONSE| Status: Monkey is not responding |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| 5 | ALIVE | Status: Monkey is alive |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| 6 | DEAD | Status: Monkey is dead |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| 7 | ACCEPT | Monkey accepts request |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| 8 | REFUSE | Monkey refuses request |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| 9-512| FUTURE | Reserved for future use |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| 513+ | USER | User defined |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
5.3 Requirements for KEEPER Request and Response Codes
Below are the requirements for request and response codes within
KEEPER.
1. A SIMIAN must respond to a STATUS request with an ALIVE, DEAD,
ASLEEP, GONE, DISTRACTED, or NORESPONSE code.
2. A SIMIAN must respond to a HEARTBEAT request with an ALIVE or DEAD
code. SIMIAN implementors must be careful when checking the
heartbeat of very relaxed monkeys who practice transcendental
meditation or yoga, as they may appear DEAD even if they are still
alive.
3. A SIMIAN must respond to a STOP request with a NORESPONSE, ALIVE,
DEAD, or GONE code. How a SIMIAN stops the monkey is
implementation-specific. However, the SIMIAN should preserve the
monkey's ALIVE status to protect the ZOO from being shut down by
authorities or animal rights groups. If the monkey is present but
the SIMIAN interface is unable to verify whether the monkey is ALIVE
or DEAD, then it must use a NORESPONSE.
Christey Informational [Page 8]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
4. A SIMIAN should respond to a TYPE or FASTER request with an ACCEPT
code, especially if there are deadlines. The only other allowed
responses are REFUSE, ASLEEP, GONE, NORESPONSE, or DEAD. This
protocol does not define what actions should be taken if a SIMIAN
responds with REFUSE, although a BRIBE_BANANA command may be added in
future versions.
5. A SIMIAN must respond to a WAKEUP request with ACCEPT, REFUSE,
GONE, NORESPONSE, or DEAD.
6. A SIMIAN must respond to a TRANSCRIPT request by establishing a
CHIMP session to send the transcript to the ZOO.
5.4 Example ZOO-to-SIMIAN Exchanges using KEEPER
Assume a ZOO (SanDiego) must interact with a monkey named BoBo.
Using KEEPER, SanDiego would interface with BoBo's SIMIAN (BoBoSIM).
The following exchange might take place if BoBo begins to evolve
self-awareness and independence.
SanDiego> STATUS
BoBoSIM> DISTRACTED
SanDiego> TYPE
BoBoSIM> REFUSE
SanDiego> TYPE
BoBoSIM> REFUSE
SanDiego> TYPE
BoBoSIM> GONE
The following exchange might take place early in the morning, if
BoBo was being poorly maintained and was working at its typewriter
very late the night before.
SanDiego> WAKEUP
BoBoSIM> NORESPONSE
SanDiego> WAKEUP
BoBoSIM> NORESPONSE
SanDiego> WAKEUP
BoBoSIM> NORESPONSE
SanDiego> HEARTBEAT
BoBoSIM> DEAD
SanDiego> TRANSCRIPT
6. CHIMP Specification
Following is a description of the Cross-Habitat Idiomatic Message
Protocol (CHIMP), which the SIMIAN uses to communicate with the ZOO.
The IMPS protocol number for CHIMP is 2.
Christey Informational [Page 9]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
CHIMP is a connection-oriented protocol. A SIMIAN (the "client")
sends a series of requests to the ZOO (the "server"), which sends
replies back to the SIMIAN.
6.1. SIMIAN Client Requests
SEND <resource>
The SIMIAN is requesting a specific resource. The resource
may be FOOD, WATER, MEDICINE, VETERINARIAN, or TECHNICIAN.
The SIMIAN makes requests for FOOD or WATER by interpreting
the monkey's behavior and environment, e.g. its food dish. It
requests MEDICINE or VETERINARIAN if it observes that the
monkey's health is declining in any way, e.g. carpal tunnel
syndrome or sore buttocks. How the SIMIAN determines health
is implementation-specific. In cases where the SIMIAN itself
may be malfunctioning, it may request a TECHNICIAN.
REPLACE <item>
The ZOO must replace an item that is used by the monkey during
typing activities. The item to be replaced may be TYPEWRITER,
PAPER, RIBBON, CHAIR, TABLE, or MONKEY.
CLEAN <item>
The SIMIAN is requesting that the ZOO must clean an item. The
item may be CHAIR, TABLE, or MONKEY. How the ZOO cleans the
item is implementation-specific. This command is identified
in the protocol because it has been theorized that if an
infinite number of monkeys sit at an infinite number of
typewriters, the smell would be unbearable [12]. If this
theory is proven true, then CLEAN may become the most critical
command in the entire protocol suite.
NOTIFY <status>
The SIMIAN notifies the ZOO of the monkey's status. The status
may be any status as defined in the KEEPER protocol,
i.e. ASLEEP, GONE, DISTRACTED, NORESPONSE, ALIVE, or DEAD.
TRANSCRIPT <size>
The SIMIAN notifies the ZOO of a new transcript from the monkey.
The number of characters in the transcript is specified in the
size parameter.
Christey Informational [Page 10]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
BYE
The SIMIAN is terminating the connection.
6.2. ZOO Server Responses
HELO <free text>
Upon initial connection, the ZOO must send a HELO reply.
ACCEPT
The ZOO will fulfill the SIMIAN's request.
DELAY
The ZOO will fulfill the SIMIAN's request at a later time.
REFUSE
The ZOO refuses to fulfill the SIMIAN's request.
RECEIVED
The ZOO has received the full text of a transcript that has been
submitted by the SIMIAN.
6.3 Example SIMIAN-to-ZOO Session using CHIMP
Assume a monkey BoBo with a SIMIAN interface named BoBoSIM, and a ZOO
named SanDiego. Once the BoBoSIM client has established a connection
to the SanDiego server, the following session might take place.
SanDiego> HELO CHIMP version 1.0 4/1/2000
BoBoSIM> REPLACE PAPER
SanDiego> ACCEPT
BoBoSIM> TRANSCRIPT 87
SanDiego> ACCEPT
BoBoSIM> xvkxvn i hate Binky xFnk , feEL hungry and sIck sbNf
BoBoSIM> so so sad sDNfkodgv .,n., ,HELP MEEEEEEEEE cv.Cvn l
SanDiego> RECEIVED
BoBoSIM> SEND FOOD
SanDiego> ACCEPT
BoBoSIM> SEND MEDICINE
SanDiego> DELAY
BoBoSIM> SEND VETERINARIAN
SanDiego> REFUSE
BoBoSIM> SEND VETERINARIAN
Christey Informational [Page 11]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
SanDiego> REFUSE
BoBoSIM> NOTIFY NORESPONSE
SanDiego> ACCEPT
BoBoSIM> NOTIFY DEAD
SanDiego> ACCEPT
BoBoSIM> REPLACE MONKEY
SanDiego> ACCEPT
7. IAMB-PENT Specification
Following is a description of the Inter-Annex Message Broadcasting
Protocol for Evaluating Neoclassical Transcripts (IAMB-PENT), which a
ZOO uses to send transcripts to a BARD. The IMPS protocol number is
5.
IAMB-PENT is a connection-oriented protocol. A ZOO (the "client")
sends a transcript phrases to the BARD (the "server"), which
evaluates the transcript and notifies the ZOO if the transcript
matches all of a classical work or a portion thereof.
7.1. ZOO Client Requests
RECEIVETH <transcript name>
The ZOO notifies the BARD of a new transcript to be evaluated.
The name of the transcript is provided.
ANON <size>
The ZOO notifies the BARD that a transcript of the given size is
to be provided soon. The text of the transcript is then sent.
ABORTETH <A2> <U3> <A3> <U4> <A4> <U5> <A5>
The ZOO notifies the BARD that it is about to close the
connection. The ZOO must specify a closing message. A2, A3,
A4, and A5 must be accented syllables. U3, U4, and U5 must not
be accented.
7.2 BARD Responses
HARK <U1> <A2> <U3> <A3> <U4> <A4> <U5> <A5>
When the ZOO establishes a connection, the BARD must send a HARK
command. A2, A3, A4, and A5 must be accented syllables. U1,
U2, U3, U4, and U5 must not be accented.
Christey Informational [Page 12]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
PRITHEE <A2> <U3> <A3> <U4> <A4> <U5> <A5>
When a ZOO uses a RECEIVETH command to specify a forthcoming
transcript, the BARD must respond with a PRITHEE. A2, A3, A4,
and A5 must be accented syllables. U3, U4, and U5 must not be
accented.
REGRETTETH <A2> <U3> <A3> <U4> <A4> <U5> <A5>
If the BARD does not have the transcript in its Annex, it uses
the REGRETTETH command to notify the ZOO. A2, A3, A4, and A5
must be accented syllables. U3, U4, and U5 must not be
accented.
ACCEPTETH <A2> <U3> <A3> <U4> <A4> <U5> <A5>
If the BARD has located the transcript in its Annex, it uses the
ACCEPTETH command to notify the ZOO. A2, A3, A4, and A5
must be accented syllables. U3, U4, and U5 must not be
accented.
7.3 Example ZOO-to-BARD Session using IAMB-PENT
This is a sample IAMB-PENT session in which a ZOO (SanDiego) sends a
transcript to a BARD (William).
William> HARK now, what light through yonder window breaks?
SanDiego> RECEIVETH TRANSCRIPT SanDiego.BoBo.17
William> PRITHEE thy monkey's wisdom poureth forth!
SanDiego> ANON 96
SanDiego> I must be cruel, only to be kind. Thus bad begins,
and worse remains in front.
William> REGRETTETH none hath writ thy words before
SanDiego> ABORTETH Fate may one day bless my zone
8. PAN Specification
Following is a description of the Protocol for Assessment of Novelty
(PAN). A ZOO uses PAN to send monkey transcripts for review by a
CRITIC. The IMPS protocol number for PAN is 10 [13].
PAN is a connection-oriented protocol. A ZOO (the "unwashed masses")
sends a request to the CRITIC (the "all-powerful"), which sends a
response back to the ZOO.
Christey Informational [Page 13]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
8.1. ZOO Requests
COMPLIMENT <text>
The ZOO may say something nice to the CRITIC using the given
text. The CRITIC does not respond to the compliment within the
protocol. However, it is generally believed that the CRITIC is
more likely to accept a new transcript when a ZOO uses many
compliments.
TRANSCRIPT <name> <size>
The ZOO notifies the CRITIC of a new transcript for review.
The name of the transcript, plus the number of characters, are
specified as parameters to this request. The text of the
transcript is then sent.
THANKS
This is an indicator that a ZOO is about to terminate the
connection.
8.2. CRITIC Responses
SIGH <insult>
When the ZOO establishes a connection, the CRITIC must respond
with a SIGH and an optional insult.
IMPRESS_ME
A CRITIC must respond with an IMPRESS_ME once a ZOO has made a
TRANSCRIPT request.
REJECT <code> REJECT 0 <text>
When a transcript has been received, the CRITIC must respond
with a REJECT and a code that indicates the reason for
rejection. A table of rejection codes is provided below. When
the code is 0, the CRITIC may respond using free text. A CRITIC
may send a REJECT before it has received or processed the full
text of the transcript.
DONT_CALL_US_WE'LL_CALL_YOU
The CRITIC makes this statement before terminating the
connection.
Christey Informational [Page 14]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
GRUDGING_ACCEPTANCE
THIS RESPONSE IS NOT SUPPORTED IN THIS VERSION OF PAN. The
Working group for the Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (WIMPS)
agreed that it is highly unlikely that a CRITIC will ever use
this response when a REJECT is available. It is only included
as an explanation to implementors who do not fully understand
how CRITICs work. In time, it is possible that a CRITIC may
evolve (in much the same way that a monkey might). Should such
a time ever come, the WIMPS may decide to support this response
in later versions of PAN.
8.3. Table of CRITIC Reject Codes
CODE DESCRIPTION
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| 0 | <Encrypted response following; see below>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| 1 | "You're reinventing the wheel."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| 2 | "This will never, ever sell."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| 3 | "Huh? I don't understand this at all."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| 4 | "You forgot one little obscure reference from twenty years
| | ago that renders your whole idea null and void."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| 5 | "Due to the number of submissions, we could not accept every
| | transcript."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| 6 | "There aren't enough charts and graphs. Where is the color?"
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| 7 | "I'm cranky and decided to take it out on you."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| 8 | "This is not in within the scope of what we are looking for."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| 9 | "This is too derivative."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
|10 | "Your submission was received after the deadline. Try again
| | next year."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
If the CRITIC uses a reject code of 0, then the textual response
must use an encryption scheme that is selected by the CRITIC.
Since the PAN protocol does not specify how a ZOO may determine
what scheme is being used, the ZOO might not be able to understand
the CRITIC's response.
Christey Informational [Page 15]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
8.4. Example ZOO-to-CRITIC Session using PAN
Below is a sample session from a ZOO (SanDiego) to a CRITIC
(NoBrainer).
NoBrainer> SIGH Abandon hope all who enter here
SanDiego> COMPLIMENT We love your work. Your words are like
SanDiego> COMPLIMENT jewels and you are always correct.
SanDiego> TRANSCRIPT RomeoAndJuliet.BoBo.763 251
NoBrainer> IMPRESS_ME
SanDiego> Two households, both alike in dignity,
SanDiego> In fair Verona, where we lay our scene,
SanDiego> From ancient grudge break to new mutiny,
SanDiego> Where civil blood makes civil hands unclean.
SanDiego> From forth the fatal loins of these two foes
SanDiego> A pair of star-cross'd lovers take their life;
NoBrainer> REJECT 2 ("This will never, ever sell.")
SanDiego> THANKS
NoBrainer> DONT_CALL_US_WE'LL_CALL_YOU
9. Security Considerations
In accordance with the principles of the humane treatment of
animals, the design of IMPS specifically prohibits the CRITIC from
contacting the SIMIAN directly and hurting its feelings. BARDs
and CRITICs are also separated because of fundamental
incompatibilities and design flaws.
The security considerations for the rest of IMPS are similar to
those for the original Internet protocols. Specifically, IMPS
refuses to learn from the mistakes of the past and blithely
repeats the same errors without batting an eye. Spoofing and
denial of service attacks abound if untrusted entities gain access
to an IMPS network. Since all transmissions occur in cleartext
without encryption, innovative works are subject to theft, which
is not a significant problem unless the network contains entities
other than CRITICs. The open nature of BARDs with respect to
IAMB-PENT messages allows a BARD to borrow heavily from
transmitted works, but by design BARDs are incapable of stealing
transcripts outright.
The ZOO may be left open to exploitation by pseudo-SIMIANs from
around the world. A third party could interrupt communications
between a ZOO and a SIMIAN by flooding the SIMIAN with packets,
incrementing the message ID by 1 for each packet. More heinously,
the party could exploit the KEEPER protocol by sending a single
STOP request to each SIMIAN, thus causing a massive denial of
service throughout the ZOO. The party could also spoof a CHIMP
Christey Informational [Page 16]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
request or send false information such as a DEAD status, which
could cause a ZOO to attempt to replace a monkey that is still
functioning properly.
In addition, if a ZOO repeatedly rejects a SIMIAN's requests
(especially those for FOOD, WATER, and VETERINARIAN), then the ZOO
may inadvertently cause its own denial of service with respect to
that particular SIMIAN. However, both KEEPER and CHIMP allow the
ZOO to detect this condition in a timely fashion via the
NORESPONSE or DEAD status codes.
All BARDs are inherently insecure because they face insurmountable
financial problems and low prioritization, which prevents them
from working reliably. In the rare cases when a BARD
implementation overcomes these obstacles, it is only successful
for 15 minutes, and reverts to being insecure immediately
thereafter [14]. Since a CRITIC could significantly reduce the
success of a BARD with an appropriate PAN response, this is one
more reason why BARDs and CRITICs should always be kept separate
from each other.
It is expected that very few people will care about most
implementations of CRITIC, and CRITICs themselves are inherently
insecure. Therefore, security is not a priority for CRITICs. The
CRITIC may become the victim of a denial of service attack if too
many SIMIANs submit transcripts at the same time. In addition,
one SIMIAN may submit a non-innovative work by spoofing another
SIMIAN (this is referred to as the Plagiarism Problem). A CRITIC
response can also be spoofed, but since the only response
supported in PAN version 1 is REJECT, this is of little
consequence. Care must be taken in future versions if a
GRUDGING_ACCEPTANCE response is allowed. Finally, a transcript
may be lost in transmission, and PAN does not provide a mechanism
for a ZOO to determine if this has happened. Future versions of
IMPS may be better suited to answer this fundamental design
problem: if an innovative work is lost in transmission, can a
CRITIC still PAN it?
Based on the number of packet-level vulnerabilities discovered in
recent years, it is a foregone conclusion that some
implementations will behave extremely poorly when processing
malformed IMPS packets with incorrect padding or reserved bits
[15] [16] [17].
Christey Informational [Page 17]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
Finally, no security considerations are made with respect to the
fact that over the course of infinite time, monkeys may evolve and
discover how to control their own SIMIAN interfaces and send false
requests, or to compose and submit their own transcripts. There
are indications that this may already be happening [18].
10. Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank Andre Frech for technical comments that
tripled the size of this document, Kean Kaufmann and Amanda
Vizedom for lectures on Shakespearean grammar, Rohn Blake for
clarifying the nature of the entire universe, William Shakespeare
for accents, the number 16, and the color yellow.
11. References
[1] The Famous Brett Watson, "The Mathematics of Monkeys and
Shakespeare." http://www.nutters.org/monkeys.html
[2] Dr. Math. "Monkeys Typing Shakespeare: Infinity Theory."
http://forum.swarthmore.edu/dr.math/problems/bridge8.5.98.html
[3] K. Clark, Stark Mill Brewery, Manchester, NH, USA. Feb 18,
2000. (personal communication). "Good question! I never thought
of that! I bet nobody else has, either. Please pass the french
fries."
[4] The author was unable to find a reference in any issue of TV
Guide published between 1956 and the date of this document.
[5] "Dough Re Mi," The Brady Bunch. Original air date January 14,
1972.
[6] Postel, J., " Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, September 1981.
[7] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", STD 7, RFC 793,
September 1981.
[8] Brown, C. and A. Malis, "Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame
Relay", STD 55, RFC 2427, September 1998.
[9] Internet-Draft, bernstein-netstrings-06 (expired Work in
Progress). D.J. Bernstein. Inclusion of this reference is a
violation of RFC 2026 section 2.2.
[10] Glassman, S., Manasse, M. and J. Mogul, "Y10K and Beyond", RFC
2550, 1 April 1999.
Christey Informational [Page 18]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
[11] "My Last Theorem: A Prankster's Guide to Ageless Mathematical
Jokes That are Funny Because They're True and People Can't Prove
Them for Centuries." P. Fermat. Circa 1630.
[12] .signature in various USENET postings, circa 1994. Author
unknown.
[13] "Recognizing Irony, or How Not to be Duped When Reading."
Faye Halpern. 1998.
http://www.brown.edu/Student_Services/Writing_Center/halpern1.htm
[14] Andy Warhol. Circa 1964.
[15] CERT Advisory CA-98-13. CERT. December 1998.
http://www.cert.org/advisories/
[16] CERT Advisory CA-97.28. CERT. December 1997.
http://www.cert.org/advisories/
[17] CERT Advisory CA-96.26. CERT. December 1996.
http://www.cert.org/advisories/
[18] All issues of TV Guide published between 1956 and the date of
this document.
12. Author's Address
SteQven M. Christey
EMail: steqve@shore.net
Christey Informational [Page 19]
RFC 2795 The Infinite Monkey Protocol Suite (IMPS) 1 April 2000
13. Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Christey Informational [Page 20]
|
