From serge.courrier at pobox.com  Mon May 12 08:04:51 2003
From: serge.courrier at pobox.com (Serge Courrier)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 17:04:51 +0200
Subject: [ih] Finding the ARPA's Request for quotation (july-august 1968)
Message-ID: <000901c31897$da8da4b0$0a00000a@serge>

Dear colisters, 

Trying to gather direct historical sources about Internet history, I
desperatly try to find a Fac simile of the famous "request for quotation"
sended in july or august 1968 by the Defense Supply Service - Washington to
140 potential bidders as stated by Michael Hauben [1], for example. He talk
also about the ARPA draft, III-35.

Do you know a website where I could find these two documents ? 

Best regards

Serge Courrier
Computer journalist, Paris, France


[1] http://www.dei.isep.ipp.pt/docs/arpa.html

"The Defense Supply Service - Washington (DSS-W) agreed to be a procurement
agent for ARPA. At the end of July the Request for Quotation for network
IMPs was mailed to 140 potential bidders who had expressed interest in
receiving it. Approximately 100 people from 51 companies attended a
subsequent bidders' conference. Twelve proposals were actually received by
DSS_W comprising 6.6 edge-feet of paper and presenting an awesome evaluation
task for IPT, which more normally awards contracts on a sole source basis.
Attempting to evaluate the proposals "strictly by the book", an
ARPA-appointed evaluation committee retired to Monterey, California, to
carry out their task. ARPA was pleasantly surprised that several of the
respondents believed that they could construct a network which performed as
much as a factor of five better than the delay constraint given in the
RFQ..." (ARPA draft, III-35) 





From chris at cs.utexas.edu  Mon May 12 10:06:28 2003
From: chris at cs.utexas.edu (Chris Edmondson-Yurkanan)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 12:06:28 -0500
Subject: [ih] Finding the ARPA's Request for quotation (july-august 1968)
Message-ID: <200305121706.h4CH6SLm002212@neverland.cs.utexas.edu>

I have scanned the RFQ as pdf images and it is here:

http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/chris/DIGITAL_ARCHIVE/ARPANET/RFQ-ARPA-IMP.pdf

Additionally:  the other network design related documents that are not widely 
available which I have put online can be found here:

http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/chris/think/digital_archive.html

Most of these documents were actually scanned and then OCR-ed.

ACM SIGCOMM helped fund this.  When I get some more funding, I will
continue with this activity.

Thanks, Chris

-- 
The University of Texas at Austin  TAY 4.136; +1 512 471 9546    Fax: 471 8885  
Chris Edmondson-Yurkanan           My email addresses are: chris at cs.utexas.edu
Computer Sciences Department          or dragon at cs.utexas.edu
1 University Station C0500         URL:  www.cs.utexas.edu/users/chris/
Austin, TX   78712-1188            Fedex: please send to Taylor Hall 2.124 



From jnc at ginger.lcs.mit.edu  Mon May 12 11:08:08 2003
From: jnc at ginger.lcs.mit.edu (J. Noel Chiappa)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 14:08:08 -0400
Subject: [ih] Finding the ARPA's Request for quotation (july-august 1968)
Message-ID: <200305121808.h4CI88Ko025523@ginger.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: "Chris Edmondson-Yurkanan" <chris at cs.utexas.edu>

    > I have scanned the RFQ as pdf images and it is here:
    > ..
    > Additionally: the other network design related documents that are not
    > widely available which I have put online can be found here:
    > ..
    > When I get some more funding, I will continue with this activity.

Wow! What a collection of great stuff!

I don't have time to comment on the Internet stuff, but for the early
ARPAnet, I would also highly suggest BBN's proposal in response to that RFQ,
a massive tome (about 200 pages) called "IMP P69-IST-5", from 6 September,
1968.

Another very important and hard-to-find ARPANet document is BBN Report 3803,
which is where the problems with the ARPAnet's original Destination-Vector
routing architecture were studied, and the routing architecture now called
"link state" proposed to replace it.

You might want to try and touch base with Katie Hafner, who did the definitive
history of the early ARPANet ("When Wizards Stay up Late", I think is the
title), and see if she has any suggestions for additional critical materials.

	Noel



From cls at rkey.com  Mon May 12 11:52:24 2003
From: cls at rkey.com (Craig Simon)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 14:52:24 -0400
Subject: [ih] Finding the ARPA's Request for quotation (july-august 1968)
References: <200305121808.h4CI88Ko025523@ginger.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <3EBFED68.2040903@rkey.com>

The title is "Where Wizards Stay up Late."

It's a friendly read and carries a nice narrative (which is partly why 
it became a best seller),  but I think Janet Abbate's "Inventing the 
Internet" feels more thorough.

Perhaps it's up to you folks to say which one is closer to getting it 
"right."

Thet U Texas is very impressive. I've noticed that that it's one of the 
only places that still holds pieces of the early NameDroppers archives.

Craig Simon

thorough, and I think it was
> You might want to try and touch base with Katie Hafner, who did the definitive
> history of the early ARPANet ("When Wizards Stay up Late", I think is the
> title), and see if she has any suggestions for additional critical materials.
> 
> 	Noel
> 
> 




From chris at cs.utexas.edu  Mon May 12 15:17:48 2003
From: chris at cs.utexas.edu (Chris Edmondson-Yurkanan)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 17:17:48 -0500
Subject: [ih] Finding the ARPA's Request for quotation (july-august 1968)
Message-ID: <200305122217.h4CMHm6R006413@neverland.cs.utexas.edu>

Additionally, Serge, the reference to the Arpanet Completion Report Draft
(III-35) is to a draft compilation of a summary of the entire project.

I have seen both, but the copy that I have put online is not the draft,
but instead is the official completion report, and it is much shorter.

I believe that the draft was primarily written by F. Heart, A. McKenzie,
J. McQuillan, and D. Walden (all of BBN) as material that *could* be 
included in the ARPANET Completion Report.  

Whereas, the official Arpanet Completion Report approved by DARPA (the DARPA 
Program Mgr whose name is on it is: Stephen Walker) is shorter, and I haven't
compared them to see the differences.

You won't find the material from Draft III-35 anywhere in the official 
ARPANET Completion Report.

Thanks, Chris

The online copy is in pdf, and is just scanned images, this was not OCRed
and thus is not searchable.
 
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/chris/DIGITAL_ARCHIVE/ARPANET/DARPA4799.pdf

-- 
The University of Texas at Austin  TAY 4.136; +1 512 471 9546    Fax: 471 8885  
Chris Edmondson-Yurkanan           My email addresses are: chris at cs.utexas.edu
Computer Sciences Department          or dragon at cs.utexas.edu
1 University Station C0500         URL:  www.cs.utexas.edu/users/chris/
Austin, TX   78712-1188            Fedex: please send to Taylor Hall 2.124 



From chris at cs.utexas.edu  Mon May 12 13:52:38 2003
From: chris at cs.utexas.edu (Chris Edmondson-Yurkanan)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 15:52:38 -0500
Subject: [ih] Finding the ARPA's Request for quotation (july-august 1968)
Message-ID: <200305122052.h4CKqcw8005203@neverland.cs.utexas.edu>

#    > From: "Chris Edmondson-Yurkanan" <chris at cs.utexas.edu>
#
#    > I have scanned the RFQ as pdf images and it is here:
#    > ..
#    > Additionally: the other network design related documents that are not
#    > widely available which I have put online can be found here:
#    > ..
#    > When I get some more funding, I will continue with this activity.
#
#Wow! What a collection of great stuff!

    thanks Noel! 

	when the ACM SIGCOMM 99 conference committee (under Lyman Chapin's
	leadership) came up with the idea of inviting all 12 (missing Jon)
	SIGCOMM Award winners to participate in a panel, then Ellen
	Zegura came up with the idea of asking them to contribute to
	an Internet History Tutorial.... 

	So, the actual 19 people who spoke at that tutorial sent me 
	a few originals (that others wouldn't have access to) 
	for possible inclusion in a tutorial notebook.  
	At that point I got hooked!  Some just sent me slides and 
	bibliographies, and some sent originals.  It was/is incredibly
	exciting.

     thanks to Craig Simon:
	The namedroppers archive came via Craig Partridge....
	Do you have some other archives to share or suggestions?

#
#I don't have time to comment on the Internet stuff, but for the early
#ARPAnet, I would also highly suggest BBN's proposal in response to that RFQ,
#a massive tome (about 200 pages) called "IMP P69-IST-5", from 6 September,
#1968.

	Wonderful!
	I specifically asked Jennie Connolly (BBN's librarian) for that, 
	when I visited	BBN on my last trip.  She went off to find out
	where it was, and was told BBN's response was thousands of pages 
	and not available.  So, I'm glad to hear it's only 200 pages.  
	It was certainly my understanding that BBN does not have a copy???

	I just sent Jennie an email to double check with her, now
	if that doesn't work any other pointers for me to pursue? 
 
#
#Another very important and hard-to-find ARPANet document is BBN Report 3803,
#which is where the problems with the ARPAnet's original Destination-Vector
#routing architecture were studied, and the routing architecture now called
#"link state" proposed to replace it.

	OK, given that most people have library access to IEEE Transactions
	on Communications paper (May 80) The New Routing Algorithm for
	the ARPANET,  not to mention random sites, such as:
	people.ece.cornell.edu/servetto/teaching/fall2002/reading/arpanet.pdf 
	and the Sigcomm 25th anniversary issue Dave Oran and Lyman spearheaded
	in 1995 has a 7 page version: An Overview of the New Routing Algorithm
	for the ARPANET.....

	So, Noel, do you remember what additional info is in 3803
	and the follow on reports: 3940 and 4088?  that might not be
	in the classic reference/citation?

	I did ask Jennie for BBN report 3641 "Arpanet routing study
	final report Sept 77" thinking that it would be the ultimate
	story of "link state", but it wasn't what I thought, so I don't 
	have it on my todo list.... and never did request 3803/3940/4088

#
#You might want to try and touch base with Katie Hafner, who did the definitive
#history of the early ARPANet ("When Wizards Stay up Late", I think is the
#title), and see if she has any suggestions for additional critical materials.
#
#	Noel
#

	Yes, ironically, she moved from Austin before I had heard of her. 
	(her husband worked at UT)	

	I ask my undergrad researchers to start by reading Katie Hafner's
	book.  It is engaging, and the students always enjoy finding out
	that you guys are "real people"!

	And, I have all of the other books as well.
 
	Thanks again, Chris


-- 
The University of Texas at Austin  TAY 4.136; +1 512 471 9546    Fax: 471 8885  
Chris Edmondson-Yurkanan           My email addresses are: chris at cs.utexas.edu
Computer Sciences Department          or dragon at cs.utexas.edu
1 University Station C0500         URL:  www.cs.utexas.edu/users/chris/
Austin, TX   78712-1188            Fedex: please send to Taylor Hall 2.124 



From cls at rkey.com  Mon May 12 17:50:32 2003
From: cls at rkey.com (Craig Simon)
Date: Mon, 12 May 2003 20:50:32 -0400
Subject: [ih] Finding the ARPA's Request for quotation (july-august 1968)
References: <200305122052.h4CKqcw8005203@neverland.cs.utexas.edu>
Message-ID: <3EC04158.2020703@rkey.com>

You might enjoy this one if you haven't seen it already.

http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/jon/arpa/internet-history.html

> 	The namedroppers archive came via Craig Partridge....
> 	Do you have some other archives to share or suggestions?



From aca at cs.utexas.edu  Tue May 13 15:24:48 2003
From: aca at cs.utexas.edu (Adriana C. Arrington)
Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 17:24:48 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [ih] character-at-a-time vs line-at-a-time systems and Telnet
In-Reply-To: <200304151905.h3FJ5D104007@boreas.isi.edu>
References: <200304151905.h3FJ5D104007@boreas.isi.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.53.0305122356380.4401@twinnings.cs.utexas.edu>

Hello,

I am continuing the research for the technical history of Telnet with
Chris Edmondson-Yurkanan for the THINK Protocols project.

RFC 97 states that one of the design problems initially for Telnet was
basically line-at-time systems should universally interface with
character-at-a-time systems and vice versa.  Obviously dealing with this
problem was essential in Telnet's design, and I want to ensure that I
fully understand the problem and its solutions.

The problem with interfacing these two kinds of systems (in Old Telnet)
was knowing which was the character-at-a-time system and which was the
line-at-a-time system with respect to the using and serving hosts.
Character-at-a-time systems processed one input character as it was
received; whereas, line-at-a-time systems worked on entire lines
terminated by a combination of carriage returns, line feeds or newlines.
So both sides of the connection had to know what kind of system was on the
other side in order to communicate with it correctly.  They had to
determine if it was necessary to queue up characters into a line or just
send single characters.

RFC 318 on page 5 gives two "USER TELNET SIGNALS": Transmit Now and
Suppress End-of-Line.  I am assuming that these were the mechanisms in Old
Telnet to allow the two kinds of systems to interface along with line mode
and character mode, as described on page 14.  From reading the RFCs, I do
not have a clear understanding of these signals' usage.  How did they
work? Was this solution in Old Telnet abandoned because of the asymmetry
problem that the protocol had?

For New Telnet, the Go Ahead command and the option Suppress Go Ahead were
the new mechanisms to make this interface work between the different kinds
of systems. This seemed to make sense because RFC 857 (page 3) and earlier
documents like NIC 15930 (August 1973, page 4) state:

   The echoing option alone will normally not be sufficient to effect
   what is commonly understood to be remote computer echoing of
   characters typed on a terminal keyboard--the SUPPRESS-GO AHEAD option
   will normally have to be invoked in conjunction with the ECHO option
   to effect character-at-a-time remote echoing.

This statement helped me to understand this better because in the
descriptions of GA use half-duplex and full-duplex terminals, which were
not used in Old Telnet. Do these kinds of terminals have anything to do
with character-at-a-time and line-at-a-time systems? What's the connection
here?

As always, thanks for the continuing help with this research.

Adriana Arrington

mailto:aca at cs.utexas.edu
http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~aca



From braden at ISI.EDU  Sat May 17 08:34:21 2003
From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden)
Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 08:34:21 -0700
Subject: [ih] Re: internet-history digest, Vol 1 #130 - 1 msg
In-Reply-To: <200305141905.h4EJ5A104261@boreas.isi.edu>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20030517082008.00b0df00@boreas.isi.edu>

>
>RFC 97 states that one of the design problems initially for Telnet was
>basically line-at-time systems should universally interface with
>character-at-a-time systems and vice versa.  Obviously dealing with this
>problem was essential in Telnet's design, and I want to ensure that I
>fully understand the problem and its solutions.


A LAAT client was unable to use a CAAT server, but vice versa worked
fine. On input, a LAAT client could not send an isolated character, for
example.  However, there was really a more complex distinction -- LAAT
systems were nearly always half-duplex.  Once the user entered a line,
the keyboard would be LOCKED until the server sent a complete line
and explicitly unlocked the keyboard.

In the beginning this distinction was not made, because the LAAT people
and the CAAT people each lived in their own world.  The CAAT people
could simply not conceive that anyone might lock the keyboard -- it was
too contrary to their world view.  Eventually, we LAAT freeks managed to
get this point across.  I believe that Alex McKenzie was one of the first
CAATers to understand the problem.

It was this experience that led me to a great generalization about computer
cultures: there were paper-tape machines, and there were punched card
machines, and never the twain could meet.


>RFC 318 on page 5 gives two "USER TELNET SIGNALS": Transmit Now and
>Suppress End-of-Line.  I am assuming that these were the mechanisms in Old
>Telnet to allow the two kinds of systems to interface along with line mode
>and character mode, as described on page 14.  From reading the RFCs, I do
>not have a clear understanding of these signals' usage.  How did they
>work? Was this solution in Old Telnet abandoned because of the asymmetry
>problem that the protocol had?


I don't immediately recall, but it seems apparent today that these commands
could not be implemented on a half-duplex LAAT system, so they would have 
been of little
help.  What helped was making the DEFAULT be LAAT half-duplex in the New 
Telnet,
with the ability to negotiate up from there.


>For New Telnet, the Go Ahead command and the option Suppress Go Ahead were
>the new mechanisms to make this interface work between the different kinds
>of systems. This seemed to make sense because RFC 857 (page 3) and earlier
>documents like NIC 15930 (August 1973, page 4) state:
>
>    The echoing option alone will normally not be sufficient to effect
>    what is commonly understood to be remote computer echoing of
>    characters typed on a terminal keyboard--the SUPPRESS-GO AHEAD option
>    will normally have to be invoked in conjunction with the ECHO option
>    to effect character-at-a-time remote echoing.
>
>This statement helped me to understand this better because in the
>descriptions of GA use half-duplex and full-duplex terminals, which were
>not used in Old Telnet. Do these kinds of terminals have anything to do
>with character-at-a-time and line-at-a-time systems? What's the connection
>here?

See above.  By New Telnet Time, the CAATers had figured out LAAT.
Though they still privately thought LAAAT was brain-damaged, ARPA
had made it clear that the ARPAnet had to support IBM and other
mainframes that used LAAT.

Bob Braden  (who LIVED it!)


>As always, thanks for the continuing help with this research.
>
>Adriana Arrington
>
>mailto:aca at cs.utexas.edu
>http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~aca
>
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>_______________________________________________
>internet-history mailing list
>internet-history at postel.org
>http://www.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>
>
>End of internet-history Digest



From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Sun May 18 21:38:13 2003
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 21:38:13 -0700
Subject: [ih] Re: internet-history digest, Vol 1 #130 - 1 msg
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20030517082008.00b0df00@boreas.isi.edu>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20030517082008.00b0df00@boreas.isi.edu>
Message-ID: <16519522051.20030518213813@brandenburg.com>

BB> See above.  By New Telnet Time, the CAATers had figured out LAAT.
BB> Though they still privately thought LAAAT was brain-damaged, ARPA


There was nothing private about the thoughts.

d/
--
 Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
 Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>



From braden at ISI.EDU  Mon May 19 11:21:07 2003
From: braden at ISI.EDU (Bob Braden)
Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 11:21:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ih] Re: internet-history digest, Vol 1 #128 - 4 msgs
Message-ID: <200305191821.LAA03476@gra.isi.edu>

  *> 
  *> Another very important and hard-to-find ARPANet document is BBN Report 3803,
  *> which is where the problems with the ARPAnet's original Destination-Vector
  *> routing architecture were studied, and the routing architecture now called
  *> "link state" proposed to replace it.
  *> 

In case anyone cares, I just checked on my bookshelf and I have a copy of 3803.
I don't know why I do, but I do ;-)

Bob Braden