<html><head></head><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:13px"><br id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288311">I should add it would be interesting to know if Rockwell or Hazeltine did anything further with packet radio. They produced the packet radios. I never heard anything about this though. I believe Hazeltine is now part of BAE.<br id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288312"><br id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288313">I hope I didn't confuse people. There have been many other programs in this area, including ones supported by DARPA, that created new radios and protocols. For example, I did work briefly on another one in 2002-2003 that was a MANET with multiple transmission media using directional antennas as part of Future Combat Systems. (As far as I know, MANET is a term that was created after packet radio.) I don't know which results from those efforts have been transferred to the field. Overall, I think many of the actual packet radio protocols have been swapped out by other things. I will admit I am not familiar with the link level things, like encoding, error detection and correction, interleaving, etc. The problems are challenging.<br id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288314"><br id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288315">barbara<div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288185"><span></span></div><div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288186" class="qtdSeparateBR"><br><br></div><div style="display: block;" id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288190" class="yahoo_quoted"> <div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288189" style="font-family: times new roman, new york, times, serif; font-size: 13px;"> <div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288188" style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"> <div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288187" dir="ltr"> <font id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288615" face="Arial" size="2"> <hr size="1"> <b><span style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> "internet-history-request@postel.org" <internet-history-request@postel.org><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> internet-history@postel.org <br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b> Thursday, September 1, 2016 5:13 AM<br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b> internet-history Digest, Vol 106, Issue 1<br> </font> </div> <div id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288316" class="y_msg_container"><br>Send internet-history mailing list submissions to<br> <a id="yui_3_16_0_ym19_1_1472616023279_288635" ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a><br><br>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br> <a href="http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history" target="_blank">http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history</a><br>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br> <a ymailto="mailto:internet-history-request@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history-request@postel.org">internet-history-request@postel.org</a><br><br>You can reach the person managing the list at<br> <a ymailto="mailto:internet-history-owner@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history-owner@postel.org">internet-history-owner@postel.org</a><br><br>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>than "Re: Contents of internet-history digest..."<br><br><br>Today's Topics:<br><br> 1. Re: Ethernet, was Why TCP? (Brian E Carpenter)<br> 2. Re: Packet Radio and Why TCP (Vint Cerf)<br><br><br>----------------------------------------------------------------------<br><br>Message: 1<br>Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 23:32:02 +1200<br>From: Brian E Carpenter <<a ymailto="mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com" href="mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com">brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com</a>><br>Subject: Re: [ih] Ethernet, was Why TCP?<br>To: Steven Ehrbar <<a ymailto="mailto:ehrbar@gmail.com" href="mailto:ehrbar@gmail.com">ehrbar@gmail.com</a>><br>Cc: "<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a>" <<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a>>,<br> <a ymailto="mailto:dcrocker@bbiw.net" href="mailto:dcrocker@bbiw.net">dcrocker@bbiw.net</a><br>Message-ID: <<a ymailto="mailto:549caadb-cc78-3be1-37cd-bf4702f4ab13@gmail.com" href="mailto:549caadb-cc78-3be1-37cd-bf4702f4ab13@gmail.com">549caadb-cc78-3be1-37cd-bf4702f4ab13@gmail.com</a>><br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8<br><br>On 01/09/2016 17:37, Steven Ehrbar wrote:<br>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 9:40 PM, Brian E Carpenter <<br>> <a ymailto="mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com" href="mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com">brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>> <br>>> I think Token Ring really failed because the IBM Cabling System was<br>>> too good, and therefore very expensive. The Ethernet discourse (one<br>>> simple coax cable goes everywhere) was very persuasive, especially<br>>> when Cheapernet (thin coax) came along.<br>>><br>> <br>> I'll agree with the first sentence, disagree with the second. The<br>> battlefields the network wars were finally decided on were in the offices<br>> of businesses, and bus coax Ethernet was awful there. <br><br>Quite right, and those were the arguments for the IBM Cabling System.<br>But cheap and cheerful won the day in many campuses, before business<br>even knew that they needed a LAN. As you say, Ethernet only penetrated<br>business seriously was when UTP came along.<br><br> Brian<br><br>> They were far too<br>> vulnerable to user-induced cabling faults that could take down a network or<br>> large parts thereof. What won the war for Ethernet in the office was that<br>> 10BaseT was native on UTP (and tolerant of bad UTP wiring), while Token<br>> Ring, while it claimed to work on UTP, really wanted STP to work right.<br>> Where the office went, volume production followed.<br>> <br><br><br>------------------------------<br><br>Message: 2<br>Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 08:13:08 -0400<br>From: Vint Cerf <<a ymailto="mailto:vint@google.com" href="mailto:vint@google.com">vint@google.com</a>><br>Subject: Re: [ih] Packet Radio and Why TCP<br>To: Jack Haverty <<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a>>, Preston Marshall <<a ymailto="mailto:pres@google.com" href="mailto:pres@google.com">pres@google.com</a>><br>Cc: internet history <<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a>><br>Message-ID:<br> <<a ymailto="mailto:CAHxHggeY9Yt-pmDLtbhVdyjwL1vFg6R3s8phtNFGKHKxYgkzDg@mail.gmail.com" href="mailto:CAHxHggeY9Yt-pmDLtbhVdyjwL1vFg6R3s8phtNFGKHKxYgkzDg@mail.gmail.com">CAHxHggeY9Yt-pmDLtbhVdyjwL1vFg6R3s8phtNFGKHKxYgkzDg@mail.gmail.com</a>><br>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br><br>a variety of radios were developed, some by DARPA. Adding Preston Marshall,<br>now at Google, who was DARPA program manager for developing new radios and<br>testing the use of the delay and disruption tolerant Bundle Protocol<br>against TCP/IP in tactical environments. He may have additional information<br>about the path of tactical radio development after the packet radio program<br>ended in the 1980s.<br><br>v<br><br><br>On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 11:23 PM, Jack Haverty <<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a>> wrote:<br><br>> I wasn't directly involved in Packet Radio itself, but heard about it,<br>> mostly from Jim Mathis and (IIRC) Holly Nelson who were at most of the<br>> meetings. Helicopters were definitely in the thought experiments, and<br>> even faster low-altitude aircraft, as users of communications. But I<br>> think you're right that probably only land-mobile and high-altitude<br>> aircraft was possible to actually demo, at least at first.<br>><br>> There were many problems to be solved (we all had lots of lists of<br>> "things that need to be worked on"), and packet radio with higher speed<br>> mobile platforms was probably one of them. It involved not only<br>> power/weight/size but also things like routing protocols, which would<br>> likely have to be much faster to respond to changes.<br>><br>> I never have heard how (or if) that early Packet Radio work evolved into<br>> "real" use in modern military systems. E.G., do drones still use TCP,<br>> do they communicate with Packet Radio protocols, etc. There's probably<br>> a good history story there for some future historian to uncover.<br>><br>> /Jack<br>><br>> On 08/31/2016 07:29 PM, Barbara Denny wrote:<br>> > In case people are interested, various packet radio efforts did<br>> > actually have demos for the military that utilized a hummer or an Air<br>> > Force airplane besides the SRI bread/mobile van which is now sitting<br>> > outside the Computer History Museum. I am not aware of any packet radio<br>> > demos with helicopters. I think power, weight, size issues probably<br>> > prevented this but feel free to correct if anyone knows otherwise.<br>> > Helicopters have been used in more recent MANET program demos for DARPA.<br>> ><br>> > barbara<br>> ><br>> > p.s.<br>> > Packet radios may have ended up on a boat too before I started working<br>> > on the project. I believe SRI had access to a research vessel.<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>> > *From:* "<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history-request@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history-request@postel.org">internet-history-request@postel.org</a>"<br>> > <<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history-request@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history-request@postel.org">internet-history-request@postel.org</a>><br>> > *To:* <a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a><br>> > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 31, 2016 3:35 PM<br>> > *Subject:* internet-history Digest, Vol 105, Issue 37<br>> ><br>> > Send internet-history mailing list submissions to<br>> > <a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a> <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a>><br>> ><br>> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit<br>> > <a href="http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history" target="_blank">http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history</a><br>> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to<br>> > <a ymailto="mailto:internet-history-request@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history-request@postel.org">internet-history-request@postel.org</a><br>> > <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history-request@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history-request@postel.org">internet-history-request@postel.org</a>><br>> ><br>> > You can reach the person managing the list at<br>> > <a ymailto="mailto:internet-history-owner@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history-owner@postel.org">internet-history-owner@postel.org</a><br>> > <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history-owner@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history-owner@postel.org">internet-history-owner@postel.org</a>><br>> ><br>> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific<br>> > than "Re: Contents of internet-history digest..."<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > Today's Topics:<br>> ><br>> > 1. Why TCP? (Jack Haverty)<br>> > 2. Re: Why TCP? (Vint Cerf)<br>> > 3. Re: Why TCP? (Brian E Carpenter)<br>> > 4. Re: Why TCP? (Vint Cerf)<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>> ><br>> > Message: 1<br>> > Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 14:43:24 -0700<br>> > From: Jack Haverty <<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a> <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a>>><br>> > Subject: [ih] Why TCP?<br>> > To: <a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a> <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a>><br>> > Message-ID: <<a ymailto="mailto:87d2d00a-361a-8ec1-b1cd-2e047a40df93@3kitty.org" href="mailto:87d2d00a-361a-8ec1-b1cd-2e047a40df93@3kitty.org">87d2d00a-361a-8ec1-b1cd-2e047a40df93@3kitty.org</a><br>> > <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:87d2d00a-361a-8ec1-b1cd-2e047a40df93@3kitty.org" href="mailto:87d2d00a-361a-8ec1-b1cd-2e047a40df93@3kitty.org">87d2d00a-361a-8ec1-b1cd-2e047a40df93@3kitty.org</a>>><br>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed<br>> ><br>> > [I changed the subject because I hate unsearchable subjects like<br>> > "...internet history digest..."]<br>> ><br>> > I think Dave's observation is a really important fact for future<br>> > historians - the Internet did not evolve in a vacuum.<br>> ><br>> > ARPANET was one of the first packet networks (I'll let others argue<br>> > about which was First...), but it was preceded by networks based on<br>> > phone lines and modems interconnecting terminals and computers.<br>> ><br>> > The ARPA Packet Radio net enabled communications between mobile<br>> > computers, moving around in jeeps and helicopters, by radio links. But<br>> > it was preceded by AlohaNet in Hawaii, which interconnected the various<br>> > islands by radio. AlohaNet was also the inspiration for Ethernet. In<br>> > the early 1970s, Bob Metcalfe's office at MIT was three doors down the<br>> > hallway from mine as he wrote his thesis that spawned Ethernet. I<br>> > remember hearing about AlohaNet from him.<br>> ><br>> > Later, SATNET interconnected sites using satellite links, also obviously<br>> > using radio for communications. Unlike the packet radio environment,<br>> > the path of the satellites was highly predictable, and the massive dish<br>> > antennas on the ground didn't move at all.<br>> ><br>> > SATNET was subsequently adapted to create MATNET, a Navy project, that<br>> > used satellite dishes on ships for communication. Ships moved of<br>> > course, but not as rapidly or spasmodically as jeeps and aircraft.<br>> ><br>> > Ethernet was evolved by Xerox PARC into its own "internet", with<br>> > multiple LANs interconnecting by radio links or telephone lines.<br>> > During the early 80s, The Internet which we still use today was running<br>> > in parallel with the PARC internet (I can't recall what they called it),<br>> > using PUP where we used TCP.<br>> ><br>> > As Dave noted, we got used to hearing that the mission of the Internet<br>> > Project (as driven by the IAB/ICCB under Vint's direction) was to<br>> > develop the infrastructure technology, i.e., protocols and algorithms<br>> > and standards, to interconnect these networks, both the existing types<br>> > and anything else that someone might dream up in the future.<br>> ><br>> > If some new type of network could carry packets from point A to point B,<br>> > it should be possible to incorporate it into the Internet --- without<br>> > requiring the host computers to change any software (which would be<br>> > hard), or change all of the routers in the Internet (only the ones that<br>> > directly interface to the new network need to change to be able to use<br>> it)<br>> ><br>> > We even mused about extreme networking. For example, TCP/IP should be<br>> > able to utilize a "network" implemented using carrier pigeons for<br>> > transport, with each pigeon carrying a small tube with a strip of paper<br>> > containing one packet of data.<br>> ><br>> > As far as I know, no one ever did that.... But it was one of the<br>> > scenarios that came up in the brainstorming discussions to prevent us<br>> > from changing the technical mechanisms in a way that precluded<br>> > PigeonNet's use.<br>> ><br>> > On another extreme, we mused about incorporating another Internet into<br>> > The Internet, i.e., using some existing set of routers and lines<br>> > (Internet 1), as a means to interconnect routers in an overlaid internet<br>> > (Internet 2). After all, a fragment of an internet meets the<br>> > definition of a network - a communications mechanism that can carry<br>> packets.<br>> ><br>> > As far as I know, such multi-layer Internet-of-Internets *did* happen.<br>> > It was used in some secure environments and I think also used as a<br>> > technique to implement the IP4 to IP6 transition (are we there<br>> > yet...it's been more than 30 years!???)<br>> ><br>> > So, as Dave noted, TCP/IP was developed as an overlay that would run<br>> > over all existing, or future, networks. That goal often came up during<br>> > the meetings and discussions as something akin to a Prime Directive.<br>> ><br>> > ==============<br>> ><br>> > IMHO, future historians might also like to know *why* that was the Prime<br>> > Directive. In other words, Why TCP? The intransigence of people to<br>> > settle on a single technology and protocol was important as a motivator,<br>> > but IMHO only part of it.<br>> ><br>> > My introduction to TCP was in 1977. I had been working in the ARPANET<br>> > environment, doing things like email et al at MIT. I moved to BBN in<br>> > 1977 and my first task was to write the first TCP for Unix, which was<br>> > needed as part of an ARPA project. At that time, TCP was at the version<br>> > 2.5 stage.<br>> ><br>> > Over the next year or so, we made a lot of changes to create TCP 3 and<br>> > then TCP 4.<br>> ><br>> > Creating a technology that could incorporate any kind of network was a<br>> > big part of the mission. But there were others. For example, it was<br>> > desirable that the infrastructure support different types of user<br>> > traffic. Ideally, the TCP infrastructure would support all types of<br>> > user traffic in a way similar to its ability to utilize any type of<br>> > network that might appear.<br>> ><br>> > Specifically, voice traffic - realtime human-human speech - was found to<br>> > not work very well over a TCP connection. With our traditional uses,<br>> > e.g., FTP/Telnet/Email, getting all of the data there intact was the<br>> > overriding goal. In speech, getting the data there in a timely fashion<br>> > was most important, and some loss of snippets of speech was acceptable.<br>> ><br>> > That, among other things, motivated the split of TCP into TCP/IP,<br>> > allowing the creation of UDP and "higher" protocols to carry things like<br>> > speech and video.<br>> ><br>> > =======================<br>> ><br>> > All of these internet-history discussions tend to revolve around<br>> > technology - protocols, algorithms, etc., which isn't surprising since a<br>> > lot of the people on this list were deeply involved in creating that<br>> > technology.<br>> ><br>> > But for the benefit of historians, there's another "layer" of discussion<br>> > that seems important - Why TCP? In other words, why was it so important<br>> > to create a whole new infrastructure with such capabilities.<br>> ><br>> > The Departments of Defense (note plural) put quite a lot of money into<br>> > the efforts to develop the Internet technology. ARPA, part of the US<br>> > military, was a large player, acting as a conduit for funds from the<br>> > various parts of the military - Army, Navy, Air Force, etc. But other<br>> > players from other countries were there too - RSRE (UK), NDRE (Norway),<br>> > DFVLR (Germany), and CNUCE (Italy) are ones I remember.<br>> ><br>> > So, .... the interesting question is "Why did they send money, and keep<br>> > sending it, to create the TCP/IP technology"? Why did they care about<br>> > being able to interconnect all sorts of networks?<br>> ><br>> > The answer of course is because they needed it to solve their own<br>> > communications problems.<br>> ><br>> > During that TCP2-->4 evolution period, I remember that we were<br>> > continuously aware of stereotypical military scenarios in which TCP was<br>> > supposed to operate. The military folks didn't really care about bits,<br>> > bytes, packets, etc. They just knew what they wanted to be able to do<br>> > with it all.<br>> ><br>> > The scenario I remember most was what I heard on joining the fray in<br>> > 1977 and learning what exactly this "TCP" thing and associated projects<br>> > were all about.<br>> ><br>> > It was a "Command and Control" scenario, which is the bread-and-butter<br>> > of the military world. The notion was that someone "out in the field",<br>> > perhaps a scout in a jeep, would see something interesting, and need to<br>> > report it up the command chain. "I see a column of tanks coming along<br>> > the river valley".<br>> ><br>> > The jeep of course couldn't be wired into an IMP port on the ARPANET.<br>> > But it could have a radio, and that radio should be able to communicate<br>> > with another jeep, or tank, or whatever else might be around. And they<br>> > might be able to communicate with the field headquarters, possibly<br>> > several miles away. But everyone had to be able to move, often rapidly<br>> > and unpredictably.<br>> ><br>> > So, .... here's some money....make it work... and Packet Radio networks<br>> > were born.<br>> ><br>> > With lots of jeeps, or helicopters, or whatever, and their eyes and<br>> > ears, the field headquarters could be connected back to the Pentagon<br>> > over the ARPANET and all of that information could be used to figure out<br>> > what to do about it. But somehow we need to have messages flow from the<br>> > Packet Radio to the ARPANET...<br>> ><br>> > So, .... here's some money....make it work.... and gateways (aka<br>> > routers) were born.<br>> ><br>> > Back at the Pentagon, looking at all the reports, it might become clear<br>> > that the Army guys in the jeeps needed a little help as waves of tanks<br>> > approached them.<br>> ><br>> > Perhaps there's a ship offshore, with some big guns, and a carrier full<br>> > of nasty airplanes. But they're over the horizon, too far away for the<br>> > Packet Radio to reach, or for wires to an IMP port. But they do have<br>> > satellite dishes, and can talk to other dishes halfway around the planet<br>> > if necessary. If only their computers could talk with everybody else...<br>> ><br>> > So, here's some money....make it work.... and SATNET and MATNET were<br>> > born. The USS Carl Vinson was on The Internet.<br>> ><br>> > When things get frenetic, messages and email just aren't fast enough.<br>> > Real time voice communication is critical (remember, no cell phones in<br>> > those days). But voice over TCP isn't working well.<br>> ><br>> > So, here's some money....make it work.... and TCP is split into TCP and<br>> > IP, UDP is defined, and the obstacle to realtime voice is removed. Hey,<br>> > it should even work for video someday.<br>> ><br>> > We can't do video, but graphics are a big help. A general might be able<br>> > to view a map while talking with commanders in the field who see the<br>> > same map. Even use a pointer to highlight specific areas of the map as<br>> > he gives instructions. "Unit A, you move here (pointing somewhere),<br>> > and Ship B, you fire at this location (pointing somewhere else)".<br>> ><br>> > It's really important that the "pointing" actions in the graphics are<br>> > well-synchronized with the speech giving the commands......<br>> ><br>> > So, the real-time UDP speech needs to be time-synched with the graphics<br>> > images over TCP.<br>> ><br>> > So, here's some money....make it work....and .... mechanisms such as NTP<br>> > (thank you Dave Mills!) are created to provide high-accuracy global<br>> > time. But I have no idea if the voice/graphics synching is guaranteed<br>> > even today. Sure hope so...<br>> ><br>> > There were a number of these scenarios that drove our thinking about the<br>> > problems. I was an initial member of Vint's IAB (then called ICCB), and<br>> > these kinds of scenarios played a significant role in those discussions,<br>> > which complemented the technical discussions in the larger Internet<br>> > group meetings. The IAB in part acted as a conduit to translate the<br>> > desires of the guys with the money into the technical goals that drove<br>> > the creation of the TCP/IP protocols and machinery.<br>> ><br>> > Someone (I wish I knew who) made the decision to do all of this work,<br>> > and spend all of that money, in an open environment, and make the<br>> > technology freely available and standardized for anyone to use. None of<br>> > the competing Internet architectures (Xerox, Novell, DEC, IBM, ISO,<br>> > etc.) did that. So when the rest of the world discovered that the<br>> > military TCP/IP technology not only worked but also could solve their<br>> > problems, the ascension of the Internet was natural.<br>> ><br>> > So, that's why we have TCP!<br>> ><br>> > As usual, I've written a lot, sorry about that. It just seems important<br>> > to get this written down somewhere to capture some of the "why" part of<br>> > the Internet history. The existence of concrete scenarios was key in<br>> > focusing the technical work on actual real-world problems to be solved.<br>> > That permeated the culture of the Internet developers. Instead of<br>> > writing documents, we wrote code...<br>> ><br>> > /Jack Haverty<br>> > August 31, 2016<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > On 08/31/2016 07:17 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:<br>> >> On 8/31/2016 6:50 AM, Craig Partridge wrote:<br>> >>> As I recall the story (I arrived on the scene later), Bob Kahn was in<br>> >>> the process of funding Packet Radio Networks and he and Vint needed to<br>> >>> solve the<br>> >>> interconnection problem and that motivated the TCP paper.<br>> >><br>> >><br>> >> This is a variant of the broader problem statement I was used to<br>> hearing:<br>> >><br>> >> Even by 1972 there already were a variety of independent networks<br>> >> around the world. How to interconnect them, since it was unlikely that<br>> >> they would all agree to switch over to someone else's network protocols.<br>> >><br>> >> TCP was developed as an overlay that would run on all of them,<br>> >> connecting them.<br>> >><br>> >> d/<br>> >><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > ------------------------------<br>> ><br>> > Message: 2<br>> > Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 18:29:05 -0400<br>> > From: Vint Cerf <<a ymailto="mailto:vint@google.com" href="mailto:vint@google.com">vint@google.com</a> <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:vint@google.com" href="mailto:vint@google.com">vint@google.com</a>>><br>> > Subject: Re: [ih] Why TCP?<br>> > To: Jack Haverty <<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a> <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a>>><br>> > Cc: internet history <<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a><br>> > <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a>>><br>> > Message-ID:<br>> > <CAHxHggd8=NHr6T-j89ANp+<a ymailto="mailto:sDOYak8sVtV1YyQs3EDfZYc9rAxA@mail.gmail.com" href="mailto:sDOYak8sVtV1YyQs3EDfZYc9rAxA@mail.gmail.com">sDOYak8sVtV1YyQs3EDfZYc9rAxA@mail.gmail.com</a><br>> > <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:sDOYak8sVtV1YyQs3EDfZYc9rAxA@mail.gmail.com" href="mailto:sDOYak8sVtV1YyQs3EDfZYc9rAxA@mail.gmail.com">sDOYak8sVtV1YyQs3EDfZYc9rAxA@mail.gmail.com</a>>><br>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>> ><br>> > On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 5:43 PM, Jack Haverty <<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a><br>> > <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a>>> wrote:<br>> ><br>> >><br>> >> We even mused about extreme networking. For example, TCP/IP should be<br>> >> able to utilize a "network" implemented using carrier pigeons for<br>> >> transport, with each pigeon carrying a small tube with a strip of paper<br>> >> containing one packet of data.<br>> >><br>> >> As far as I know, no one ever did that...<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > yeah, they did - there's even an RFC about it, I think, from UK.<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > see also YouTube: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQCZH9Lp8uo" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQCZH9Lp8uo</a><br>> ><br>> > The audio and auto-caption is hilariously disconnected.<br>> ><br>> > <a href="https://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/09/08/29/" target="_blank">https://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/09/08/29/</a><br>> 1934251/pigeon-protocol-finds-a-practical-purpose<br>> ><br>> > <a href="http://www.cnet.com/news/pigeon-powered-internet-takes-flight/" target="_blank">http://www.cnet.com/news/pigeon-powered-internet-takes-flight/</a><br>> ><br>> > v<br>> > <<a href="http://www.cnet.com/news/pigeon-powered-internet-takes-flight/" target="_blank">http://www.cnet.com/news/pigeon-powered-internet-takes-flight/</a>><br>> ><br>> > --<br>> > New postal address:<br>> > Google<br>> > 1875 Explorer Street, 10th Floor<br>> > Reston, VA 20190<br>> > -------------- next part --------------<br>> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>> > URL:<br>> > <a href="http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/internet-history/" target="_blank">http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/internet-history/</a><br>> attachments/20160831/30aad3c0/attachment-0001.html<br>> ><br>> > ------------------------------<br>> ><br>> > Message: 3<br>> > Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 10:31:16 +1200<br>> > From: Brian E Carpenter <<a ymailto="mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com" href="mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com">brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com</a><br>> > <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com" href="mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com">brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com</a>>><br>> > Subject: Re: [ih] Why TCP?<br>> > To: Jack Haverty <<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a> <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a>>><br>> > Cc: <a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a> <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a>><br>> > Message-ID: <<a ymailto="mailto:50804405-fff3-c6cb-421a-44d1bf08ab2c@gmail.com" href="mailto:50804405-fff3-c6cb-421a-44d1bf08ab2c@gmail.com">50804405-fff3-c6cb-421a-44d1bf08ab2c@gmail.com</a><br>> > <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:50804405-fff3-c6cb-421a-44d1bf08ab2c@gmail.com" href="mailto:50804405-fff3-c6cb-421a-44d1bf08ab2c@gmail.com">50804405-fff3-c6cb-421a-44d1bf08ab2c@gmail.com</a>>><br>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8<br>> ><br>> > On 01/09/2016 09:43, Jack Haverty wrote:<br>> > ...<br>> >> For example, TCP/IP should be<br>> >> able to utilize a "network" implemented using carrier pigeons for<br>> >> transport, with each pigeon carrying a small tube with a strip of paper<br>> >> containing one packet of data.<br>> >><br>> >> As far as I know, no one ever did that....<br>> ><br>> > Of coure they did:<br>> > <a href="http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/writeup/" target="_blank">http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/writeup/</a><br>> ><br>> > Brian<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > ------------------------------<br>> ><br>> > Message: 4<br>> > Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 18:35:06 -0400<br>> > From: Vint Cerf <<a ymailto="mailto:vint@google.com" href="mailto:vint@google.com">vint@google.com</a> <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:vint@google.com" href="mailto:vint@google.com">vint@google.com</a>>><br>> > Subject: Re: [ih] Why TCP?<br>> > To: Jack Haverty <<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a> <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a>>><br>> > Cc: internet history <<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a><br>> > <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a>>><br>> > Message-ID:<br>> > <CAHxHggfi9-LNbV71bUSX6ozkX=<a ymailto="mailto:GTtioTLdVTMk2EhBi_Y-Z3wg@mail.gmail.com" href="mailto:GTtioTLdVTMk2EhBi_Y-Z3wg@mail.gmail.com">GTtioTLdVTMk2EhBi_Y-Z3wg@mail.gmail.com</a><br>> > <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:GTtioTLdVTMk2EhBi_Y-Z3wg@mail.gmail.com" href="mailto:GTtioTLdVTMk2EhBi_Y-Z3wg@mail.gmail.com">GTtioTLdVTMk2EhBi_Y-Z3wg@mail.gmail.com</a>>><br>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>> ><br>> > On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 5:43 PM, Jack Haverty <<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a><br>> > <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:jack@3kitty.org" href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org">jack@3kitty.org</a>>> wrote:<br>> ><br>> >><br>> >> Someone (I wish I knew who) made the decision to do all of this work,<br>> >> and spend all of that money, in an open environment, and make the<br>> >> technology freely available and standardized for anyone to use. None of<br>> >> the competing Internet architectures (Xerox, Novell, DEC, IBM, ISO,<br>> >> etc.) did that. So when the rest of the world discovered that the<br>> >> military TCP/IP technology not only worked but also could solve their<br>> >> problems, the ascension of the Internet was natural.<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > Bob Kahn, Larry Roberts and Dave Russell are probably the closest to the<br>> > deciding parties<br>> > at the IPTO level but one has to credit George Heilmeier and Steve<br>> Lukasic<br>> > as DARPA<br>> > Directors for their strong support for ARPANET and then Internet.<br>> ><br>> > v<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > --<br>> > New postal address:<br>> > Google<br>> > 1875 Explorer Street, 10th Floor<br>> > Reston, VA 20190<br>> > -------------- next part --------------<br>> > An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>> > URL:<br>> > <a href="http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/internet-history/" target="_blank">http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/internet-history/</a><br>> attachments/20160831/86df189e/attachment.html<br>> ><br>> > ------------------------------<br>> ><br>> > _______________________________________________<br>> > internet-history mailing list<br>> > <a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a> <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a>><br>> > <a href="http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history" target="_blank">http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history</a><br>> > Contact <a ymailto="mailto:list-owner@postel.org" href="mailto:list-owner@postel.org">list-owner@postel.org</a> <mailto:<a ymailto="mailto:list-owner@postel.org" href="mailto:list-owner@postel.org">list-owner@postel.org</a>> for<br>> assistance.<br>> ><br>> ><br>> > End of internet-history Digest, Vol 105, Issue 37<br>> > *************************************************<br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> ><br>> > _______<br>> > internet-history mailing list<br>> > <a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a><br>> > <a href="http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history" target="_blank">http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history</a><br>> > Contact <a ymailto="mailto:list-owner@postel.org" href="mailto:list-owner@postel.org">list-owner@postel.org</a> for assistance.<br>> ><br>> _______<br>> internet-history mailing list<br>> <a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a><br>> <a href="http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history" target="_blank">http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history</a><br>> Contact <a ymailto="mailto:list-owner@postel.org" href="mailto:list-owner@postel.org">list-owner@postel.org</a> for assistance.<br>><br><br><br><br>-- <br>New postal address:<br>Google<br>1875 Explorer Street, 10th Floor<br>Reston, VA 20190<br>-------------- next part --------------<br>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...<br>URL: <a href="http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20160901/21dc0c43/attachment.html" target="_blank">http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20160901/21dc0c43/attachment.html</a><br><br>------------------------------<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>internet-history mailing list<br><a ymailto="mailto:internet-history@postel.org" href="mailto:internet-history@postel.org">internet-history@postel.org</a><br><a href="http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history" target="_blank">http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history</a><br>Contact <a ymailto="mailto:list-owner@postel.org" href="mailto:list-owner@postel.org">list-owner@postel.org</a> for assistance.<br><br><br>End of internet-history Digest, Vol 106, Issue 1<br>************************************************<br><br><br></div> </div> </div> </div></div></body></html>