[ih] DNS History

[Vint Cerf]

yes - add jugnead, WAIS, alta-vista, ...


On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:47 PM, Richard Bennett <richard at bennett.com> wrote:

> Wasn't all that Archie and Veronica stuff an attempt to provide the
> Internet with a directory service?
>
>
> On 3/8/2010 2:15 PM, Craig Partridge wrote:
>
>> Intriguingly 822 contains support for multi-level domain names (at
>> a time they were largely not being considered) including several examples
>> and also  the early version of DNS names -- what I referred to in the day
>> as the "appellation controlee"  approach of using one's company as the
>> last part of the name.  In many ways it was a spec bullet-proofed for
>> whever the DNS ended up (belated kudos on that foresight!).
>>
>> Craig
>>
>>
>>
>>> Small tidbits:
>>>
>>> By accident, RFC 822 published a spec for domain /names/ slightly before
>>> the
>>> DNS
>>> specification came out.  The efforts were parallel and 822 was a revision
>>> to
>>> 733
>>> that included positioning for Internet (as opposed to Arpanet) usage.
>>>  This
>>> included support for the scalable host naming system.
>>>
>>> And RFC 821 contained the support also.
>>>
>>> I remember being confused that each hop in the SMTP sequence was being
>>> given
>>> the
>>> /full/ domain name, rather than some incrementally stripped version and
>>> Jon
>>> Postel gave me a tutorial about the difference between global naming and
>>> route-based naming.  Up to that time, any multi-part naming really was
>>> route-based, in some fashion, including the work we had done with CSNet
>>> (user at host@gateway).
>>>
>>> d/
>>>
>>> On 3/8/2010 12:31 PM, Craig Partridge wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> First, in terms of the RFC system, where are the comments themselves?
>>>>>  Wer
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> e
>>>
>>>
>>>> they hard-copies that no longer exist, or mailing lists that have been
>>>>> tucked away somewhere?  Is there any correspondence left (for DNS
>>>>> related
>>>>> RFCs) or has it all been lost?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> There was no formal comment system (nor is there now).  But there were
>>>> lots
>>>> of comments on drafts on various mailing lists.   For DNS issues the
>>>> archives of the namedroppers list is probably your best place
>>>> (http://psg.com/lists/namedroppers and kudos to Randy Bush for bringing
>>>> it
>>>> up)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Second, does anyone have or know where to find details about the
>>>>> debates/conversations that took place leading up to RFC 1591 and what
>>>>> appears to be a "compromise" between generic and ccTLDs?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> RFC 1591 is awfully late -- most key technical issues, as I recall, were
>>>> determined when RFC973 came out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Third, it is not entirely clear to me exactly why DNS was engineered in
>>>>> place of X.500.  It is my understanding at this early point in my
>>>>> research
>>>>> that OSI standards seemed inevitable at one point, and sources have
>>>>> told m
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> e
>>>
>>>
>>>> that DNS was designed to get something out the door quickly (presumably
>>>>> something that *wasn't* X.500).  Was X.500 simply based on an old
>>>>> paradigm
>>>>> (white pages / old telecom) and seen as a bulky and slow alternative?
>>>>>  Whe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> n,
>>>
>>>
>>>> and with whom, was the actual decision made to ditch X.500 altogether?
>>>>>  Th
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> is
>>>
>>>
>>>> part of the story goes a long way to explaining why everyone in the
>>>>> world
>>>>> doesn't have a unique identifier.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I have my theory on that subject -- I'll send you the relevant paper I
>>>> wrot
>>>>
>>>>
>>> e
>>>
>>>
>>>> on the history of email, there's a brief discussion.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Craig
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>    Dave Crocker
>>>    Brandenburg InternetWorking
>>>    bbiw.net
>>>
>>>
>> ********************
>> Craig Partridge
>> Chief Scientist, BBN Technologies
>> E-mail: craig at aland.bbn.com or craig at bbn.com
>> Phone: +1 517 324 3425
>>
>>
>
> --
> Richard Bennett
> Research Fellow
> Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
> Washington, DC
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20100308/a25fde5e/attachment.htm>