[ih] internet-history Digest, Vol 37, Issue 1

[Jack Haverty]

I think that's right - but it's been a long time....  I vaguely remember
the event was more like a traditional Internet Working Group meeting
(lectures and debates by Internet geeks) than a conference, with the
main agenda being presentations about various things being worked on.
That's where I think that the ceramic tiles were given out.  Dan was the
one who figured out that there were lots of people who'd be interested
enough to pay real money even to be able to just listen, and he knew all
the people (yes, geeks are people too...) who'd be willing to come and
talk - especially if the next event was held somewhere like Monterey.
It was an amazingly short journey from there to Moscone to Vegas.

I wonder if the Internet would have been such a success if Interop
hadn't happened to allow the "real world" to join the party.  And of
course the signature chocolate chip cookies were crucial.

/Jack


On Fri, 2009-11-06 at 00:14 -0500, Vint Cerf wrote:
> i thought the first meeting was 1986 and was just lectures by Internet  
> geeks?
> 
> On Nov 5, 2009, at 4:30 PM, Jack Haverty wrote:
> 
> > I just found my souvenir plastic pocket protector - "TCP/IP '87  
> > Geeks on
> > the Bay in Monterey".  I think this was probably just before the name
> > "Interop" appeared, but it was arguably the first Interop conference.
> > The first name was "Advanced Computing Environments" (on my ceramic
> > souvenir tile.)
> >
> > I wonder what else is down in this drawer....  /Jack
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 18:34 -0500, Vint Cerf wrote:
> >> oh, duh, that can't be right (Interop wasn't born until about 1986  
> >> was
> >> it?).
> >>
> >> so I guess I don't know where that pin came from.
> >>
> >> v
> >>
> >> On Nov 2, 2009, at 4:44 PM, Jack Haverty wrote:
> >>
> >>> This is like the arguments about when life begins - lots of  
> >>> different
> >>> opinions...
> >>>
> >>> I like Bob's milestone - the Internet came to life when its  
> >>> technology
> >>> (i.e., the TCP technology that enabled the "inter" aspect of  
> >>> Internet)
> >>> was adopted for operational use and there was no going back.
> >>> Everything
> >>> before that was prenatal, part of a lengthy R&D gestation.  Much of
> >>> the
> >>> Arpanet software "DNA" carried over to the Internet algorithms.  But
> >>> 1/1/1983 seems like a good date for when the Internet was "born".
> >>>
> >>> Subsequently, the offspring Internet consumed its mother Arpanet,
> >>> which
> >>> disappeared totally - as happens in the animal kingdom.  But of
> >>> course,
> >>> opinions may differ.
> >>>
> >>> At the time, the "Arpanet people" didn't think they were creating an
> >>> Internet.  In fact, as I remember, the Internet was somewhat of an
> >>> annoyance, since it significantly altered the traffic patterns which
> >>> the
> >>> Arpanet internal algorithms were optimized to handle and caused
> >>> operational problems as a result.  Those "gateways" (now called
> >>> routers)
> >>> just acted weird, unlike normal well-behaved hosts.  The Arpanet R&D
> >>> was
> >>> intently focused on making the network bigger and better, converting
> >>> to
> >>> the X.25 interface, deploying clone networks for anyone who wanted
> >>> one,
> >>> and in general evolving and commercializing the Arpanet technology.
> >>>
> >>> The government had to mandate the transition to TCP in order to make
> >>> it
> >>> possible to communicate across several networks - the "inter" in
> >>> Internet.  Without the mandate, I doubt it would have happened.    
> >>> Our
> >>> "Internet" today would probably be a gaggle of X.25 networks
> >>> interconnected by X.75 gateways - that was certainly the plan.  The
> >>> economics and performance of X.25/X.75 would probably never have
> >>> permitted the creation of the Web, or any of the other "killer apps"
> >>> that we now use everyday.  Packet-switching may have changed the
> >>> economics of using long lines, but I think the "Internet economics"
> >>> changed the cost structure on data comm dramatically, and that's  
> >>> what
> >>> enabled the explosion of growth of "The Internet" from the mid-90s  
> >>> on.
> >>> If the Arpanet had had its way, today's Internet, if it existed at
> >>> all,
> >>> would be X.25/X.75.
> >>>
> >>> So, my perspective is that the Arpanet was not the fledgling
> >>> Internet -
> >>> the Arpanet reluctantly nurtured the Internet, and eventually died
> >>> as a
> >>> result.  Once TCP was required, the Arpanet was doomed; it took  
> >>> only a
> >>> few years.  I wonder if there are any Arpanet-style X.25 networks
> >>> left...
> >>>
> >>> I have a big red button that says "I Survived the TCP Transition
> >>> 1/1/83".  They were handed out to commemorate the cutover, but I  
> >>> don't
> >>> remember exactly where I got it.  Sounds like something Jon Postel
> >>> would
> >>> have done though.  Anybody else have one?
> >>>
> >>> /Jack Haverty
> >>> Point Arena, CA
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, 2009-11-02 at 12:20 -0800, Bob Braden wrote:
> >>>> Noel wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>  And speaking of the Internet as a distinct entity, whats it's
> >>>> birth-day
> >>>>> anyway? I would call it the first day on which a packet was sent
> >>>>> from one
> >>>>> host, across a particular kind of network, through a router (or
> >>>> gateway as we
> >>>>> called them back then), across another network, into another host.
> >>>> (That woul
> >>>>> d
> >>>>> have been a TCP packet, I guess - no IP back then!) So where and
> >>>>> when was
> >>>>> that?
> >>>>
> >>>> At the time, we reckoned the beginning of the Internet to be the  
> >>>> Red
> >>>> Flag day when the ARPAnet converted from NCP to TCP/IP: Jan 1,  
> >>>> 1983.
> >>>> I think someone has an "I survived..." sweatshirt to commemorate
> >>>> that date.
> >>>>
> >>>> Bob Braden
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> 
>