From touch at isi.edu  Tue May  8 16:21:32 2012
From: touch at isi.edu (Joe Touch)
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 16:21:32 -0700
Subject: [ih] favor regarding Facebook and Jon Postel
Message-ID: <4FA9AA7C.6080805@isi.edu>

Hi, all,

Sorry for the non-IH intrusion, but since this list has a number of 
people who worked with Jon and is hosted on a site named in his honor, 
I'm asking for your help with the following:

----

There is a Facebook page that falsely implies being owned by Jon Postel:

https://www.facebook.com/jon.postel

Facebook has declined requests from Jon's family to have this page removed.

To everyone on this list:

PLEASE do not "LIKE" or interact with this page. Jon passed in 1998, as 
you know, 5 years before Facebook ever existed. He never had a page on 
this or any other social networking site, and whomever is running this 
should stop misrepresenting themselves.

If anyone here can help, please let me know.

Joe
touch at isi.edu


From vint at google.com  Tue May  8 19:26:39 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 22:26:39 -0400
Subject: [ih] favor regarding Facebook and Jon Postel
In-Reply-To: <4FA9AA7C.6080805@isi.edu>
References: <4FA9AA7C.6080805@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggfQjsGPJdTjJiRoEa09_8+xSH0Gw8wrZwVBFY0MREV7uA@mail.gmail.com>

folks, i am in touch with facebook and will put them in touch with
jon's relatives.

v


On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Joe Touch <touch at isi.edu> wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> Sorry for the non-IH intrusion, but since this list has a number of people
> who worked with Jon and is hosted on a site named in his honor, I'm asking
> for your help with the following:
>
> ----
>
> There is a Facebook page that falsely implies being owned by Jon Postel:
>
> https://www.facebook.com/jon.postel
>
> Facebook has declined requests from Jon's family to have this page removed.
>
> To everyone on this list:
>
> PLEASE do not "LIKE" or interact with this page. Jon passed in 1998, as you
> know, 5 years before Facebook ever existed. He never had a page on this or
> any other social networking site, and whomever is running this should stop
> misrepresenting themselves.
>
> If anyone here can help, please let me know.
>
> Joe
> touch at isi.edu


From bill.n1vux at gmail.com  Wed May  9 16:44:36 2012
From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 19:44:36 -0400
Subject: [ih] Fwd: Remembering MAP
In-Reply-To: <CAAbKA3XGh44nDq6C1s-wu_NDWUNct-82Hhh9G4wWTheMuTu+Ag@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAbKA3XGh44nDq6C1s-wu_NDWUNct-82Hhh9G4wWTheMuTu+Ag@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAbKA3XHCSdMbOukni+jBgZid8odJhRKwVAaL4Z=6QqBkJ2TvQ@mail.gmail.com>

Mike Padlipsky would have been 73 today.

Bill Ricker (MAP's literary conservator)
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120509/a432b91a/attachment.htm>

From joly at punkcast.com  Wed May  9 23:41:31 2012
From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 02:41:31 -0400
Subject: [ih] IHOF/ INET videos
Message-ID: <CAM9VJk2FZM+C+NWFE2zdUk3M2ynCKO6K0Ck=vJ0n-Gg_zcHScQ@mail.gmail.com>

I have gathered, as far as have been posted already, Internet Hall of Fame
Induction video clips..

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLF9B86EA30F94242E


also the Global INET itself, including Leonard Kleinrock's historical
keynote, at

http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLC78676D85E34E427


j



-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
 VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120510/57d6307e/attachment.htm>

From sytel at shaw.ca  Thu May 10 01:32:37 2012
From: sytel at shaw.ca (Sytel)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 01:32:37 -0700
Subject: [ih]  Historical fiction
Message-ID: <137C8A10481946F184D39168B2FCA44A@bng1>

Hello all,
I'm currently (co-)writing a story set in the early days of ARPANET. I've been doing a lot of research, but there are some things that the usual resources just don't cover; would it be all right to ask a few questions here? I sent a message about this earlier but I'm not sure if it got through.

Many thanks,

Sytel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120510/e79f62bd/attachment.htm>

From bortzmeyer at nic.fr  Thu May 10 01:42:38 2012
From: bortzmeyer at nic.fr (Stephane Bortzmeyer)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 10:42:38 +0200
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <137C8A10481946F184D39168B2FCA44A@bng1>
References: <137C8A10481946F184D39168B2FCA44A@bng1>
Message-ID: <20120510084238.GA12265@nic.fr>

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 01:32:37AM -0700,
 Sytel <sytel at shaw.ca> wrote 
 a message of 46 lines which said:

> I'm currently (co-)writing a story 

Who is the other co-author? Tom Clancy? Dan Brown? John Grisham?

> set in the early days of ARPANET.

Jean Auel? :-)


From agmalis at gmail.com  Thu May 10 03:36:14 2012
From: agmalis at gmail.com (Andrew G. Malis)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 06:36:14 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <137C8A10481946F184D39168B2FCA44A@bng1>
References: <137C8A10481946F184D39168B2FCA44A@bng1>
Message-ID: <CAA=duU3AWVZ9AjD1f-=1WbYkMJ2ZiGURXRfWgQYqVahk8J58mw@mail.gmail.com>

It never hurts to ask!

Cheers,
Andy

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 4:32 AM, Sytel <sytel at shaw.ca> wrote:
> Hello all,
> I'm currently (co-)writing a story set in the early days of ARPANET. I've
> been doing a lot of research, but there are some things that the usual
> resources just don't cover; would it be all right to ask a few questions
> here? I sent a message about this earlier but I'm not sure if it got
> through.
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Sytel


From craig at aland.bbn.com  Thu May 10 04:06:09 2012
From: craig at aland.bbn.com (Craig Partridge)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 07:06:09 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
Message-ID: <20120510110609.2A86C28E139@aland.bbn.com>

> It never hurts to ask!

Indeed, it might turn up a historical detail that future historians will
find interesting.

Craig


From amckenzie3 at yahoo.com  Thu May 10 04:50:42 2012
From: amckenzie3 at yahoo.com (Alex McKenzie)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 04:50:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <137C8A10481946F184D39168B2FCA44A@bng1>
References: <137C8A10481946F184D39168B2FCA44A@bng1>
Message-ID: <1336650642.65175.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

I did not see your earlier message on this list.

Alex McKenzie



________________________________
 From: Sytel <sytel at shaw.ca>
To: internet-history at postel.org 
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 4:32 AM
Subject: [ih]  Historical fiction
 

 
Hello all,
I'm currently (co-)writing a story set in the early 
days of ARPANET. I've been doing a lot of research, but there are some things 
that the usual resources just don't cover; would it be all right to ask a few 
questions here? I sent a message about this earlier but I'm not sure if it got 
through.
?
Many thanks,
?
Sytel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120510/d3f70676/attachment.htm>

From sytel at shaw.ca  Thu May 10 08:15:09 2012
From: sytel at shaw.ca (Sytel)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 08:15:09 -0700
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
Message-ID: <24EF098081574E1FB2379D125F00B3BD@bng1>

Hello again,
Thanks for the go-ahead! Here's a rundown of the story concept and what we'd like to know...

We've recently begun to write an open-ended piece of historical fiction about the history of the ARPANET - specifically its early days and the everyday/social aspects of living and working alongside such a remarkable network. 
 
Rather than viewing the ARPANET as a stepping-stone on the road to the modern Internet, we've been trying to look at the early network as an entity in its own right - not just a transitional phase, but as an important and ambitious project of its day, with great things in its future. To that end, we've taken the unique (we hope) approach of personifying the Arpanet (beginning life as a child, reaching adolescence by the 1972 demonstration), and having "him" interact with his developers and users, as he matures, increasingly fitting into the student society around him. 
 
In writing this, we've found ourselves in the awkward position of having to write about the members of the original Arpanet team. While we have attempted to go about this with the utmost respect, and doing as much research as possible, most of our sources are inadequate for this; they describe Arpanet only in the context of being something that would one day become the Internet. We're more interested in the very early social aspects and day-to-day operations of the lab, and how the Arpanet's future was envisioned in those days. 
 
We'd also like to be sure we're portraying everyone involved fairly and accurately, and we want to make sure we get the facts straight, as well as doing justice to the unique characters of the real people behind the story.


These are some of the points we're wondering about; if you could answer any of these, that'd be great:

 
How was Arpanet viewed/seen *at the time*? How did it fit in the context of the era? What was its future envisioned to be?
 
What kinds of tests would be run on the Arpanet on a daily basis, i.e. what would be a typical day in the lab? And who would be in charge of performing what kind of test? What would happen in the lab other than tests?
 
What were some of the first things it was actually used for other than testing the capabilities of the network? When did it begin to perform those duties? 
 
How did people react to its potential social aspects? Were they even considered at the time, or were they overshadowed by its potential as a scientific/knowledge-sharing system? 
 
What did one of the old packets actually look like? We haven't been able to do much except extrapolate from modern packets. 
 
What were some common problems that happened during the early days of testing? Other than the famous Login error. 
 
Was the system ever shut down at night? At which point did they stop doing that, and what factored into that decision? At what point did the system become too important and decentralized to shut down *ever*?
 
Had the ARPANET become personified in the manner described, what advice do you think you might have given it, at various stages of its development? 
 
It's been said that there are many fathers and mothers of the 'net. Are there any mothers that you might consider especially noteworthy in the early days?
 
What was the initial reaction to the first non-academic uses of the network? Any steps that were seen as wrong turns? Any that were seen as wrong turns at the time but worked out for the best eventually?
 

Please feel free to answer them in any order, or to leave out any that are too obvious, too time-consuming or just unanswerable. 
 
The story itself, for anyone interested, is here: http://forum.ultima-java.com/viewtopic.php?f=79&t=1353 It's a lot to read, though, and if you don't have much time, this chapter would probably be a good introduction to the characters and concept: http://forum.ultima-java.com/viewtopic.php?p=29299#p29299 Don't feel obligated to look at it, though; I'm not trying to hype it or anything.

 
Thanking you in advance for your time, 
Sytel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120510/bf34457f/attachment.htm>

From vint at google.com  Thu May 10 09:52:08 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 12:52:08 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <24EF098081574E1FB2379D125F00B3BD@bng1>
References: <24EF098081574E1FB2379D125F00B3BD@bng1>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggfCP5+qvEBpCmLJGBKrc6y0N6PTtpFTN09y3r=WVD8h-g@mail.gmail.com>

Sytel,

BBN was the designer and operator of the ARPANET from the outset to
its termination in 1990.

I would distinguish the "subnet" of Interface Message Processors that
represented a major effort to design and implement a wide-area packet
network, from the hosts that used it for communication. The hosts were
programmed by staff at the universities and research institutions that
were first users of the network. So you had day to day operations of
the subnet by the "IMP Guys" at BBN and the daily operation of the
hosts on which applications were run. The motivation for building the
network arose from the vision of the power of non-numerical processing
expressed by Vannevar Bush, Douglas Engelbart, J.C.R. Licklider who
became the first director of ARPA's Information Processing Techniques
Office. Bob Taylor, then the director of the Information Processing
Techniques Office, was a strong advocate for the ARPANET and convinced
Charlie Herzfeld (then DARPA Director) to fund it and to bring Larry
Roberts from Lincoln Laboratory to ARPA to run the ARPANET development
program. Bolt Beranek and Newman was selected to design, build and
operate the network, drawing on the talents of Robert Kahn, Dave
Walden, William Crowther, Severo Ornstein, Frank Heart and many others
at BBN. The system was billed as a resource sharing network that would
allow all the computer science research teams, funded by ARPA, to
share computing resources and software. In truth it was an incredibly
successful experiment in packet networking and a major platform for
collaboration in computer science research. The host developments were
undertaken with the leadership of Stephen Crocker, then a graduate
student at UCLA working in Leonard Kleinrock's Network Measurement
Center. Steve and his colleagues were part of the Network Working
Group, formed and led by Steve. the NWG included dozens of
participants are the various institutions that participated in the
evolution and application of the ARPANET. For day to day operation,
you might consult with Alex McKenzie who is on this email list.

Eventually the ARPANET operation was transferred to the Defense
Communication Agency in 1975. Col. Heidi Heiden was a key program
manager in that time frame. During this period, the ARPANET served
both as an operational utility and also as a scaffolding that
contributed mightily to the development of the Internet.

vint

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Sytel <sytel at shaw.ca> wrote:
> Hello again,
> Thanks for the go-ahead! Here's a rundown of the story concept and what we'd
> like to know...
>
> We've recently begun to write an open-ended piece of historical fiction
> about the history of the ARPANET - specifically its early days and the
> everyday/social aspects of living and working alongside such a remarkable
> network.
>
> Rather than viewing the ARPANET as a stepping-stone on the road to the
> modern Internet, we've been trying to look at the early network as an entity
> in its own right - not just a transitional phase, but as an important and
> ambitious project of its day, with great things in its future. To that end,
> we've taken the unique (we hope) approach of personifying the Arpanet
> (beginning life as a child, reaching adolescence by the 1972 demonstration),
> and having "him" interact with his developers and users, as he matures,
> increasingly fitting into the student society around him.
>
> In writing this, we've found ourselves in the awkward position of having to
> write about the members of the original Arpanet team. While we have
> attempted to go about this with the utmost respect, and doing as much
> research as possible, most of our sources are inadequate for this; they
> describe Arpanet only in the context of being something that would one day
> become the Internet. We're more interested in the very early social aspects
> and day-to-day operations of the lab, and how the Arpanet's future was
> envisioned in those days.
>
> We'd?also like to be sure we're portraying everyone involved fairly
> and?accurately, and we want to make sure we get the facts straight, as
> well?as doing justice to the unique characters of the real people behind the
> story.
>
>
> These are some of the points we're wondering about; if you could answer any
> of these, that'd be great:
>
>
> How was Arpanet viewed/seen *at the time*? How did it fit in the context of
> the era? What was its future envisioned to be?

see summary above. Resource sharing! Experiment in packet switched
networking. I think it is fair to say that the "future" was captured
in the Internet concepts and pursued by NSF, DOE, NASA as well as
DARPA.  Many packet networks were developed in addition to the ARPANET
including X.25-based commercial systems, NSFNET, ESNET, NSINET, the
packet radio and packet satellite networks (of ARPA), Ethernets,
Proteon Rings, IBM Token Network, and many non-US academic and
research networks around the world. We were swimming in networks and
the Internet's TCP/IP protocols was one popular means of
interconnecting them all.

XEROX PARC deserves some of your attention because of its far-sighted
and highly innovative foray into high speed local networking (Ethernet
invented by Bob Metcalfe and David Boggs), personal computing, WYSIWYG
screen interactions, it's own variation of internetworking called PARC
Universal Packets (and associated host protocols), etc. The team at
PARC influenced the Internet designs, as did teams at the University
College London, Institute National Recherche d'informatique et
d'automatique. The National Physical Laboratory in Teddington,
England, influenced the ARPANET design (recommended very high speed
circuits to reduce latency) as well as inventing the term "packet"
(Donald W. Davies).


>
> What kinds of tests would be run on the Arpanet on a daily basis, i.e.?what
> would be a typical day in the lab? And who would be in charge of performing
> what kind of test? What would happen in the lab other than tests?

The Network Measurement Center ran a wide range of artificial tests
(stochastic traffic generation) both to characterize the performance
of the subnet and to uncover ways in which the network algorithms
might fail. Bob Kahn had several theoretical scenarios of failure that
he tested and demonstrated at UCLA. Measurement data was used also to
validate queueuing models developed by Len Kleinrock or his students.
I ran many traffic tests with Bob Kahn and with many of Len
Kleinrock's students as the principal programmer at the Network
Measurement Center at UCLA.
>
> What were some of the first things it was actually used for other than
> testing the capabilities of the network? When did it begin to perform those
> duties?

Steve Crocker is a good source for the host level development story.
Larry Roberts pressed for usable results as the director of IPTO and
leader of the project. Larry asked Bob Kahn to organize a public
demonstration of the ARPANET for October 1972 as part of the
International Conference on Computer Communication in Washington DC.
This demonstration was a huge stimulus to getting things to work. Bob
Metcalfe organized and documented a wide range of demonstration
applications that the general public at the conference could try out.
Many of the engineers at BBN and graduate students at universities
funded by ARPA participated in the development and conduct of this
major demonstration. Seeing the list of applications would be useful
for you.

Ray Tomlinson announced his experiment in networked electronic mail in
1971; Larry Roberts wrote a TECO program to parse electronic maiil
called RD. Other email programs sprang up quickly. Standards were
developed and documented by David Crocker (Steve is his older
brother). MIT's Abhay Bhushan among others developed FTP. A messaging
development community emerged involving many others such as Eric
Allman (SENDMAIL), Dave Farber and his students, Einar Stefferud
(RIP), Jon Postel (RIP), John Vittal, ... well there are a LOT of
email pioneers to draw upon.

TELNET was the first protocol designed for remote access to computers
over the ARPANET and was a very important capability that allowed us
to use each others machines and software to work collaboratively.
Eventually we tested packet speech and packet video over the ARPANET
in the late 1970s and early 1980s.



>
> How did people react to its potential social aspects? Were they
> even?considered at the time, or were they overshadowed by its potential as
> a?scientific/knowledge-sharing system?

as soon as email came along, distribution lists were developed for
SF-Lovers (science fiction, not san francisco) and restaurant reviews
(Yum-Yum maililng list) and showed us all how quickly the system was
turned to social use.
>
> What did one of the old packets actually look like? We haven't been able to
> do much except extrapolate from modern packets.

there are detailed RFCs to be found in the Internet Engineering Task
Force records for formats, etc.
>
> What were some common problems that happened during the early days of
> testing? Other than the famous Login error.

routing and packet reassembly problems that led to lockups. IMP
failures that highlighted the need for checksums on packet content.
The need for larger and larger "windows" to allow many packets to be
"in flight" between pairs of correspondents on the network.
>
> Was the system ever shut down at night? At which point did they stop doing
> that, and what factored into that decision? At what point did the system
> become too important and decentralized to shut down *ever*?

It rapidly became essential for our work - I would argue that as of
early 1973 this was the case. It was not deliberately shut down.
>
> Had the ARPANET become personified in the manner described, what advice do
> you think you might have given it, at various stages of its?development?

errr.
>
> It's been said that there are many fathers and mothers of the 'net. Are
> there any mothers that you might consider especially?noteworthy in the early
> days?

Virginia Strazisar was the first to build a gateway for the Internet
linking, e.g. the packet radio network to the ARPANET.
Radia Perlman did extremely creative work on the formation of spanning
tree algorithms and on internet routing and recovery from
partitioning.
Karen Sollins at MIT worked closely with David Clark who became the
chief internet architect in 1982 (or maybe even 1981?).
Lixia Zhang from MIT and now UCLA did extraordinary work on network
design and architecture.
Deborah Estrin, also studying at MIT with David Clark, focused heavily
on applications of networks, especially mobile or mesh environments.

>
> What was the initial reaction to the first non-academic uses of the network?
> Any steps that were seen as wrong turns? Any that?were seen as?wrong turns
> at the time but worked out for the best eventually?

the first job advertisement caused a firestorm as did the first commercial spam.

>
>
> Please feel free to answer them in any order, or to leave out any that are
> too?obvious, too time-consuming or just unanswerable.
>
> The story itself, for anyone interested, is here:
> http://forum.ultima-java.com/viewtopic.php?f=79&t=1353?It's a lot to read,
> though, and if you don't have much time, this chapter would probably be a
> good introduction to the characters and concept:
> http://forum.ultima-java.com/viewtopic.php?p=29299#p29299?Don't feel
> obligated to look at it, though; I'm not trying to hype it or anything.
>
>
> Thanking you in advance for your time,
> Sytel



From scott.brim at gmail.com  Thu May 10 10:59:48 2012
From: scott.brim at gmail.com (Scott Brim)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 13:59:48 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <24EF098081574E1FB2379D125F00B3BD@bng1>
References: <24EF098081574E1FB2379D125F00B3BD@bng1>
Message-ID: <CAPv4CP_pbuzY-JsAaPoGc0qp8Tv+GDB7vZmA6+p4oovwvd-q2Q@mail.gmail.com>

aside: have you seen the movie?
http://archive.org/details/ComputerNetworks_TheHeraldsOfResourceSharing


From lpress at csudh.edu  Thu May 10 11:16:20 2012
From: lpress at csudh.edu (Larry Press)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 11:16:20 -0700
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <CAHxHggfCP5+qvEBpCmLJGBKrc6y0N6PTtpFTN09y3r=WVD8h-g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <24EF098081574E1FB2379D125F00B3BD@bng1>
	<CAHxHggfCP5+qvEBpCmLJGBKrc6y0N6PTtpFTN09y3r=WVD8h-g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FAC05F4.10402@csudh.edu>

Sytel,

Have you seen this historical presentation by Leonard Kleinrock?

http://youtu.be/FTvumnFU_No

Larry


From bernie at fantasyfarm.com  Thu May 10 11:32:02 2012
From: bernie at fantasyfarm.com (Bernie Cosell)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 14:32:02 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <24EF098081574E1FB2379D125F00B3BD@bng1>
References: <24EF098081574E1FB2379D125F00B3BD@bng1>
Message-ID: <4FAC09A2.1402.3C70688@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>

On 10 May 2012 at 8:15, Sytel wrote:

> How was Arpanet viewed/seen *at the time*? How did it fit in the context
> of the era? What was its future envisioned to be?

I expect the various folk involved with it saw it pretty differently.  
>From my perspective, I didn't worry much about 'future' -- it was very 
hard to see quite what it would be good for but was an awful lot of fun 
to build..:o)

> What kinds of tests would be run on the Arpanet on a daily basis, 
> i.e.what would be a typical day in the lab? And who would be in charge
> of performing what kind of test? What would happen in the lab other than
> tests?

"lab"?  The only real tests I remember were ones orchestrated by 
Kleinrock at the NMC and I can't remember when they were run, only that 
we knew about them [of course] and were on more or less high alert to 
look for things breaking and such while they were testing.  Other than 
that kind of thing, I don't remember much 'testing', per se.

There was a lot of ongoing implementation and things changed over time 
[e.g., routing algorithm was redone at least twice in the early days].  
But the most remarkable thing to me, in retrospect, is the degree to 
which the damn thing *just*worked*.  As I look back over the listings 
[which I can barely apprehend any more] I realize that it was really 
quite a complicated system and it was pretty neat that basically it 
mostly just hummed along.

Things did break and fail a bit and so we had plenty of analysis, 
debugging and patching to do [Why'd imp 7 crash?  And we'd get someone at 
the site to help us poke around [via the switches] and we'd often plant 
some diagnostic code [to report things back to us], etc]  But overall it 
really just kept running and quite quickly the hosts connecting to it 
were *expecting* it to be there.

> What were some of the first things it was actually used for other than
> testing the capabilities of the network? When did it begin to perform 
> those duties?

Mostly in the early days, I think most of the 'testing' was via the 
hosts.  They'd hook up and try to get their host software to work or try 
some new application and we'd try to watch [from inside the IMP] to see 
what was going on and try to help figure out whether/if/what was going 
wrong.  While we were at it, we often discovered bugs and problems in the 
IMP code.  I can recall a few times when something that happened in the 
net hinted at a problem and we'd try to figure it out and fix it before 
anyone actually noticed it [on the theory that a bug not run-across by 
the users didn't happen... :o)]

> How did people react to its potential social aspects? Were they 
> evenconsidered at the time, or were they overshadowed by its potential
> as ascientific/knowledge-sharing system?

For me, I didn't worry much about that stuff --- we were involved with 
the hosts and the various applications and uses they were developing to 
try to make some sense, and some use, of the network [one I recall was 
using "raw packets" [is that right -- my memory is hazy] and an attempt 
[by Lincoln labs, I think] to use them to make a scrambled/digitized 
phone work over the net.  Those kinds of things often showed up problems 
in the code and so we would end up working with the host software 
developers and we all tried to make things work better.  But from my 
"bottom of the well" view, it was mostly an interesting, hard technical 
exercise -- new problems and challenges every day and with a finicky and 
complicted software system that had to be kept running *all* the time.

> What did one of the old packets actually look like? We haven't been able
> to do much except extrapolate from modern packets.

Boy, I don't remember -- the host packets you can get from BBN rpt 1822 
[and that info must be in the RFCs somewhere].  I've loaned out my copy 
of the IMP source listing but I'd guess that that's about the only place 
where you'd be able to find that info [I don't *think* we ever produced 
any external documentation of how the IMP-to-IMP packets were laid out]

> What were some common problems that happened during the early days of 
> testing? Other than the famous Login error.

I don't even know what the "famous Login error" was.  the most common 
problem was that a new host system would connect and then not be able to 
talk...:o)   I know that once when I was sending out a patch I 
fatfingered something [the details blur a bit with the mists of time :o)] 
and I took down the *whole* net: we were in the monitoring center and 
could see the net winking out, node by node.  I got the software fixed, 
but then we had to call EVERY site [only a dozen maybe] and get someone 
to reboot the 516 [at which point it would try to reload its software 
from a neighbor and would get the patched code and came back to life -- 
and so one-by-one we watched it come back.  As I recall it was early in 
the morning at BBN and so we had to talk a janitor or something through 
loading the IMP boot-tape into the paper tape reader at, like, 4AM 
pacific. 

> Was the system ever shut down at night? At which point did they stop 
> doing that, and what factored into that decision? At what point did the
> system become too important and decentralized to shut down *ever*?

AFAICM [new acronym: "... I can remember" :o)], the network was *NEVER* 
shut down.  Not once!  Even when folks were just trying new applications 
and developing software, almost from the first day the presence and 
functioning of the underlying network was taken for granted.  There were 
sites from Norway to Hawaii and so there was hardly an [eastern timezone] 
time that the network wasn't being used.

> What was the initial reaction to the first non-academic uses of the 
> network? Any steps that were seen as wrong turns? Any thatwere seen 
> aswrong turns at the time but worked out for the best eventually?

I thought it was fine.  Note "first non-academic" is a bit odd -- it 
implies a more direct path of development than I think actually happened. 
To my memory, there were a lot of experiments [e.g., Bob Thomas's 
distributed OS stuff and the scrambled-phone I mentioned earlier] but it 
was all not [IMO] pointing anywhere -- it didn't feel like it'd be useful 
to third parties: it was all interesting software [often difficult] and 
everyone was learning a lot about what the net could and couldn't do and 
such, but just as for the PC what really was needed was a "killer app".  
And of course, that was email.  email, IMO, brought the first 
non-technical people onto the ARPAnet and changed things [instead of 
system programmers calling when there were problems, there were office 
staff people and such].  And it was all downhill from there...:o)

[in fact the 'academic' is a separate story best elaborated by the CSNET 
folk [I was only perphierally involved in that] -- the ARPAnet wasn't an 
_academic_ network: it was a DoD research network and as such only sites, 
mostly universities, granted, were allowed to connect.  And were 
*supposed* to limit their use to whatever project they were working on.  
Among other things, email changed all that, of course..:o)

  /Bernie\
-- 
Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie at fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--       





From sytel at shaw.ca  Thu May 10 11:43:46 2012
From: sytel at shaw.ca (Sytel)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 11:43:46 -0700
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
Message-ID: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>

Thanks for the great resources! Much appreciated. (Already had seen that Heralds of Resource Sharing video, as a matter of fact-- but it's great to have the link handy.)

I guess what I'm interested in is "zooming in" a little more, if you will. November, 1969, a typical afternoon in room 3420 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/3420boelterhall/5609051340/ ) -- what might people be working on, reading, doing with the computers? What's a test that might be running on the network, and how is it still not quite working right? If something strange happens, who asks who about it? What exciting plans are in the pipeline, what deadlines are looming?
Not that I'm asking for specific answers to all those questions-- they're more examples. Since this is fiction rather than a research report, I'd like to be able to set the scene and get a sense of what it was like to *be* there. I know it's a bit of an unusual and somewhat vague question, but that's probably part of the reason I haven't been able to find much else that approaches it...
Thank you for all the info, though, it's all good to have! I really appreciate all your responses.

Sytel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120510/65a4122f/attachment.htm>

From craig at aland.bbn.com  Thu May 10 12:11:35 2012
From: craig at aland.bbn.com (Craig Partridge)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 15:11:35 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
Message-ID: <20120510191135.A841928E138@aland.bbn.com>

> I guess what I'm interested in is "zooming in" a little more, if you =
> will. November, 1969, a typical afternoon in room 3420 =
> (http://www.flickr.com/photos/3420boelterhall/5609051340/ ) -- what =
> might people be working on, reading, doing with the computers? What's a =
> test that might be running on the network, and how is it still not quite =
> working right? If something strange happens, who asks who about it? What =
> exciting plans are in the pipeline, what deadlines are looming?

I'll risk jogging a few memories by repeating a few stories I've heard
(I wasn't there).

In 1969, the person running tests was a BBNer (Vint tells of Bob Kahn
coming out for a week to run tests) or perhaps a grad student trying to
debug stuff (as I recall, Len K's group's set of measurement studies
came a bit later).  So imagine a clean cut guy in dark slacks and a white
shirt alternating time on the computers with some engineering students
(who were decidedly less carefully dressed).

If you wait a couple of years there's a guy who periodically shows up
wearing sandals (no socks), shorts and a T-shirt and asking what good
things you done in return for his funding?  According to stories.
That's your DARPA Program Manager (pre Vint and Bob), the guy whose
funding is making all this fun possible.

Craig


From vint at google.com  Thu May 10 12:32:09 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 15:32:09 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggeKZJfcXDHubj3+tmggzf_yYRQ+3-8nZdxaBfK8=TY7pA@mail.gmail.com>

steve crocker, charley kline, vint cerf, Louis Nelson (?), Mike
Wingfield (hardware), Bill Naylor and jon postel (among others) were
on the Network Measurement Center team that was run by Len Kleinrock.

they might have recollections that would add color to the historical record.
v


On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:43 PM, Sytel <sytel at shaw.ca> wrote:
> Thanks for the great resources! Much appreciated. (Already had seen that
> Heralds of Resource Sharing video, as a matter of fact-- but it's great to
> have the link handy.)
>
> I guess what I'm interested in is "zooming in" a little more, if you will.
> November, 1969, a typical afternoon in room 3420
> (http://www.flickr.com/photos/3420boelterhall/5609051340/?) -- what might
> people be working on, reading, doing with the computers? What's a test that
> might be running on the network, and how is it still not quite working
> right? If something strange happens, who asks who about it? What exciting
> plans are in the pipeline, what deadlines are looming?
> Not that I'm asking for specific answers to all those questions-- they're
> more examples. Since this is fiction rather than a research report, I'd like
> to be able to set the scene and get a sense of what it was like to *be*
> there. I know it's a bit of an unusual and somewhat vague question, but
> that's probably part of the reason I haven't been able to find much else
> that approaches it...
> Thank you for all the info, though, it's all good to have! I really
> appreciate all your responses.
>
> Sytel



From bell1945 at offthisweek.com  Thu May 10 12:58:07 2012
From: bell1945 at offthisweek.com (David Elliott Bell)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 15:58:07 -0400
Subject: [ih] =?windows-1252?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fath?=
 =?windows-1252?q?ers_of_the_Internet=85=2E=2E?=
Message-ID: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>

nevertheless, I would point out that not everyone agreed that 

"BBN was the designer and operator of the ARPANET from the outset to its termination in 1990."  

The disagreement would be over the phrase "the designer".  

Michael Padlipsky clearly did not agree. per his book The Elements of Networking Style (& Other Essays & Animadversions of the Art of Intercomputer Networking. (Peter Salus continues to have a high opinion of this book, which includes the only reference on Wikipedia to the Arpanet Reference Model.)  

One of the chapters in that book "And They Argued All Night...."  posited that much of what happened in the early days of the Arpanet was the result of group discussion where the participants did not always themselves remember who said what and where ideas came from.

I recommend his book for some reflection of the life and times of the early days of ARPA's Network Working Group (?  phrasing right?).

David Bell

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120510/80fc5080/attachment.htm>

From paul at redbarn.org  Thu May 10 13:24:12 2012
From: paul at redbarn.org (Paul Vixie)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 20:24:12 +0000
Subject: [ih] elements
In-Reply-To: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
Message-ID: <4FAC23EC.6060705@redbarn.org>

On 2012-05-10 7:58 PM, David Elliott Bell wrote:
> ... Michael Padlipsky clearly did not agree. per his book The Elements
> of Networking Style (& Other Essays & Animadversions of the Art of
> Intercomputer Networking. (Peter Salus continues to have a high
> opinion of this book, which includes the only reference on Wikipedia
> to the Arpanet Reference Model.)  ...I recommend his book for some
> reflection of the life and times of the early days of ARPA's Network
> Working Group (?  phrasing right?).

very strong +1.

paul


From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Thu May 10 13:51:19 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 16:51:19 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih]
	=?windows-1252?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fath?=
	=?windows-1252?q?ers_of_the_Internet=85=2E=2E?=
Message-ID: <20120510205119.366B818C117@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: David Elliott Bell <bell1945 at offthisweek.com>

    > The disagreement would be over the phrase "the designer".

It depends; there are lots of different parts to 'the ARPANet'. The Host-Host
and application protocols were clearly done by a group of people from the
sites. Then there is the actual network as implemented - and then you get the
early versions (as documented in Heart et al. 1970 SJCC), the 'middle' version
(McQuillan et al. 1972 FJCC) and the 'late' version (no quick ref for this,
but it includes after the 'new' routing algorithm).

As to the actual network, check out the original ARPA RFQ, July 29 1968
(#DAHC15 69 Q 0002), and then look at the BBN proposal, 6 September 1968 (IMP
P69-IST-5). Then compare that with the actual network as first implemented.
(And bear in mind that before the RFQ was written, there was a lot of
discussion among a fair number of folk, e.g. Wes Clark's suggestion of a
separate IMP.)

I would say 'designed by BBN' is a reasonable, succint, description for the
actual network, but of course there were many hands, and many pieces, and
a full description of all the former, for the latter, is rather lengthy.

	Noel


From vint at google.com  Thu May 10 13:55:28 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 16:55:28 -0400
Subject: [ih]
	=?windows-1252?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fath?=
	=?windows-1252?q?ers_of_the_Internet=85=2E=2E?=
In-Reply-To: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>

so, we need to distinguish the subnet from the host on the ARPANET.
The latter were the subject of much debate from the participating
sites. The design of the IMP system, on the other hand was really BBN.
If you really think Mike disagreed with that, you must imply that he
had a rather odd model of what the "ARPANET" was.

vint



On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:58 PM, David Elliott Bell
<bell1945 at offthisweek.com> wrote:
> nevertheless, I would point out that not everyone agreed that
>
> "BBN was the designer and operator of the ARPANET from the outset to?its
> termination in 1990."
>
> The disagreement would be over the phrase "the designer".
>
> Michael Padlipsky?clearly did not agree. per his book?The Elements of
> Networking Style (& Other Essays & Animadversions of the Art of
> Intercomputer Networking.?(Peter Salus continues to have a high opinion of
> this book, which includes the only reference on Wikipedia to the Arpanet
> Reference Model.)
>
> One of the chapters in that book?"And They Argued All Night...." ?posited
> that much of what happened in the early days of the Arpanet was the result
> of group discussion where the participants did not always themselves
> remember who said what and where ideas came from.
>
> I recommend his book for some reflection of the life and times of the early
> days of ARPA's Network Working Group (? ?phrasing right?).
>
> David Bell
>



From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Thu May 10 14:07:22 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (dave.walden.family at gmail.com)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 17:07:22 -0400
Subject: [ih]
 =?utf-8?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fathers_of_?=
 =?utf-8?b?dGhlIEludGVybmV04oCmLi4=?=
In-Reply-To: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
Message-ID: <C1465EFF-C402-434F-A8DB-EEE3DA9C3723@gmail.com>

We, BBN, certainly did a lot of design for the IMP system, taking off from the fairly undetailed spec that came in the Request for Quotation.  I would say we contributed to the larger ARPANET design along with the people at ARPA, Network Analysis Corporation, the Host computer sites, the Network Working Group, the UCLA Network Measurement Center, the SRI Network Information Center, etc.

We did do the day-to-day operation of the IMP subnetwork and monitored that as well as some bits of Host status.  In terms of who managed the overall ARPANET in the early days, I'd say that was ARPA.  The NIC also played an operational role.  As for the other groups mentioned above, in some sense they also played operational roles, but I think of the my as playing more developmental roles.

I certainly concur that lots of people were involved in discussions and design of various aspects of the evolving design.

Bob Kahn and I went to UCLA to run the tests that showed the lockup problem with the initial source-IMP to destination-IMP storage allocation algorithm.  Vine and UCLA people were also there.

Dave

Sent from my iPad

On May 10, 2012, at 3:58 PM, David Elliott Bell <bell1945 at offthisweek.com> wrote:

> nevertheless, I would point out that not everyone agreed that 
> 
> "BBN was the designer and operator of the ARPANET from the outset to its termination in 1990."  
> 
> The disagreement would be over the phrase "the designer".  
> 
> Michael Padlipsky clearly did not agree. per his book The Elements of Networking Style (& Other Essays & Animadversions of the Art of Intercomputer Networking. (Peter Salus continues to have a high opinion of this book, which includes the only reference on Wikipedia to the Arpanet Reference Model.)  
> 
> One of the chapters in that book "And They Argued All Night...."  posited that much of what happened in the early days of the Arpanet was the result of group discussion where the participants did not always themselves remember who said what and where ideas came from.
> 
> I recommend his book for some reflection of the life and times of the early days of ARPA's Network Working Group (?  phrasing right?).
> 
> David Bell
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120510/e0ef1739/attachment.htm>

From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Thu May 10 14:09:22 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 17:09:22 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
Message-ID: <20120510210922.46ACA18C121@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: "Sytel" <sytel at shaw.ca>

    > What did one of the old packets actually look like? We haven't been
    > able to do much except extrapolate from modern packets.

I wasn't there in the earliest days, but I can answer this for you (so that
others can focus on the stuff only they can provide, such as memories of
actual events).

I thought this was all available online in early RFCs, but looking at the
list, I don't see anything likely. I will scan and OCR all this stuff in from
various sources (e.g. BBN Report 1822), and throw up a web page (so it's
easily accessible in the future). Give me a couple of hours.

In the meantime, if you're interested in the technical details of how the
_network itself_ operated (as opposed to the host-host communication, and
the early applications), you should get ahold of:

  F.E. Heart, R.E. Kahn, S.M. Ornstein,  W.R. Crowther, and D.C. Walden, 
	"The interface message processor for the ARPA computer network",
	Proceedings AFIPS 1970 SJCC, Vol. 36, pp. 551-567.

  J.M. McQuillan, W.R. Crowther, B.P. Cosell, D.C. Walden, and F.E. Heart,
	"Improvements in the Design and Performance of the ARPA Network",
	Proceedings AFIPS 1972 FJCC, Vol. 40, pp. 741-754. 

which will give you a pretty complete picture (in a lot more detail than
you want to know, probably :-).

	Noel


From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Thu May 10 14:26:19 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (dave.walden.family at gmail.com)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 17:26:19 -0400
Subject: [ih]
 =?utf-8?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fathers_of_?=
 =?utf-8?b?dGhlIEludGVybmV04oCmLi4=?=
In-Reply-To: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
Message-ID: <C1E69F84-3834-4DD4-AB0B-EF88A7A2E9F5@gmail.com>

One more point.
Because we at BBN had the contract to develop the IMP and to operate the IMP subnetwork plus monitoring and BBN also had the contract to develop the TIP host and BBN developed the TENEX host, we probably had lots more people involved in various aspects of ARPANET development than any other single group, and thus were involved in lots of aspects of the overall network design.  And because we later were also involved in the packet radio net and the satellite net stuff, we were also in the thick of the early Internet experiments and implementation work.  My point is not to claim "we did the design" -- we were only one group of many.  My point is to note that because we were involved in so many things, inevitably we touched lots of pieces of what some might call "the design".  Dave

Sent from my iPad

On May 10, 2012, at 3:58 PM, David Elliott Bell <bell1945 at offthisweek.com> wrote:

> nevertheless, I would point out that not everyone agreed that 
> 
> "BBN was the designer and operator of the ARPANET from the outset to its termination in 1990."  
> 
> The disagreement would be over the phrase "the designer".  
> 
> Michael Padlipsky clearly did not agree. per his book The Elements of Networking Style (& Other Essays & Animadversions of the Art of Intercomputer Networking. (Peter Salus continues to have a high opinion of this book, which includes the only reference on Wikipedia to the Arpanet Reference Model.)  
> 
> One of the chapters in that book "And They Argued All Night...."  posited that much of what happened in the early days of the Arpanet was the result of group discussion where the participants did not always themselves remember who said what and where ideas came from.
> 
> I recommend his book for some reflection of the life and times of the early days of ARPA's Network Working Group (?  phrasing right?).
> 
> David Bell
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120510/4e46738a/attachment.htm>

From bell1945 at offthisweek.com  Thu May 10 14:34:36 2012
From: bell1945 at offthisweek.com (David Elliott Bell)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 17:34:36 -0400
Subject: [ih]
 =?utf-8?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fathers_of_?=
 =?utf-8?b?dGhlIEludGVybmV04oCmLi4=?=
In-Reply-To: <CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>

I don't disagree that BBN designed the IMP.   I also don't think design-the-IMP is the same as design-ARPANET.

  Mike viewed the main topic of the NWG to be .... dang, forgot the term.   But disparate, possibly different, computers computing together.   The communications subnet certainly was crucial but the need for layers (3 will do if you know what you're going; if you don't, 11 won't help you); a world view about which layers and the rigidity required to enforce layers; proposing alternate protocols for achieving a desired goal; things like that are part of design-ARPANET.   As I recall, BBN was the only (principal?) corporation involved in the NWG.  Others were government and academia and a few non-profits.

For Mike's view of what the ARPANET was, his *ARPANET Reference Model* is the best source.

David

iPh

On May 10, 2012, at 16:55, Vint Cerf <vint at google.com> wrote:

> so, we need to distinguish the subnet from the host on the ARPANET.
> The latter were the subject of much debate from the participating
> sites. The design of the IMP system, on the other hand was really BBN.
> If you really think Mike disagreed with that, you must imply that he
> had a rather odd model of what the "ARPANET" was.
> 
> vint
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:58 PM, David Elliott Bell
> <bell1945 at offthisweek.com> wrote:
>> nevertheless, I would point out that not everyone agreed that
>> 
>> "BBN was the designer and operator of the ARPANET from the outset to its
>> termination in 1990."
>> 
>> The disagreement would be over the phrase "the designer".
>> 
>> Michael Padlipsky clearly did not agree. per his book The Elements of
>> Networking Style (& Other Essays & Animadversions of the Art of
>> Intercomputer Networking. (Peter Salus continues to have a high opinion of
>> this book, which includes the only reference on Wikipedia to the Arpanet
>> Reference Model.)
>> 
>> One of the chapters in that book "And They Argued All Night...."  posited
>> that much of what happened in the early days of the Arpanet was the result
>> of group discussion where the participants did not always themselves
>> remember who said what and where ideas came from.
>> 
>> I recommend his book for some reflection of the life and times of the early
>> days of ARPA's Network Working Group (?  phrasing right?).
>> 
>> David Bell
>> 



From vint at google.com  Thu May 10 14:42:47 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 17:42:47 -0400
Subject: [ih]
	=?windows-1252?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fath?=
	=?windows-1252?q?ers_of_the_Internet=85=2E=2E?=
In-Reply-To: <5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggdkb5ng-b0q_-_JYRRxoSd7ETC8MEC6VyWQx_-MJrBTwQ@mail.gmail.com>

so we need to make the distinction between the subnet, which was
primarily supplied by and operated by BBN and the system of hosts,
protocol stack, applications, etc. - the latter is clearly well beyond
the subnet and BBN's work there. However, BBN also contributed in that
area - from early implementations of email and TCP/IP to distributed
applications like the Air Traffic Control System simulator to say
nothing of the TENEX operating system, the gateways, and so on.

Lots of people and institutions eventually became part of the NWG that
morphed into the IETF for all practical purposes. There was an
Internet research group in the early 1970s, distinct from the general
ARPANET (including hosts) community but that work, too, eventually was
absorbed into IETF and into NSF, NASA and DOE sponsors (among others).

A problem in discussions like this is the ambiguity of the term "ARPANET"

v


On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:34 PM, David Elliott Bell
<bell1945 at offthisweek.com> wrote:
> I don't disagree that BBN designed the IMP. ? I also don't think design-the-IMP is the same as design-ARPANET.
>
> ?Mike viewed the main topic of the NWG to be .... dang, forgot the term. ? But disparate, possibly different, computers computing together. ? The communications subnet certainly was crucial but the need for layers (3 will do if you know what you're going; if you don't, 11 won't help you); a world view about which layers and the rigidity required to enforce layers; proposing alternate protocols for achieving a desired goal; things like that are part of design-ARPANET. ? As I recall, BBN was the only (principal?) corporation involved in the NWG. ?Others were government and academia and a few non-profits.
>
> For Mike's view of what the ARPANET was, his *ARPANET Reference Model* is the best source.
>
> David
>
> iPh
>
> On May 10, 2012, at 16:55, Vint Cerf <vint at google.com> wrote:
>
>> so, we need to distinguish the subnet from the host on the ARPANET.
>> The latter were the subject of much debate from the participating
>> sites. The design of the IMP system, on the other hand was really BBN.
>> If you really think Mike disagreed with that, you must imply that he
>> had a rather odd model of what the "ARPANET" was.
>>
>> vint
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 3:58 PM, David Elliott Bell
>> <bell1945 at offthisweek.com> wrote:
>>> nevertheless, I would point out that not everyone agreed that
>>>
>>> "BBN was the designer and operator of the ARPANET from the outset to its
>>> termination in 1990."
>>>
>>> The disagreement would be over the phrase "the designer".
>>>
>>> Michael Padlipsky clearly did not agree. per his book The Elements of
>>> Networking Style (& Other Essays & Animadversions of the Art of
>>> Intercomputer Networking. (Peter Salus continues to have a high opinion of
>>> this book, which includes the only reference on Wikipedia to the Arpanet
>>> Reference Model.)
>>>
>>> One of the chapters in that book "And They Argued All Night...." ?posited
>>> that much of what happened in the early days of the Arpanet was the result
>>> of group discussion where the participants did not always themselves
>>> remember who said what and where ideas came from.
>>>
>>> I recommend his book for some reflection of the life and times of the early
>>> days of ARPA's Network Working Group (? ?phrasing right?).
>>>
>>> David Bell
>>>



From vint at google.com  Thu May 10 14:45:17 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 17:45:17 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <20120510210922.46ACA18C121@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120510210922.46ACA18C121@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggekd7Trqffy3LK=1P0r7n5BufzFL_CbwJxV4YkhFu3AVQ@mail.gmail.com>

the resource sharing paper by Larry Roberts and Barry Wessler (circa
SJCC or FJCC 1970) might also be useful.

v


On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Noel Chiappa <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu> wrote:
> ? ?> From: "Sytel" <sytel at shaw.ca>
>
> ? ?> What did one of the old packets actually look like? We haven't been
> ? ?> able to do much except extrapolate from modern packets.
>
> I wasn't there in the earliest days, but I can answer this for you (so that
> others can focus on the stuff only they can provide, such as memories of
> actual events).
>
> I thought this was all available online in early RFCs, but looking at the
> list, I don't see anything likely. I will scan and OCR all this stuff in from
> various sources (e.g. BBN Report 1822), and throw up a web page (so it's
> easily accessible in the future). Give me a couple of hours.
>
> In the meantime, if you're interested in the technical details of how the
> _network itself_ operated (as opposed to the host-host communication, and
> the early applications), you should get ahold of:
>
> ?F.E. Heart, R.E. Kahn, S.M. Ornstein, ?W.R. Crowther, and D.C. Walden,
> ? ? ? ?"The interface message processor for the ARPA computer network",
> ? ? ? ?Proceedings AFIPS 1970 SJCC, Vol. 36, pp. 551-567.
>
> ?J.M. McQuillan, W.R. Crowther, B.P. Cosell, D.C. Walden, and F.E. Heart,
> ? ? ? ?"Improvements in the Design and Performance of the ARPA Network",
> ? ? ? ?Proceedings AFIPS 1972 FJCC, Vol. 40, pp. 741-754.
>
> which will give you a pretty complete picture (in a lot more detail than
> you want to know, probably :-).
>
> ? ? ? ?Noel



From jeanjour at comcast.net  Thu May 10 14:55:52 2012
From: jeanjour at comcast.net (John Day)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 17:55:52 -0400
Subject: [ih]
 =?iso-8859-1?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fath_?=
 =?iso-8859-1?q?=09ers_of_the_Internet=8A=2E=2E?=
In-Reply-To: <20120510205119.366B818C117@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120510205119.366B818C117@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <a06240817cbd1e311cdb7@[155.41.78.215]>

A few things:

Bernie is right.  It is amazing how it pretty much just worked. 
There were bugs.  And those cranky Tuesday mornings. (BBN tried out 
new IMPsys' on Monday nights, if they were going to.)  The ARPANET 
was primarily an operational network from the beginning.  It was not 
a network for experimenting about networks, it was a network for 
sharing resources, which we did a lot.  We were the largest user of 
Rutherford in the UK, and were using a lot of other machines around 
the network.

What I find amusing about Sytel's questions is how much he assumes 
that things then were like they are now.  They were very different.

Noel is correct as far as I know.  The design and development of the 
IMP subnet was pretty much a BBN affair.  Also the comments that NMC 
(and BBN) was running most of the tests on the network.  Someone 
should talk to Ari about that.  Most of the testing the hosts did 
were on their own projects.

However the NWG meetings were a different matter.  They were loud, 
boisterous, and cantankerous.  Made of the OS guys from the various 
sites, who were lords in their own kingdoms (some would say prima 
donnas), so sparks were to be expected.  I remember marvelling at how 
often we were arguing about the same design but with different words. 
The same term meaning slightly different things on different systems 
but largely everyone had the same basic sense.  (Although one should 
read Ritual for Catharisis #1).

But what I have found missing here is the excitement of the what was 
going on outside the lab.  Of course BBN being a company was pretty 
much immune to it.  Demonstrations against the Vietnam War.  John 
Melvin's comment about ARPA, that "our money is only bloody on one 
side."  Agitation about the military research on campuses.  We were 
in the thick of it at Illinois more because of Illiac IV than the 
ARPANET  but they were both ARPA projects.  We spent many hours 
dealing with the demonstrators.  Our office was fire bombed (but it 
didn't go off).  The thing was, we agreed with them that classified 
research shouldn't be on campus.  The project was doing anything 
classified, so what was the beef?  The story I tell of 4 of us 
leaving Urbana to go Philadelphia to do some debugging, running into 
the first metal detectors at the gate but as we had arrived in 
Chicago, the flight attendant had said to me, "Are you guys in a 
band?"  ;-)  (That wasn't the last time we were asked that question!) 
All of this happening in the context of Kent State, Watergate, the 
overthrow of Allende, Agnew resigning, etc.  It was a pretty wild and 
wooly time.  I am amazed at all tthe stuff that was done.

And other things I am not sure I should talk about.  ;-)

Take care,
John


At 16:51 -0400 2012/05/10, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>     > From: David Elliott Bell <bell1945 at offthisweek.com>
>
>     > The disagreement would be over the phrase "the designer".
>
>It depends; there are lots of different parts to 'the ARPANet'. The Host-Host
>and application protocols were clearly done by a group of people from the
>sites. Then there is the actual network as implemented - and then you get the
>early versions (as documented in Heart et al. 1970 SJCC), the 'middle' version
>(McQuillan et al. 1972 FJCC) and the 'late' version (no quick ref for this,
>but it includes after the 'new' routing algorithm).
>
>As to the actual network, check out the original ARPA RFQ, July 29 1968
>(#DAHC15 69 Q 0002), and then look at the BBN proposal, 6 September 1968 (IMP
>P69-IST-5). Then compare that with the actual network as first implemented.
>(And bear in mind that before the RFQ was written, there was a lot of
>discussion among a fair number of folk, e.g. Wes Clark's suggestion of a
>separate IMP.)
>
>I would say 'designed by BBN' is a reasonable, succint, description for the
>actual network, but of course there were many hands, and many pieces, and
>a full description of all the former, for the latter, is rather lengthy.
>
>	Noel



From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Thu May 10 15:02:51 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (Dave Walden)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 18:02:51 -0400
Subject: [ih]
 =?iso-8859-1?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_father?=
 =?iso-8859-1?q?s_of__the_Internet=2E=2E?=
In-Reply-To: <5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
Message-ID: <4fac3a13.c22ce00a.6875.ffffad5a@mx.google.com>


>As I recall, BBN was the only (principal?) corporation involved in 
>the NWG.  Others were government and academia and a few non-profits.

As I said in my message a few minutes ago, BBN was probably the 
largest group and we were a non-government and non-academic 
corporation.  However Network Analysis Corporation which did the 
topological design was also was such a corporation, and ATT Long 
Lines was certainly such a corporation (they didn't help with the 
design; thus just supplied the lines under contract to the 
government).  Also, some of the early host sites might have 
subcontracted their IMP interface implementation to a small private 
company, e.g., maybe at UCSB.  Also, while BBN was nominally 
for-profit and SRI was nominally non-profit, I don't think there was 
much practical different between how the two of them operated and 
interacted with the government.  Neither was a government or academic 
organization; both were (are) contract R&D places.




From LarrySheldon at cox.net  Thu May 10 15:17:39 2012
From: LarrySheldon at cox.net (Larry Sheldon)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 17:17:39 -0500
Subject: [ih] "Subnet"
Message-ID: <4FAC3E83.20504@cox.net>

I have no useful credentials for any of the current discussion, but I do 
have a question about the term "subnet" as has been used a couple of times.

The word interests me because I was at battle with people for their use 
in the classless IP world (I was an administrator at a small school here).

People with forever talk as if the subnet number was the third octet in 
the dotted decimal representation of the IP address, and that decisions 
could be made using that at the originating end or anywhere in the 
middle.  I argued and still do that it is mostly a useless datum and can 
not be known anywhere except on the leg between the destination station 
ant the router talking to it.

In the ARPANet discussion, what does "subnet" refer to?  It seems like 
there must have been a bigger network that I don't know anything about.
-- 
Requiescas in pace o email           Two identifying characteristics
                                         of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio      Infallibility, and the ability to
                                         learn from their mistakes.
ICBM Data:  http://g.co/maps/e5gmy        (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)


From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Thu May 10 15:21:46 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (Dave Walden)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 18:21:46 -0400
Subject: [ih] following up on some of what Noel said
In-Reply-To: <20120510205119.366B818C117@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120510205119.366B818C117@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <4fac3e80.cfb7e00a.1059.ffffaf4c@mx.google.com>

At 04:51 PM 5/10/2012, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>Then there is the actual network as implemented - and then you get the
>early versions (as documented in Heart et al. 1970 SJCC),

    You can find it 
here: 
<http://walden-family.com/public/1970-imp-afips.pdf>http://walden-family.com/public/1970-imp-afips.pdf 

    (but I don't have permission to have this posted on my website, 
so don't turn me in)

>the 'middle' version
>(McQuillan et al. 1972 FJCC) and the 'late' version

    You can find that same information plus more 
at: 
<http://walden-family.com/public/whole-paper.pdf>http://walden-family.com/public/whole-paper.pdf 

    (ditto)

>As to the actual network, check out the original ARPA RFQ, July 29 1968
>(#DAHC15 69 Q 0002),

   I have a scan of this.  I can post it to my website if that would 
be interesting.

>and then look at the BBN proposal, 6 September 1968 (IMP
>P69-IST-5).

   Coincidentally, I am having a copy of this scanned now to be 
posted to my website (for an unrelated purpose).

>A January 1976 version of BBN Report 1822 is 
>at: 
><http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/bbn/imp/BBN1822_Jan1976.pdf>http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/bbn/imp/BBN1822_Jan1976.pdf 
>
(This will have the message format in it.)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120510/678309f6/attachment.htm>

From bernie at fantasyfarm.com  Thu May 10 15:21:05 2012
From: bernie at fantasyfarm.com (Bernie Cosell)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 18:21:05 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
Message-ID: <4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>

On 10 May 2012 at 11:43, Sytel wrote:

> I guess what I'm interested in is "zooming in" a little more, if you 
> will. November, 1969, a typical afternoon in room 3420 
> (http://www.flickr.com/photos/3420boelterhall/5609051340/) -- what might
> people be working on, reading, doing with the computers? What's a test
> that might be running on the network, and how is it still not quite 
> working right? If something strange happens, who asks who about it? What
> exciting plans are in the pipeline, what deadlines are looming?

I think that given the reality of all of the folk around the country 
working on the ARPAnet, between the actual network development and the 
host system software and the application development, I don't think that 
Boelter Hall was all that central to what was going on either in the 
large or in the small, so your work will be really quite "fictional" if 
you're focusing on UCLA...

  /Bernie\

-- 
Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie at fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--       





From jeanjour at comcast.net  Thu May 10 15:49:28 2012
From: jeanjour at comcast.net (John Day)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 18:49:28 -0400
Subject: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the father s of the
 Internet..
In-Reply-To: <4fac3a13.c22ce00a.6875.ffffad5a@mx.google.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<4fac3a13.c22ce00a.6875.ffffad5a@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <a0624081dcbd1f6384acc@[155.41.78.215]>

CCA who was doing the datacomputer.

Roland Bryan had his company ACC, although for this early early 
period that doesn't count.


At 18:02 -0400 2012/05/10, Dave Walden wrote:
>>As I recall, BBN was the only (principal?) corporation involved in 
>>the NWG.  Others were government and academia and a few non-profits.
>
>As I said in my message a few minutes ago, BBN was probably the 
>largest group and we were a non-government and non-academic 
>corporation.  However Network Analysis Corporation which did the 
>topological design was also was such a corporation, and ATT Long 
>Lines was certainly such a corporation (they didn't help with the 
>design; thus just supplied the lines under contract to the 
>government).  Also, some of the early host sites might have 
>subcontracted their IMP interface implementation to a small private 
>company, e.g., maybe at UCSB.  Also, while BBN was nominally 
>for-profit and SRI was nominally non-profit, I don't think there was 
>much practical different between how the two of them operated and 
>interacted with the government.  Neither was a government or 
>academic organization; both were (are) contract R&D places.



From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Thu May 10 16:03:00 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (Dave Walden)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 19:03:00 -0400
Subject: [ih] "Subnet"
In-Reply-To: <4FAC3E83.20504@cox.net>
References: <4FAC3E83.20504@cox.net>
Message-ID: <4fac481e.47d0e00a.1a1e.ffffbbde@mx.google.com>

Larry,

When I refer to the subnet, I mean the sets of IMPs, communications 
circuits between them, and the protocols they used to connect among 
themselves and to the hosts.  When I refer to the ARPANET, I mean the 
subnet with the host computers attached, using their host-host 
protocols to communicate over the subnet.  This was all when there 
was only one network, not like later with the Internet.  This is 
slightly confused between the TIP box had both an IMP and a host 
(handling terminals that communicated with other hosts on the network).

Dave

At 06:17 PM 5/10/2012, Larry Sheldon wrote:
>I have no useful credentials for any of the current discussion, but 
>I do have a question about the term "subnet" as has been used a 
>couple of times.
>
>The word interests me because I was at battle with people for their 
>use in the classless IP world (I was an administrator at a small school here).
>
>People with forever talk as if the subnet number was the third octet 
>in the dotted decimal representation of the IP address, and that 
>decisions could be made using that at the originating end or 
>anywhere in the middle.  I argued and still do that it is mostly a 
>useless datum and can not be known anywhere except on the leg 
>between the destination station ant the router talking to it.
>
>In the ARPANet discussion, what does "subnet" refer to?  It seems 
>like there must have been a bigger network that I don't know anything about.
>--
>Requiescas in pace o email           Two identifying characteristics
>                                         of System Administrators:
>Ex turpi causa non oritur actio      Infallibility, and the ability to
>                                         learn from their mistakes.
>ICBM Data:  http://g.co/maps/e5gmy        (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)


--
home address: 12 Linden Rd., E. Sandwich, MA 02537
home ph=508-888-7655; cell ph = 503-757-3137
email address:  dave at walden-family.com; website: 
<http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/>http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/  



From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Thu May 10 16:04:44 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 19:04:44 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] "Subnet"
Message-ID: <20120510230444.07F4A18C113@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon at cox.net>

    > I do have a question about the term "subnet" as has been used a couple
    > of times.

Do be aware that that term is 'overloaded' - i.e. it has several distinct
meanings. One is the one you list (sort of):

    > as if the subnet number was the third octet in the dotted decimal
    > representation of the IP address, and that decisions could be made
    > using that at the originating end or anywhere in the middle.

Call this 'IP subnetting' to distinguish it. It started as way of splitting an
IP 'network' (originally only class A, since 'IP subnetting' in its earliest
form predates the introduction of class A/B/C IP network numbers) into smaller
pieces, one for each physical LAN at a site. (This is originally an MITism; we
were the first people to do this that I know of.) Actually, at MIT, the subnet
was (and still is, I think) the second byte. Eventually (circa RFC-1122, with
the bit-mask for 'is the destination on my physical network') it came to be
any bit-field in the 'rest' portion. And then CIDR did away with the
network/rest distinction, but that's another generation of development...

The other is:

    > In the ARPANet discussion, what does "subnet" refer to? It seems like
    > there must have been a bigger network that I don't know anything about.

No, nothing to do with that. 'subnet' just means (or, eventually came to
mean) the 'physical network'. In the ARPANet case, the collection of IMPs and
point-point links (since they formed a 'network' of their own, to which the
larger 'network' of all the hosts connected.)


    > I argued and still do that it is mostly a useless datum and can not be
    > known anywhere except on the leg between the destination station ant
    > the router talking to it.

The original concept of 'IP subnetting' was that nobody outside the site
could tell it was subnetted (since originally, subnetting was a purely
MIT-local hack to the architecture).

In the longer term - the discussion of whether routes to pieces of an
naming/topology aggregate can/should usefully be distributed outside of the
boundaries of that aggregate - too large and off-topic discussion for this
margin, alas.

	Noel


From bernie at fantasyfarm.com  Thu May 10 16:11:34 2012
From: bernie at fantasyfarm.com (Bernie Cosell)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 19:11:34 -0400
Subject: [ih] "Subnet"
In-Reply-To: <4FAC3E83.20504@cox.net>
References: <4FAC3E83.20504@cox.net>
Message-ID: <4FAC4B26.9617.4C6F3AA@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>

On 10 May 2012 at 17:17, Larry Sheldon wrote:

> People with forever talk as if the subnet number was the third octet in
> the dotted decimal representation of the IP address, and that decisions
> could be made using that at the originating end or anywhere in the 
> middle.  I argued and still do that it is mostly a useless datum and can
> not be known anywhere except on the leg between the destination station
> ant the router talking to it.
> 
> In the ARPANet discussion, what does "subnet" refer to?  It seems like
> there must have been a bigger network that I don't know anything
> about.

Well, I don't think there was any 'subnet'ing with the ARPAnet -- just 
IMP numbers, mostly.  In the IP/Internet era, as I understand it, a 
subnet just consists of a block of a power of 2 IP addresses, always 
accompanied by *some* indication, implicit or explicit of the size of the 
block[*].  [and so, for example, we allocate subnets-of-8 to many of our 
customers.].  The standard "class C" has 256 IP addrs, class B 65K[**], 
etc.  I can see a context in which the "third octet" might make sense: if 
you have a class-B allocated and you, in turn, allocate class C's to 
other parties, then the class-B holder might well think of the third 
octet as the "subnet number"

    [*] for example you will often see folk talk about /28 subnets and
    /20 subnets and such, where that's the number of bits in the 'base'
    IP addr, and so the subnet consists of 2^(32-<thatnumber>) IP
    addresses.  We've occasionally used the terminology "/32" for "a
    single IP address". 

    [**] Yes, I know generally that that either one or two of the IP
    addresses in the block isn't available..:o) 

/Bernie\

-- 
Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie at fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--       





From sytel at shaw.ca  Thu May 10 16:15:36 2012
From: sytel at shaw.ca (Sytel)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 16:15:36 -0700
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
Message-ID: <A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>

I see. This is interesting, and definitely new; from the accounts I'd read 
(admittedly, mostly from Kleinrock's perspective) I was under the impression 
that the NMC was the "headquarters" for the early net; indeed, I might have 
read somewhere that it wasn't even connected to BBN's offices until some 
time after... I'm aware that most of the original team went their separate 
ways after the ECCC in 1972, but up until then I'd been sort of picturing 
Kleinrock's team as "running" the network from UCLA, with a lot of contact 
with BBN, of course.
I'm sorry if there's some false assumptions in there... as mentioned, this 
is something that's often hard to find out about in the more widely 
available histories.
What would have been the main "home bases" in the 1969-1972 period, then, 
and what would be happening at each one? Were they actually connected to the 
network, or were they more working on things that would be used at nodes 
that were connected?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bernie Cosell" <bernie at fantasyfarm.com>
To: <internet-history at postel.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: [ih] Historical fiction


> On 10 May 2012 at 11:43, Sytel wrote:
>
>> I guess what I'm interested in is "zooming in" a little more, if you
>> will. November, 1969, a typical afternoon in room 3420
>> (http://www.flickr.com/photos/3420boelterhall/5609051340/) -- what might
>> people be working on, reading, doing with the computers? What's a test
>> that might be running on the network, and how is it still not quite
>> working right? If something strange happens, who asks who about it? What
>> exciting plans are in the pipeline, what deadlines are looming?
>
> I think that given the reality of all of the folk around the country
> working on the ARPAnet, between the actual network development and the
> host system software and the application development, I don't think that
> Boelter Hall was all that central to what was going on either in the
> large or in the small, so your work will be really quite "fictional" if
> you're focusing on UCLA...
>
>  /Bernie\
>
> -- 
> Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
> mailto:bernie at fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
>    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--
>
>
> 



From sytel at shaw.ca  Thu May 10 16:24:43 2012
From: sytel at shaw.ca (Sytel)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 16:24:43 -0700
Subject: [ih]
	=?iso-8859-1?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fath_?=
	=?iso-8859-1?q?=09ers_of_the_InternetS=2E=2E?=
References: <20120510205119.366B818C117@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
	<a06240817cbd1e311cdb7@[155.41.78.215]>
Message-ID: <3DD6F0C956514E12B6BF765C9BAC82E3@bng1>

I'm actually a "she", but aside from that... I figured there were probably a 
lot of assumptions I was making that might not apply back then, but I don't 
know what exactly. Sorry about that; it's part of the reason I wanted to get 
the information here...
We actually are planning on incorporating the political and social issues of 
the time into the plot, but that's largely for later on, once 
personified-Arpanet gets out into the world more, meets students, and 
discovers that the world doesn't in fact revolve around him (yet)...
Very interested in the early uses of the network, though. What sort of 
resources would be shared over it? I've heard (and this may be inaccurate) 
that one of the primary reasons for inventing it was to run applications 
remotely instead of recoding them for each different computer; what 
applications might these have been at first?
Very useful information, especially on the NWG meetings and the attack on 
the office in Illinois. Will also be looking into the Iliac IV; would this 
have been connected to the ARPANET in any way?

Thanks,
Sytel
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Day" <jeanjour at comcast.net>
To: "Noel Chiappa" <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu>; <bell1945 at offthisweek.com>; 
<internet-history at postel.org>
Cc: <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fath ers of the 
InternetS..


>A few things:
>
> Bernie is right.  It is amazing how it pretty much just worked. There were 
> bugs.  And those cranky Tuesday mornings. (BBN tried out new IMPsys' on 
> Monday nights, if they were going to.)  The ARPANET was primarily an 
> operational network from the beginning.  It was not a network for 
> experimenting about networks, it was a network for sharing resources, 
> which we did a lot.  We were the largest user of Rutherford in the UK, and 
> were using a lot of other machines around the network.
>
> What I find amusing about Sytel's questions is how much he assumes that 
> things then were like they are now.  They were very different.
>
> Noel is correct as far as I know.  The design and development of the IMP 
> subnet was pretty much a BBN affair.  Also the comments that NMC (and BBN) 
> was running most of the tests on the network.  Someone should talk to Ari 
> about that.  Most of the testing the hosts did were on their own projects.
>
> However the NWG meetings were a different matter.  They were loud, 
> boisterous, and cantankerous.  Made of the OS guys from the various sites, 
> who were lords in their own kingdoms (some would say prima donnas), so 
> sparks were to be expected.  I remember marvelling at how often we were 
> arguing about the same design but with different words. The same term 
> meaning slightly different things on different systems but largely 
> everyone had the same basic sense.  (Although one should read Ritual for 
> Catharisis #1).
>
> But what I have found missing here is the excitement of the what was going 
> on outside the lab.  Of course BBN being a company was pretty much immune 
> to it.  Demonstrations against the Vietnam War.  John Melvin's comment 
> about ARPA, that "our money is only bloody on one side."  Agitation about 
> the military research on campuses.  We were in the thick of it at Illinois 
> more because of Illiac IV than the ARPANET  but they were both ARPA 
> projects.  We spent many hours dealing with the demonstrators.  Our office 
> was fire bombed (but it didn't go off).  The thing was, we agreed with 
> them that classified research shouldn't be on campus.  The project was 
> doing anything classified, so what was the beef?  The story I tell of 4 of 
> us leaving Urbana to go Philadelphia to do some debugging, running into 
> the first metal detectors at the gate but as we had arrived in Chicago, 
> the flight attendant had said to me, "Are you guys in a band?"  ;-)  (That 
> wasn't the last time we were asked that question!) All of this happening 
> in the context of Kent State, Watergate, the overthrow of Allende, Agnew 
> resigning, etc.  It was a pretty wild and wooly time.  I am amazed at all 
> tthe stuff that was done.
>
> And other things I am not sure I should talk about.  ;-)
>
> Take care,
> John
>
>
> At 16:51 -0400 2012/05/10, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>>     > From: David Elliott Bell <bell1945 at offthisweek.com>
>>
>>     > The disagreement would be over the phrase "the designer".
>>
>>It depends; there are lots of different parts to 'the ARPANet'. The 
>>Host-Host
>>and application protocols were clearly done by a group of people from the
>>sites. Then there is the actual network as implemented - and then you get 
>>the
>>early versions (as documented in Heart et al. 1970 SJCC), the 'middle' 
>>version
>>(McQuillan et al. 1972 FJCC) and the 'late' version (no quick ref for 
>>this,
>>but it includes after the 'new' routing algorithm).
>>
>>As to the actual network, check out the original ARPA RFQ, July 29 1968
>>(#DAHC15 69 Q 0002), and then look at the BBN proposal, 6 September 1968 
>>(IMP
>>P69-IST-5). Then compare that with the actual network as first 
>>implemented.
>>(And bear in mind that before the RFQ was written, there was a lot of
>>discussion among a fair number of folk, e.g. Wes Clark's suggestion of a
>>separate IMP.)
>>
>>I would say 'designed by BBN' is a reasonable, succint, description for 
>>the
>>actual network, but of course there were many hands, and many pieces, and
>>a full description of all the former, for the latter, is rather lengthy.
>>
>> Noel
> 



From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Thu May 10 16:51:47 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (dave.walden.family at gmail.com)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 19:51:47 -0400
Subject: [ih] "Subnet"
In-Reply-To: <4FAC4B26.9617.4C6F3AA@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
References: <4FAC3E83.20504@cox.net>
	<4FAC4B26.9617.4C6F3AA@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
Message-ID: <A72EF3C4-3EA9-43F5-AD5C-8064D8BC3FFB@gmail.com>


On May 10, 2012, at 7:11 PM, "Bernie Cosell" <bernie at fantasyfarm.com> wrote:
> Well, I don't think there was any 'subnet'ing with the ARPAnet 

Well, I vaguely remember there was in some other sense -- logical subnets, a seldom used, if ever, feature where the IMPs could let a subset of hosts only communicate with each other.  Or, instead of a vague memory, do I have a wrong memory?    (Of course this is irrelevant to the distinction previously being discussed.)
> 



From LarrySheldon at cox.net  Thu May 10 16:53:42 2012
From: LarrySheldon at cox.net (Larry Sheldon)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 18:53:42 -0500
Subject: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fathers of the
	Internet..
In-Reply-To: <4fac3a13.c22ce00a.6875.ffffad5a@mx.google.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<4fac3a13.c22ce00a.6875.ffffad5a@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <4FAC5506.20103@cox.net>

On 5/10/2012 5:02 PM, Dave Walden wrote:
>
>> As I recall, BBN was the only (principal?) corporation involved in the
>> NWG. Others were government and academia and a few non-profits.
>
> As I said in my message a few minutes ago, BBN was probably the largest
> group and we were a non-government and non-academic corporation. However
> Network Analysis Corporation which did the topological design was also
> was such a corporation, and ATT Long Lines was certainly such a
> corporation (they didn't help with the design; thus just supplied the
> lines under contract to the government). Also, some of the early host
> sites might have subcontracted their IMP interface implementation to a
> small private company, e.g., maybe at UCSB. Also, while BBN was
> nominally for-profit and SRI was nominally non-profit, I don't think
> there was much practical different between how the two of them operated
> and interacted with the government. Neither was a government or academic
> organization; both were (are) contract R&D places.

Probably not important to the discussion, but SRI was part of Stanford 
through the 1970's, right?  Non Academic?

-- 
Requiescas in pace o email           Two identifying characteristics
                                         of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio      Infallibility, and the ability to
                                         learn from their mistakes.
ICBM Data:  http://g.co/maps/e5gmy        (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)


From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Thu May 10 17:23:23 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (Dave Walden)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 20:23:23 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
Message-ID: <4fac5ae3.8fb2e00a.41d7.ffffc800@mx.google.com>

BBN IMP was the fifth IMP on the network, in early 1970.  Before that 
we did our IMP operations work and support of host work by phone and 
by flying to the first four sites.  One or more people from BBN went 
with each of the first four IMP deliveries to help the host people 
get connected.  We made other trips to the first four host sites.  I 
did at least one new software release by flying in turn to the U of 
Utah, SRI, UCSB, and UCLA dropping off paper tapes as I went.  I have 
the IMP program listing on the telephone stand in my apartment so I 
could take phone calls from the host sites outside BBN east coast 
work hours (day or night).  (I already mention Bob Kahn and I going 
to UCLA once the first four nodes were connected to do tests which 
revealed a problem (Bob anticipated) with packet reassembly lockup.) 
Once we had the first cross-country line and the IMP at BBN, we could 
do new releases over the net, monitor the IMPs remotely, etc.

I would say that the main "home bases" were ARPA which was calling 
the top level shots, the IMP development team and Network Monitoring 
Center at BBN, the Network Information Center at SRI, the Network 
Measurement Center at UCLA, the highly distributed Network Working 
Group and interface development people at all the host sites, and the 
Air Force contracts office which acquired the wideband communications 
circuits from ATT.  I believe Network Analysis Corporation did 
repeated topological designs for ARPA leading up to acquisition on 
additional wideband circuits.

The first four IMPs were delivered and a host connected to each in 
approximately the last four months of 1969.  Then an IMP was 
delivered approximately every month for quite a while (with BBN which 
already had IMPs on site being the fifth site connected).

People were working on the net, writing RFCs to each other, creating 
or revising various protocol specs, and when appropriate updating IMP 
and/or host software.  Look the first few hundred RFCs for notices 
anticipating or reporting on various network activities.

Dave


At 07:15 PM 5/10/2012, Sytel wrote:
>I see. This is interesting, and definitely new; from the accounts 
>I'd read (admittedly, mostly from Kleinrock's perspective) I was 
>under the impression that the NMC was the "headquarters" for the 
>early net; indeed, I might have read somewhere that it wasn't even 
>connected to BBN's offices until some time after... I'm aware that 
>most of the original team went their separate ways after the ECCC in 
>1972, but up until then I'd been sort of picturing Kleinrock's team 
>as "running" the network from UCLA, with a lot of contact with BBN, of course.
>I'm sorry if there's some false assumptions in there... as 
>mentioned, this is something that's often hard to find out about in 
>the more widely available histories.
>What would have been the main "home bases" in the 1969-1972 period, 
>then, and what would be happening at each one? Were they actually 
>connected to the network, or were they more working on things that 
>would be used at nodes that were connected?
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Bernie Cosell" <bernie at fantasyfarm.com>
>To: <internet-history at postel.org>
>Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 3:21 PM
>Subject: Re: [ih] Historical fiction
>
>
>>On 10 May 2012 at 11:43, Sytel wrote:
>>
>>>I guess what I'm interested in is "zooming in" a little more, if you
>>>will. November, 1969, a typical afternoon in room 3420
>>>(http://www.flickr.com/photos/3420boelterhall/5609051340/) -- what might
>>>people be working on, reading, doing with the computers? What's a test
>>>that might be running on the network, and how is it still not quite
>>>working right? If something strange happens, who asks who about it? What
>>>exciting plans are in the pipeline, what deadlines are looming?
>>
>>I think that given the reality of all of the folk around the country
>>working on the ARPAnet, between the actual network development and the
>>host system software and the application development, I don't think that
>>Boelter Hall was all that central to what was going on either in the
>>large or in the small, so your work will be really quite "fictional" if
>>you're focusing on UCLA...
>>
>>  /Bernie\
>>
>>--
>>Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
>>mailto:bernie at fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
>>    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--
>>
>>


--
home address: 12 Linden Rd., E. Sandwich, MA 02537
home ph=508-888-7655; cell ph = 503-757-3137
email address:  dave at walden-family.com; website: 
<http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/>http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/  



From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Thu May 10 17:35:40 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (Dave Walden)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 20:35:40 -0400
Subject: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fathers of the
 Internet..
In-Reply-To: <4FAC5506.20103@cox.net>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<4fac3a13.c22ce00a.6875.ffffad5a@mx.google.com>
	<4FAC5506.20103@cox.net>
Message-ID: <4fac5dc0.d2dbe00a.7ae3.ffffc8b5@mx.google.com>

According to the wikipedia, it separated from Stanford in 1970.  I 
stand by what I said that it was hard (at least for me) to tell BBN 
and SRI apart in how they worked, the kind of contacts they went for, 
etc., including their closeness to nearby university faculty and 
students to hire either as consultants or permanently.

At 07:53 PM 5/10/2012, Larry Sheldon wrote:
>On 5/10/2012 5:02 PM, Dave Walden wrote:
>>
>>>As I recall, BBN was the only (principal?) corporation involved in the
>>>NWG. Others were government and academia and a few non-profits.
>>
>>As I said in my message a few minutes ago, BBN was probably the largest
>>group and we were a non-government and non-academic corporation. However
>>Network Analysis Corporation which did the topological design was also
>>was such a corporation, and ATT Long Lines was certainly such a
>>corporation (they didn't help with the design; thus just supplied the
>>lines under contract to the government). Also, some of the early host
>>sites might have subcontracted their IMP interface implementation to a
>>small private company, e.g., maybe at UCSB. Also, while BBN was
>>nominally for-profit and SRI was nominally non-profit, I don't think
>>there was much practical different between how the two of them operated
>>and interacted with the government. Neither was a government or academic
>>organization; both were (are) contract R&D places.
>
>Probably not important to the discussion, but SRI was part of 
>Stanford through the 1970's, right?  Non Academic?
>
>--
>Requiescas in pace o email           Two identifying characteristics
>                                         of System Administrators:
>Ex turpi causa non oritur actio      Infallibility, and the ability to
>                                         learn from their mistakes.
>ICBM Data:  http://g.co/maps/e5gmy        (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)


--
home address: 12 Linden Rd., E. Sandwich, MA 02537
home ph=508-888-7655; cell ph = 503-757-3137
email address:  dave at walden-family.com; website: 
<http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/>http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/  



From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Thu May 10 17:53:30 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 20:53:30 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <4fac5ae3.8fb2e00a.41d7.ffffc800@mx.google.com>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
	<4fac5ae3.8fb2e00a.41d7.ffffc800@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <4FAC630A.8060803@meetinghouse.net>

Dave Walden wrote:
> BBN IMP was the fifth IMP on the network, in early 1970.

You know, I've always wondered, how is it that one of the first four 
nodes wasn't at either BBN or MIT?  How were the first four sites 
actually selected?

Miles Fidelman



-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From amckenzie3 at yahoo.com  Thu May 10 18:32:56 2012
From: amckenzie3 at yahoo.com (Alex McKenzie)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 18:32:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
Message-ID: <1336699976.86973.YahooMailNeo@web160204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Every site connected to the early ARPAnet was the center of something.

IMP 1: UCLA was the place where Kleinrock worked - applying 
queueing theory to data communications.? Because of this he had an ARPA 
contract to operate the Network Measurement Center which used facilities built into the IMPs (packet tracing, periodic measurements of queue 
lengths and waiting times, traffic statistics, traffic generators, etc) to run experiments with the performance/behavior of the "subnetwork".
? ? UCLA was also home of the Campus Computer Network and its IBM 360/91, funded in large part by ARPA.? This was the largest commercial number-cruncher planned to be connected to the network, and was therefore an important 
number-crunching resource to be shared by the ARPA research community.

IMP 2: Stanford Research Institute (SRI) was home to Doug Englebart and his "[Human] Augmentation Research Center (ARC), largely funded by ARPA.? 
The ARC developed the OnLine System (OLS) to facilitate the 
collaborative production of documentation, including authoring, sharing, indexing, storing, etc. Because of this Doug's group had an ARPA 
contract to serve as the Network Information Center.

IMP 3: UCSB had an IBM 360/75 which was used to run a time-sharing system, 
which included special CRT terminals designed for the UCSB system (at 
this time almost every ARPAnet site except UCSB and SRI used hard-copy 
terminals).? The UCSB? 360/75 was a major resourch intended to be 
shared.

IMP 4: University of Utah was doing major work in experimental graphics for ARPA.? Its graphic expertise and graphic rendering software was a 
resource to be shared.

IMP 5: BBN was the location of the group (the "IMP Guys") who designed the 
subnetwork and built the hardware and software to implement it.? Once 
IMP 5 was installed in early 1970 BBN ran the Network Operation Center 
(NOC) which managed network operation, maintenance, and improvement. 
[IMP 1 was installed at the beginning of September 1969 and IMP 5 was 
installed in March 1970; during the intervening time (a bit over 6 
months) UCLA was the center of much subnet activity, especially 
measurement and testing.? After March 1970 BBN was the center of operations and the goal was to keep the subnet running all the time.]
???? BBN was also the home of the group which built the TENEX hardware and 
operating system and used TENEX as a platform for research in artificial intelligence, speech understanding, and natural language processing.? 
This expertise and the TENEX system were resources to be shared.

IMP 6: MIT was the home of a variety of unique computer resources and 
expertise, including (but far from limited to) the CTSS, ITS, and 
Multics computer systems, and major research in AI, symbolic mathematics, and operating system security - all funded in part or entirely by ARPA.? The systems and expertise were resources to be shared.

And so on. [I'm a 1-finger typist and can't keep this up.]? It would be impossible to say that any of the network sites 
were the center of the network, in the sense that "center" implies "most important".? But on the other hand, EVERY site was the center of some 
important and unique activity!? Only when Terminal IMPS (TIPs) were first deployed was it the case that some sites were purely users of other resources rather that the center of some activity.


Hope this helps,
Alex McKenzie
BBN 1967-1996



________________________________
 From: Sytel <sytel at shaw.ca>
To: internet-history at postel.org 
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: [ih] Historical fiction
 
I see. This is interesting, and definitely new; from the accounts I'd read (admittedly, mostly from Kleinrock's perspective) I was under the impression that the NMC was the "headquarters" for the early net; indeed, I might have read somewhere that it wasn't even connected to BBN's offices until some time after... I'm aware that most of the original team went their separate ways after the ECCC in 1972, but up until then I'd been sort of picturing Kleinrock's team as "running" the network from UCLA, with a lot of contact with BBN, of course.
I'm sorry if there's some false assumptions in there... as mentioned, this is something that's often hard to find out about in the more widely available histories.
What would have been the main "home bases" in the 1969-1972 period, then, and what would be happening at each one? Were they actually connected to the network, or were they more working on things that would be used at nodes that were connected?

----- Original Message ----- From: "Bernie Cosell" <bernie at fantasyfarm.com>
To: <internet-history at postel.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 3:21 PM
Subject: Re: [ih] Historical fiction


> On 10 May 2012 at 11:43, Sytel wrote:
> 
>> I guess what I'm interested in is "zooming in" a little more, if you
>> will. November, 1969, a typical afternoon in room 3420
>> (http://www.flickr.com/photos/3420boelterhall/5609051340/) -- what might
>> people be working on, reading, doing with the computers? What's a test
>> that might be running on the network, and how is it still not quite
>> working right? If something strange happens, who asks who about it? What
>> exciting plans are in the pipeline, what deadlines are looming?
> 
> I think that given the reality of all of the folk around the country
> working on the ARPAnet, between the actual network development and the
> host system software and the application development, I don't think that
> Boelter Hall was all that central to what was going on either in the
> large or in the small, so your work will be really quite "fictional" if
> you're focusing on UCLA...
> 
>? /Bernie\
> 
> -- Bernie Cosell? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?  Fantasy Farm Fibers
> mailto:bernie at fantasyfarm.com? ?  Pearisburg, VA
>? ? -->? Too many people, too few sheep? <--
> 
> 
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120510/12780356/attachment.htm>

From amckenzie3 at yahoo.com  Thu May 10 18:44:07 2012
From: amckenzie3 at yahoo.com (Alex McKenzie)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 18:44:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <4FAC630A.8060803@meetinghouse.net>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
	<4fac5ae3.8fb2e00a.41d7.ffffc800@mx.google.com>
	<4FAC630A.8060803@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <1336700647.70450.YahooMailNeo@web160204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

The original contract was for only 4 IMPs.? ARPA picked the locations, and has never really said what the decision process was.? But obviously they wanted them to all be sites where ARPA was funding major efforts, and they didn't want the circuit costs to break the bank (so one wouldn't want the cost of 2 cross-country circuits for the initial experiment).? Procuring circuits had a lead time of about 6 months, and no one knew whether BBN would be able to make the IMPs actually work, or to get the first one delivered just 9 months after contract award. It may also be relevant that Ivan Sutherland who was leading the graphics group at Utah had been at ARPA just before going to Utah.? It may also be relevant that Len Kleinrork and Larry Roberts were very close friends.



________________________________
 From: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net>
To: 
Cc: internet-history at postel.org 
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 8:53 PM
Subject: Re: [ih] Historical fiction
 
Dave Walden wrote:
> BBN IMP was the fifth IMP on the network, in early 1970.

You know, I've always wondered, how is it that one of the first four nodes wasn't at either BBN or MIT?? How were the first four sites actually selected?

Miles Fidelman



-- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.?  .... Yogi Berra
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120510/3b1b10eb/attachment.htm>

From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Thu May 10 18:55:50 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (dave.walden.family at gmail.com)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 21:55:50 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <4FAC630A.8060803@meetinghouse.net>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
	<4fac5ae3.8fb2e00a.41d7.ffffc800@mx.google.com>
	<4FAC630A.8060803@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <2EFB2699-1C29-4EB3-A4E9-A5D1976CF5A9@gmail.com>

My guess is that the first four sites were promised participation, or were required to participate, as part of ARPA's plan to have a network, before BBN was selected as the IMP contractor.  Also the winner of the IMP contract might have been a west coast company which could have inexpensively connected to one of the first four IMPs (e.g., a company called something like Jacobi Systems might have won).

Sent from my iPad

On May 10, 2012, at 8:53 PM, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net> wrote:

> Dave Walden wrote:
>> BBN IMP was the fifth IMP on the network, in early 1970.
> 
> You know, I've always wondered, how is it that one of the first four nodes wasn't at either BBN or MIT?  How were the first four sites actually selected?
> 
> Miles Fidelman
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
> In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra
> 
> 



From bill.n1vux at gmail.com  Thu May 10 19:33:49 2012
From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 22:33:49 -0400
Subject: [ih]
	=?windows-1252?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fath?=
	=?windows-1252?q?ers_of_the_Internet=85=2E=2E?=
In-Reply-To: <CAHxHggdkb5ng-b0q_-_JYRRxoSd7ETC8MEC6VyWQx_-MJrBTwQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggdkb5ng-b0q_-_JYRRxoSd7ETC8MEC6VyWQx_-MJrBTwQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAbKA3XuQKRHUtKpGt=r-qqX+7BJ=ZUMbAVxhRNZ6xMpsVxKJQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Vint Cerf <vint at google.com> wrote:

> so we need to make the distinction between the subnet ...  and the system
> of hosts,
> protocol stack, applications, etc.
>

and must be further distinguished from the communities that grew around the
latter.


> A problem in discussions like this is the ambiguity of the term "ARPANET"
>

I believe MAP as the self-designated 'Semantic Puritan' would have endorsed
that statement.

The modern conflation of "WWW" (application level infrastructure, now with
tiered apps on that) and "Internet" (lowest end to end protocol) and
"Broadband" (physical and hop-wise protocol) is equally annoying and
pernicious , but at least we the cognoscenti have separate words for them,
rather than calling all three "ARPAnet".

( If it's turtles all the way down, are apps built on apps built
on applications camels all the way up ? )

Padlipsky also distinguished between the (Aristotelian) ARPAnet Refernce
Model and the (evolving) protocol stack (as of some date: NCP/FTP/TELNET or
TCP/IP/HTTP or IPv6/DNSsec/AQM someday).

DEB may overstate the case, but he is correct to the extent that Mike was
regularly perturbed to peroration by folks who, whether by intent or
ignorance, conflated the subnet and The Net, and pitched Kleinrock and BBN
as sole founders of the ARPAnet (or laterly internet), defending
the contributions Licklider, Vint, Postel, and rest of NWG/IETF/RFC
community.

Mike was not blind to the contribution of BBN; he prized a copy of Sen.
Kennedy's hilarious telegram to BBN congratulating them on their
development of the "Interfaith Message Processor" [sic], and had respect
for BBN NWG reps in protocol and security matters (e.g. Steve Kent, to name
but one).

To direct an echo of Mike's defense of Vint (and Jon) against Vint (who has
just volunteered to help defended Jon's memory in the other thread) is
cosmic irony, a sort that MAP would have savored (although he'd have likely
told me that properly it was not properly 'irony' in a rhetorical sense).

-- 
Bill Ricker
MAP's literary estate
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120510/77b47a90/attachment.htm>

From bill.n1vux at gmail.com  Thu May 10 19:59:14 2012
From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 22:59:14 -0400
Subject: [ih]
	=?windows-1252?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fath?=
	=?windows-1252?q?ers_of_the_Internet=85=2E=2E?=
In-Reply-To: <5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
Message-ID: <CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:34 PM, David Elliott Bell <
bell1945 at offthisweek.com> wrote:

> the need for layers (3 will do if you know what you're going; if you
> don't, 11 won't help you);


Correction, it is canonically '17 won't help you' .
The ironic allusion to the hol(e)y 7 of the Other Reference Model ("ISORM")
makes this MAPhorism much funnier than mere exaggeration.

a world view about which layers and the rigidity required to enforce
> layers; proposing alternate protocols for achieving a desired goal; things
> like that are part of design-ARPANET.


Mike having come to protocol design and programming via poetry rather than
prosaic electrical engineering, yes, he viewed layering as the design, as
the essense. The fact that both the IMPs and NCP have been retired but the
network that  (D)ARPA wrought lives on as "the Internet", over a hybrid
hodgepodge of physical subnets, militates that his logical view of The Net
has won out over the physical, just as the pragmatic, good-enough ARM has
won out of the overly baroque OSI ISORM .

However ...

The Popular History of the Net has largely been told from the BBN POV. As
an editorial/authorial decision, this is understandably so, much though it
may annoy those who worked on upper layers. Having a for-profit's PR office
on the case doesn't hurt, but that is not solely responsible. It's easier
to follow BBN'S  IMP/TIP narrative than a narrative spread over several
campuses and multiple OS's no one uses anymore, and far easier to explain
challenges of hardware than challenges of software to a general audience. I
have corroboration on that bald assertion -- Tracey Kidder interviewed the
DG 'Eagle' operating system team manager while researching 'Soul of the New
Machine', and couldn't figure out how to explain it, so went back to
focusing on hardware and microcode teams. Networking may be easier to make
metaphor than an OS, but not compared to modems.

[I worked for said DG manager at his next gig, and volunteered with a
'microkid' a few years later. The microkid taught me to drink cognac at ACM
committee meetings; Mike's whisky lessons cured me of that quickly.]

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120510/b42bfbfc/attachment.htm>

From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Thu May 10 20:14:59 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 23:14:59 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih]
	=?iso-8859-1?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fath_?=
	=?iso-8859-1?q?=3D=3Fiso-8859-h?=
Message-ID: <20120511031459.563B018C0B3@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: "Sytel" <sytel at shaw.ca>

    > the attack on the office in Illinois. Will also be looking into the
    > Iliac IV; would this have been connected to the ARPANET in any way?

Yes, via a front-end PDP-10 running Tenex, but only after it moved to Ames in
1972. See RFC-330, April 1972, "Network Host Status", where it shows up as
host 0/15.

It was listed in several issues of "Network Host Status" prior to that, but
always as 'not conected yet'. The original plan was to apparently to connect
via its B6500 front-end, but they switched it to be a PDP-10.

(Oddly enough, it was originally listed as being host 0/13 in RFC 288 -
perhaps this was a typo? That RFC also shows Case as being 0/13... IMP 13 was
later the Gunter IMP.)

	Noel


From vint at google.com  Fri May 11 01:06:55 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 04:06:55 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <2EFB2699-1C29-4EB3-A4E9-A5D1976CF5A9@gmail.com>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
	<4fac5ae3.8fb2e00a.41d7.ffffc800@mx.google.com>
	<4FAC630A.8060803@meetinghouse.net>
	<2EFB2699-1C29-4EB3-A4E9-A5D1976CF5A9@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggfrpFW7gGXeoeeWJo6KDnmBs_rsUsAWLvs-3aTx9sKtiQ@mail.gmail.com>

Dave W and Alex M have done a good job of describing the early
conditions and activities surrounding the ARPANET deployment.

Ironically, Steve Crocker and I consulted with Jacobi Systems that did
bid on the project and ended up being among the top 4 bidders (I
think). We were lucky that we were also at UCLA where the Network
Measurement Center was to be established and got to work on ARPANET
despite losing the bid made by Jacobi!

I think the summary about the first 4 nodes is likely close to reality
although a more definitive answer might come from Larry Roberts who
ran the program at the time. Is he on this list?

v


On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 9:55 PM,  <dave.walden.family at gmail.com> wrote:
> My guess is that the first four sites were promised participation, or were required to participate, as part of ARPA's plan to have a network, before BBN was selected as the IMP contractor. ?Also the winner of the IMP contract might have been a west coast company which could have inexpensively connected to one of the first four IMPs (e.g., a company called something like Jacobi Systems might have won).
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On May 10, 2012, at 8:53 PM, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net> wrote:
>
>> Dave Walden wrote:
>>> BBN IMP was the fifth IMP on the network, in early 1970.
>>
>> You know, I've always wondered, how is it that one of the first four nodes wasn't at either BBN or MIT? ?How were the first four sites actually selected?
>>
>> Miles Fidelman
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>> In practice, there is. ? .... Yogi Berra
>>
>>
>



From vint at google.com  Fri May 11 01:34:14 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 04:34:14 -0400
Subject: [ih] "Subnet"
In-Reply-To: <A72EF3C4-3EA9-43F5-AD5C-8064D8BC3FFB@gmail.com>
References: <4FAC3E83.20504@cox.net>
	<4FAC4B26.9617.4C6F3AA@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A72EF3C4-3EA9-43F5-AD5C-8064D8BC3FFB@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggfg10tREt1CigAEz4qDN=QyZnJNqM74nd6wz9Owa5X28A@mail.gmail.com>

to add to confusion, there was a "port expander" hack that Jim Mathis
and I cooked up that could also be seen as a form of subnetting but I
think the simplest observation is that "subnet" in the ARPANET era
referred to the collection of IMPs forming the transport backbone
while MAP's "NET' included the hosts, etc. The term "subnet" in the
Internet era had to do with parsing of the IP address bits.

v


On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 7:51 PM,  <dave.walden.family at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On May 10, 2012, at 7:11 PM, "Bernie Cosell" <bernie at fantasyfarm.com> wrote:
>> Well, I don't think there was any 'subnet'ing with the ARPAnet
>
> Well, I vaguely remember there was in some other sense -- logical subnets, a seldom used, if ever, feature where the IMPs could let a subset of hosts only communicate with each other. ?Or, instead of a vague memory, do I have a wrong memory? ? ?(Of course this is irrelevant to the distinction previously being discussed.)
>>
>



From matthias at baerwolff.de  Fri May 11 02:33:44 2012
From: matthias at baerwolff.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Matthias_B=E4rwolff?=)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 11:33:44 +0200
Subject: [ih] "Subnet"
In-Reply-To: <A72EF3C4-3EA9-43F5-AD5C-8064D8BC3FFB@gmail.com>
References: <4FAC3E83.20504@cox.net>
	<4FAC4B26.9617.4C6F3AA@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A72EF3C4-3EA9-43F5-AD5C-8064D8BC3FFB@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CABy8LgEipxvGtpUUh0wJffo_-fgN_+Y4ytUEiWh_Esw_Y4Bm7w@mail.gmail.com>

2012/5/11  <dave.walden.family at gmail.com>:
>
> On May 10, 2012, at 7:11 PM, "Bernie Cosell" <bernie at fantasyfarm.com> wrote:
>> Well, I don't think there was any 'subnet'ing with the ARPAnet
>
> Well, I vaguely remember there was in some other sense -- logical subnets, a seldom used, if ever, feature where the IMPs could let a subset of hosts only communicate with each other. ?Or, instead of a vague memory, do I have a wrong memory? ? ?(Of course this is irrelevant to the distinction previously being discussed.)

Right memory. Logical subnetworks were introduced in 1974 (see BBN
reports 2852 and 2913; or CTRL-F in my 2010 thesis).

>>
>



From jeanjour at comcast.net  Fri May 11 05:45:30 2012
From: jeanjour at comcast.net (John Day)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 08:45:30 -0400
Subject: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fath =?iso-8859-h
In-Reply-To: <20120511031459.563B018C0B3@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120511031459.563B018C0B3@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <a0624080ccbd2b9cd40ee@[10.0.1.3]>

Yes, that is correct.  Burros built the machine and it was to be 
connect via B6700, which was a much more interesting machine than 
either Illiac IV or Tenex.

Yes, it was wonderfully ironic that the rationale for moving the 
machine from Illinois was fear of it doing classified research. 
However the building to house was not securable and that couldn't 
have happened.  So it went to Ames where it was securable and was 
used for classified work, which is why it was never connected.



At 23:14 -0400 2012/05/10, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>     > From: "Sytel" <sytel at shaw.ca>
>
>     > the attack on the office in Illinois. Will also be looking into the
>     > Iliac IV; would this have been connected to the ARPANET in any way?
>
>Yes, via a front-end PDP-10 running Tenex, but only after it moved to Ames in
>1972. See RFC-330, April 1972, "Network Host Status", where it shows up as
>host 0/15.
>
>It was listed in several issues of "Network Host Status" prior to that, but
>always as 'not conected yet'. The original plan was to apparently to connect
>via its B6500 front-end, but they switched it to be a PDP-10.
>
>(Oddly enough, it was originally listed as being host 0/13 in RFC 288 -
>perhaps this was a typo? That RFC also shows Case as being 0/13... IMP 13 was
>later the Gunter IMP.)
>
>	Noel



From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Fri May 11 07:52:21 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 10:52:21 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fath =?iso-8859-h
Message-ID: <20120511145221.B0D3318C0E7@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: John Day <jeanjour at comcast.net>

    > it was to be connect via B6700

6700 or 6500? Both Wikipedia (I know, I know, not a reliable source) and the
RFC's (e.g. 326,319) say 6500?

	Noel

PS: Sytel, if you really want a flavour of the early days, just read most of
the first couple of hundred RFC's. No, I'm not kidding - most of them are
only a page or so, little chatty notes or status updates, and you can fly
through them, and you really get a feel for what things were like.


From jeanjour at comcast.net  Fri May 11 07:59:26 2012
From: jeanjour at comcast.net (John Day)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 10:59:26 -0400
Subject: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fath =?iso-8859-h
In-Reply-To: <20120511145221.B0D3318C0E7@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120511145221.B0D3318C0E7@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <a06240813cbd2d8dccff0@[10.0.1.3]>

They were the same machine.  The early version was a 6500, the 
successor to the 5500.  Then Burros upgraded the hardware and 
produced and the machines were called the 5700 adn 6700, but I can't 
remember now what the upgrade was.

The machine we were debugging on was a 6500 serial #2.

I have this vague recollection that the difference was more marketing 
than engineering.  But won't swear to it.

At 10:52 -0400 2012/05/11, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>     > From: John Day <jeanjour at comcast.net>
>
>     > it was to be connect via B6700
>
>6700 or 6500? Both Wikipedia (I know, I know, not a reliable source) and the
>RFC's (e.g. 326,319) say 6500?
>
>	Noel
>
>PS: Sytel, if you really want a flavour of the early days, just read most of
>the first couple of hundred RFC's. No, I'm not kidding - most of them are
>only a page or so, little chatty notes or status updates, and you can fly
>through them, and you really get a feel for what things were like.



From vint at google.com  Fri May 11 08:39:36 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 11:39:36 -0400
Subject: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fath =?iso-8859-h
In-Reply-To: <a0624080ccbd2b9cd40ee@10.0.1.3>
References: <20120511031459.563B018C0B3@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
	<a0624080ccbd2b9cd40ee@10.0.1.3>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggdGFqur2n_HmSedcRVAPUxGP0RVpT16UT4OxWmzgsoxQw@mail.gmail.com>

I am sure you meant Burroughs but your typo is hilarious!

v


On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 8:45 AM, John Day <jeanjour at comcast.net> wrote:
> Yes, that is correct. ?Burros built the machine and it was to be connect via
> B6700, which was a much more interesting machine than either Illiac IV or
> Tenex.
>
> Yes, it was wonderfully ironic that the rationale for moving the machine
> from Illinois was fear of it doing classified research. However the building
> to house was not securable and that couldn't have happened. ?So it went to
> Ames where it was securable and was used for classified work, which is why
> it was never connected.
>
>
>
>
> At 23:14 -0400 2012/05/10, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>>
>> ? ?> From: "Sytel" <sytel at shaw.ca>
>>
>> ? ?> the attack on the office in Illinois. Will also be looking into the
>> ? ?> Iliac IV; would this have been connected to the ARPANET in any way?
>>
>> Yes, via a front-end PDP-10 running Tenex, but only after it moved to Ames
>> in
>> 1972. See RFC-330, April 1972, "Network Host Status", where it shows up as
>> host 0/15.
>>
>> It was listed in several issues of "Network Host Status" prior to that,
>> but
>> always as 'not conected yet'. The original plan was to apparently to
>> connect
>> via its B6500 front-end, but they switched it to be a PDP-10.
>>
>> (Oddly enough, it was originally listed as being host 0/13 in RFC 288 -
>> perhaps this was a typo? That RFC also shows Case as being 0/13... IMP 13
>> was
>> later the Gunter IMP.)
>>
>> ? ? ? ?Noel
>
>



From rogers at isi.edu  Fri May 11 09:29:34 2012
From: rogers at isi.edu (Craig Milo Rogers)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 09:29:34 -0700
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <1336699976.86973.YahooMailNeo@web160204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
	<1336699976.86973.YahooMailNeo@web160204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20120511162934.GA4605@isi.edu>

On 12.05.10, Alex McKenzie wrote:
> Every site connected to the early ARPAnet was the center of something.
> 
> IMP 1: UCLA was the place where Kleinrock worked - applying 
> queueing theory to data communications.? Because of this he had an ARPA 
> contract to operate the Network Measurement Center which used facilities built into the IMPs (packet tracing, periodic measurements of queue 
> lengths and waiting times, traffic statistics, traffic generators, etc) to run experiments with the performance/behavior of the "subnetwork".
> ? ? UCLA was also home of the Campus Computer Network and its IBM 360/91, funded in large part by ARPA.? This was the largest commercial number-cruncher planned to be connected to the network, and was therefore an important 
> number-crunching resource to be shared by the ARPA research community.

	UCLA was also the home of the Center for Computer-based Behavioral
Studies (CCBS), a research unit of the UCLA Psychology Department that was
essentially an SDC (Systems Development Corp. in Santa Monica) spinoff (SDC
was itself a RAND spinoff), funded by ARPA.  Initially located in the basement
of the Business School building, Bunche Hall, CCBS soon moved to a
purpose-built area on the third floor of Middle Franz Hall.  CCBS had the
first PDP-10 (KA10) system assembled with a full complement of 256K 36-bit
words of core memory.  This was bigger than the CTSS and ITS systems at MIT, a
bit smaller than the 384K 36-bit words on MULTICS, but only a quarter of the
main memory capacity of CCN's IBM 360/91.  CCBS was chartered to offer general
purpose timesharing services, interactive statistical analysis tools, and
realtime, online studies of collaboration and competition (wargaming, in
piecemeal), both in-house and to military and academic customers over the
ARPANET.

> IMP 3: UCSB had an IBM 360/75 which was used to run a time-sharing system, 
> which included special CRT terminals designed for the UCSB system (at 
> this time almost every ARPAnet site except UCSB and SRI used hard-copy 
> terminals).? The UCSB? 360/75 was a major resourch intended to be 
> shared.

	CCBS also built special CRT terminals, based on the Tektronix storage
tube technology, with light pens and other special features intended to
compete with the PLATO system.  I can't remember if they were fully
operational in 1970, but I'm pretty sure they were in use by 1971.  In a
sense, this was a continuation of the group's work at SDC, which had CRT
terminals (fed by a drum storage unit) (and with light pens for input) on the
IBM AN/FSQ-32 all-transistorized timesharing system (funded by initially by
SAC to replace the vacuum-tube AN/FSQ-7 computers, taken over by ARPA to study
timesharing), which I used in 1968.

	There was a dedicated computer-computer link between SDC and the TX-2
at MIT.  This was a significant pathfinder effort prior to the ARPAnet.  I saw
it in 1968, although I didn't get to poke at it.  Underlying this West Coast
activity was SAGE, the Semi-Automatic Ground Environment, a military defense
program, which was the true pioneer in developing timesharing, computer
communications, CRT-based interfaces and large-scale computing.

	You might ask, why wasn't SDC put on the ARPANET?  It is my
understanding that even after the group that became CCBS moved from SDC to
UCLA, it was intended to tie SDC into the ARPAnet fairly quickly.  However, a
dispute arose between SDC and the government; I recall being told that SDC
attempted to retroactively raise its overhead rates on its research contracts,
leading to a drastic reduction in SDC's ARPA funding and the cancellation of
SDC's ARPAnet connection.

					Craig Milo Rogers


From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Fri May 11 10:04:42 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (Dave Walden)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 13:04:42 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <20120511162934.GA4605@isi.edu>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
	<1336699976.86973.YahooMailNeo@web160204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<20120511162934.GA4605@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <4fad45b5.c22ce00a.6875.5097@mx.google.com>

I think SDC was on the ARPANET, host number 10??
Ari Shoshonan or something like that is a name that comes to mind.

In response to another question yesterday -- about women in the early 
days of the ARPANET: Peggy Karp was involved very early as was Nancy 
Neigus pretty early, and Jake (Elizabeth) Feinler at SRI had early 
and long involvement.  There are others.


At 12:29 PM 5/11/2012, Craig Milo Rogers wrote:
>On 12.05.10, Alex McKenzie wrote:
> > Every site connected to the early ARPAnet was the center of something.
> >
> > IMP 1: UCLA was the place where Kleinrock worked - applying
> > queueing theory to data communications.  Because of this he had an ARPA
> > contract to operate the Network Measurement Center which used 
> facilities built into the IMPs (packet tracing, periodic measurements of queue
> > lengths and waiting times, traffic statistics, traffic 
> generators, etc) to run experiments with the performance/behavior 
> of the "subnetwork".
> >     UCLA was also home of the Campus Computer Network and its IBM 
> 360/91, funded in large part by ARPA.  This was the largest 
> commercial number-cruncher planned to be connected to the network, 
> and was therefore an important
> > number-crunching resource to be shared by the ARPA research community.
>
>         UCLA was also the home of the Center for Computer-based Behavioral
>Studies (CCBS), a research unit of the UCLA Psychology Department that was
>essentially an SDC (Systems Development Corp. in Santa Monica) spinoff (SDC
>was itself a RAND spinoff), funded by ARPA.  Initially located in the basement
>of the Business School building, Bunche Hall, CCBS soon moved to a
>purpose-built area on the third floor of Middle Franz Hall.  CCBS had the
>first PDP-10 (KA10) system assembled with a full complement of 256K 36-bit
>words of core memory.  This was bigger than the CTSS and ITS systems at MIT, a
>bit smaller than the 384K 36-bit words on MULTICS, but only a quarter of the
>main memory capacity of CCN's IBM 360/91.  CCBS was chartered to offer general
>purpose timesharing services, interactive statistical analysis tools, and
>realtime, online studies of collaboration and competition (wargaming, in
>piecemeal), both in-house and to military and academic customers over the
>ARPANET.
>
> > IMP 3: UCSB had an IBM 360/75 which was used to run a time-sharing system,
> > which included special CRT terminals designed for the UCSB system (at
> > this time almost every ARPAnet site except UCSB and SRI used hard-copy
> > terminals).  The UCSB  360/75 was a major resourch intended to be
> > shared.
>
>         CCBS also built special CRT terminals, based on the Tektronix storage
>tube technology, with light pens and other special features intended to
>compete with the PLATO system.  I can't remember if they were fully
>operational in 1970, but I'm pretty sure they were in use by 1971.  In a
>sense, this was a continuation of the group's work at SDC, which had CRT
>terminals (fed by a drum storage unit) (and with light pens for input) on the
>IBM AN/FSQ-32 all-transistorized timesharing system (funded by initially by
>SAC to replace the vacuum-tube AN/FSQ-7 computers, taken over by ARPA to study
>timesharing), which I used in 1968.
>
>         There was a dedicated computer-computer link between SDC and the TX-2
>at MIT.  This was a significant pathfinder effort prior to the ARPAnet.  I saw
>it in 1968, although I didn't get to poke at it.  Underlying this West Coast
>activity was SAGE, the Semi-Automatic Ground Environment, a military defense
>program, which was the true pioneer in developing timesharing, computer
>communications, CRT-based interfaces and large-scale computing.
>
>         You might ask, why wasn't SDC put on the ARPANET?  It is my
>understanding that even after the group that became CCBS moved from SDC to
>UCLA, it was intended to tie SDC into the ARPAnet fairly quickly.  However, a
>dispute arose between SDC and the government; I recall being told that SDC
>attempted to retroactively raise its overhead rates on its research contracts,
>leading to a drastic reduction in SDC's ARPA funding and the cancellation of
>SDC's ARPAnet connection.
>
>                                         Craig Milo Rogers


--
home address: 12 Linden Rd., E. Sandwich, MA 02537
home ph=508-888-7655; cell ph = 503-757-3137
email address:  dave at walden-family.com; website: 
<http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/>http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/  



From jeanjour at comcast.net  Fri May 11 11:07:46 2012
From: jeanjour at comcast.net (John Day)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 14:07:46 -0400
Subject: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fath =?iso-8859-h
In-Reply-To: <CAHxHggdGFqur2n_HmSedcRVAPUxGP0RVpT16UT4OxWmzgsoxQw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20120511031459.563B018C0B3@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
	<a0624080ccbd2b9cd40ee@10.0.1.3>
	<CAHxHggdGFqur2n_HmSedcRVAPUxGP0RVpT16UT4OxWmzgsoxQw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <a06240818cbd3051f62bb@[10.0.1.3]>

Yes, but for those of us who spent many years interacting with the 
company, it was no typo!  We always spelled it that way as did many 
of the employees.

Talk about a company that was 20 years ahead of everyone else and 
didn't know how to sell it!  Good grief.


At 11:39 -0400 2012/05/11, Vint Cerf wrote:
>I am sure you meant Burroughs but your typo is hilarious!
>
>v
>
>
>On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 8:45 AM, John Day <jeanjour at comcast.net> wrote:
>>  Yes, that is correct.  Burros built the machine and it was to be connect via
>>  B6700, which was a much more interesting machine than either Illiac IV or
>>  Tenex.
>>
>>  Yes, it was wonderfully ironic that the rationale for moving the machine
>>  from Illinois was fear of it doing classified research. However the building
>>  to house was not securable and that couldn't have happened.  So it went to
>>  Ames where it was securable and was used for classified work, which is why
>>  it was never connected.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  At 23:14 -0400 2012/05/10, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>>>
>>>     > From: "Sytel" <sytel at shaw.ca>
>>>
>>>     > the attack on the office in Illinois. Will also be looking into the
>>>     > Iliac IV; would this have been connected to the ARPANET in any way?
>>>
>>>  Yes, via a front-end PDP-10 running Tenex, but only after it moved to Ames
>>>  in
>>>  1972. See RFC-330, April 1972, "Network Host Status", where it shows up as
>>>  host 0/15.
>>>
>>>  It was listed in several issues of "Network Host Status" prior to that,
>>>  but
>>>  always as 'not conected yet'. The original plan was to apparently to
>>>  connect
>>>  via its B6500 front-end, but they switched it to be a PDP-10.
>>>
>>>  (Oddly enough, it was originally listed as being host 0/13 in RFC 288 -
>>>  perhaps this was a typo? That RFC also shows Case as being 0/13... IMP 13
>>>  was
>>>  later the Gunter IMP.)
>>>
>>>         Noel
>>
>>



From rogers at isi.edu  Fri May 11 11:26:03 2012
From: rogers at isi.edu (Craig Milo Rogers)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 11:26:03 -0700
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <4fad45b5.c22ce00a.6875.5097@mx.google.com>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
	<1336699976.86973.YahooMailNeo@web160204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<20120511162934.GA4605@isi.edu>
	<4fad45b5.c22ce00a.6875.5097@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <20120511182603.GB4605@isi.edu>

>>         You might ask, why wasn't SDC put on the ARPANET?  It is my
>> understanding that even after the group that became CCBS moved from SDC to
>> UCLA, it was intended to tie SDC into the ARPAnet fairly quickly.  However, a
>> dispute arose between SDC and the government; I recall being told that SDC
>> attempted to retroactively raise its overhead rates on its research contracts,
>> leading to a drastic reduction in SDC's ARPA funding and the cancellation of
>> SDC's ARPAnet connection.

> I think SDC was on the ARPANET, host number 10??

	I believe you're right.  SDC was on earlier than I remembered; they
show up on the 1970 ARPANET map.  They dropped off the map, so to speak,
around 1977.  For the purposes of the historical research that led to this
discussion thread, SDC's participation is very pertinent.  I apologize
for misspeaking.

http://som.csudh.edu/cis/lpress/history/arpamaps/

> Ari Shoshonan or something like that is a name that comes to mind.

	That would be Arie Shoshani, I believe.  He might provide additional
insights on the early LA-area ARPANET culture.

http://crd.lbl.gov/about/staff/cds/scientific-data-management-sdm/arie-shoshani/

	I think (but am not certain) that my source of information on SDC in
the mid- to late-70's was Billy Brackenridge.

					Craig Milo Rogers


From randy at psg.com  Fri May 11 11:34:54 2012
From: randy at psg.com (Randy Bush)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 08:34:54 -1000
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <20120511162934.GA4605@isi.edu>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
	<1336699976.86973.YahooMailNeo@web160204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<20120511162934.GA4605@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <m2boluo9bl.wl%randy@psg.com>

ucla had two /91s, the second being carol newton's in biomath, which i
used.  but i do not remember that it was connected, other than
bisync/rjs to city of hope and other LA area institutions in the late
'60s.

randy


From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Fri May 11 11:49:46 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 11:49:46 -0700
Subject: [ih]
 =?utf-8?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fathers_of_?=
 =?utf-8?b?dGhlIEludGVybmV04oCmLi4=?=
In-Reply-To: <C1465EFF-C402-434F-A8DB-EEE3DA9C3723@gmail.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<C1465EFF-C402-434F-A8DB-EEE3DA9C3723@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FAD5F4A.80809@dcrocker.net>


On 5/10/2012 2:07 PM, dave.walden.family at gmail.com wrote:
> We, BBN, certainly did a lot of design for the IMP system, taking
> off from the fairly undetailed spec that came in the Request for
> Quotation. I would say we contributed to the larger ARPANET design
> along with the people at ARPA, Network Analysis Corporation, the Host
> computer sites, the Network Working Group, the UCLA Network
> Measurement Center, the SRI Network Information Center, etc.


I'd guess that the categories of interesting innovation for the arpanet 
were:

    1. Basic packet-switching constructs

    2. Design of a packet-switching service -- the IMPs

    3. Design of service management capabilities

    4. Design of the standardized interface (and eventually plural)

    5. Design of the transport mechanisms (host to host, initial
    connection, and the like.)

    6. Design of application services.

I thought BBN was primary and maybe exclusive for #2 and #3.

I don't know the history of the interface spec, but have the vague 
impression that BBN did that, too.

Of course, #5 and #6 were highly collaborative across the community. 
Assignment of credit goes to different people for different parts.

d/
--
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net



From jeanjour at comcast.net  Fri May 11 12:47:43 2012
From: jeanjour at comcast.net (John Day)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 15:47:43 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <m2boluo9bl.wl%randy@psg.com>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
	<1336699976.86973.YahooMailNeo@web160204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<20120511162934.GA4605@isi.edu> <m2boluo9bl.wl%randy@psg.com>
Message-ID: <a0624081ecbd31cfdf44a@[10.0.1.3]>

No, just the one.  Braden was the contact person.  We were doing a 
lot of RJE to it.

We were all amazed that it had 2MB of memory and thought it 
scandalous that the OS took up half of it.  ;-)

At 8:34 -1000 2012/05/11, Randy Bush wrote:
>ucla had two /91s, the second being carol newton's in biomath, which i
>used.  but i do not remember that it was connected, other than
>bisync/rjs to city of hope and other LA area institutions in the late
>'60s.
>
>randy



From vint at google.com  Fri May 11 13:05:58 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 16:05:58 -0400
Subject: [ih]
	=?windows-1252?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_fath?=
	=?windows-1252?q?ers_of_the_Internet=85=2E=2E?=
In-Reply-To: <4FAD5F4A.80809@dcrocker.net>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<C1465EFF-C402-434F-A8DB-EEE3DA9C3723@gmail.com>
	<4FAD5F4A.80809@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggdke-3=sk9gL2VtqacjxxquDL2e7iF4F8iKsXuV8oLuQg@mail.gmail.com>

Bob kahn wrote bbn1822. Host/imp interface.
On May 11, 2012 3:09 PM, "Dave Crocker" <dhc2 at dcrocker.net> wrote:

>
> On 5/10/2012 2:07 PM, dave.walden.family at gmail.com wrote:
>
>> We, BBN, certainly did a lot of design for the IMP system, taking
>> off from the fairly undetailed spec that came in the Request for
>> Quotation. I would say we contributed to the larger ARPANET design
>> along with the people at ARPA, Network Analysis Corporation, the Host
>> computer sites, the Network Working Group, the UCLA Network
>> Measurement Center, the SRI Network Information Center, etc.
>>
>
>
> I'd guess that the categories of interesting innovation for the arpanet
> were:
>
>   1. Basic packet-switching constructs
>
>   2. Design of a packet-switching service -- the IMPs
>
>   3. Design of service management capabilities
>
>   4. Design of the standardized interface (and eventually plural)
>
>   5. Design of the transport mechanisms (host to host, initial
>   connection, and the like.)
>
>   6. Design of application services.
>
> I thought BBN was primary and maybe exclusive for #2 and #3.
>
> I don't know the history of the interface spec, but have the vague
> impression that BBN did that, too.
>
> Of course, #5 and #6 were highly collaborative across the community.
> Assignment of credit goes to different people for different parts.
>
> d/
> --
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120511/8e5b5065/attachment.htm>

From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Fri May 11 13:29:50 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (Dave Walden)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 16:29:50 -0400
Subject: [ih]
 =?iso-8859-1?q?Hesitating_to_disagree_with_one_of_the_father?=
 =?iso-8859-1?q?s_of__the_Internet=2E=2E?=
In-Reply-To: <4FAD5F4A.80809@dcrocker.net>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<C1465EFF-C402-434F-A8DB-EEE3DA9C3723@gmail.com>
	<4FAD5F4A.80809@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <4fad7599.c8bde00a.05c1.ffff8d83@mx.google.com>

At 02:49 PM 5/11/2012, Dave Crocker wrote:
    4. Design of the standardized interface (and eventually plural)
>I don't know the history of the interface spec, but have the vague 
>impression that BBN did that, too.

>Assuming Dave is talking about the 1822 interface, BBN spec'd 
>that.  The original spec was for the host to be located more or less 
>next to the IMP (short electrical connection).  This was how the 
>original 4 site prototype network was envision, and we were able to 
>get that done in the nine months before the UCLA IMP  was delivered. 
>But it needed extending very shortly immediately to allow for a host 
>to be father away (up to 1,000 feet ?? -- can't remember).  The 
>latter was his called the "distant host" interface spec and was 
>still all about electricity.  That lasted a while longer before we 
>had to allow hosts to connect to IMPs when the hosts were a 
>communications circuit away from the IMP; this was called the Very 
>Distant Host spec and it was implemented shortly after September 
>1971.  Success (not just mistakes, as in the destination IMP storage 
>lockup mentioned yesterrday) drove a lot of changes.


--
home address: 12 Linden Rd., E. Sandwich, MA 02537
home ph=508-888-7655; cell ph = 503-757-3137
email address:  dave at walden-family.com; website: 
<http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/>http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/  



From rogers at isi.edu  Fri May 11 13:37:54 2012
From: rogers at isi.edu (Craig Milo Rogers)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 13:37:54 -0700
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <a0624081ecbd31cfdf44a@[10.0.1.3]>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
	<1336699976.86973.YahooMailNeo@web160204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<20120511162934.GA4605@isi.edu> <m2boluo9bl.wl%randy@psg.com>
	<a0624081ecbd31cfdf44a@[10.0.1.3]>
Message-ID: <20120511203754.GE4605@isi.edu>

On 12.05.11, John Day wrote:
> No, just the one.  Braden was the contact person.  We were doing a lot of 
> RJE to it.
>
> We were all amazed that it had 2MB of memory and thought it scandalous that 
> the OS took up half of it.  ;-)

	4MB, at least by 1971.  Perhaps it had less when first installed?

http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc0090

	Note that CCN ran up to 4 different timesharing systems simultaneously
as well as 2 or 3 different batch processors, all running under MVT.  Perhaps
it is not surprising that so much memory was pinned.

					Craig Milo Rogers


From amckenzie3 at yahoo.com  Fri May 11 14:55:04 2012
From: amckenzie3 at yahoo.com (Alex McKenzie)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 14:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Bill,

I know MAP was perpetually annoyed by BBN and always felt BBN claimed to have invented everything.? I was at BBN the entire time and I always felt most of Mike's criticism was unjustified.? BBN wrote a lot of papers, with ARPAs strong encouragement, about what we did do, and BBN did a lot.? We didn't write about what others did- that was up to them.? So if others didn't write so much, the written history got kind of BBN-centric.

One notable exception:? Ray Tomlinson was credited by a lot of non-BBN people with "inventing email" and Mike was justifiably upset every time he heard that claim.? Mike seems to have blamed BBN for making that claim.? However, I think you can look as carefully as you want at BBN publications and you will not find that claim made by BBN.

Sincerely,
Alex




________________________________
 From: Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com>
To: David Elliott Bell <bell1945 at offthisweek.com> 
Cc: "internet-history at postel.org" <internet-history at postel.org> 
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:59 PM
Subject: Re: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fathers of the Internet?..
 

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:34 PM, David Elliott Bell <bell1945 at offthisweek.com> wrote:

the need for layers (3 will do if you know what you're going; if you don't, 11 won't help you); 

Correction, it is canonically '17 won't help you' .?
The ironic allusion to the hol(e)y 7 of the Other?Reference?Model ("ISORM") makes this MAPhorism much funnier than mere?exaggeration.

a world view about which layers and the rigidity required to enforce layers; proposing alternate protocols for achieving a desired goal; things like that are part of design-ARPANET.
Mike having come to protocol design and programming via poetry rather than prosaic electrical engineering, yes, he viewed layering as the design, as the essense. The fact that both the IMPs and NCP have been retired but the network that ?(D)ARPA wrought lives on as "the Internet", over a hybrid hodgepodge of physical subnets, militates that his logical view of The Net has won out over the physical, just as the pragmatic, good-enough ARM has won out of the overly baroque OSI ISORM .

However ...

The Popular History of the Net has largely been told from the BBN POV. As an editorial/authorial decision, this is understandably so, much though it may annoy those who worked on upper layers. Having a for-profit's PR office on the case doesn't hurt, but that is not solely responsible. It's easier to follow BBN'S ?IMP/TIP narrative than a narrative spread over several campuses and multiple OS's no one uses anymore, and far easier to explain challenges of hardware than challenges of software to a general audience. I have corroboration on that bald assertion -- Tracey Kidder interviewed the DG 'Eagle' operating system team manager while researching 'Soul of the New Machine', and couldn't figure out how to explain it, so went back to focusing on hardware and microcode teams. Networking may be easier to make metaphor than an OS, but not compared to modems.

[I worked for said DG manager at his next gig, and volunteered with a 'microkid' a few years later. The microkid taught me to drink cognac at ACM committee meetings; Mike's whisky lessons cured me of that quickly.]?

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120511/8d4e13d9/attachment.htm>

From vint at google.com  Fri May 11 15:41:11 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 18:41:11 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>

I thought it was reasonable to assert that Ray Tomlinson invented
networked email, Alex - do you see it differently?

vint



On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Alex McKenzie <amckenzie3 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Bill,
>
> I know MAP was perpetually annoyed by BBN and always felt BBN claimed to
> have invented everything.? I was at BBN the entire time and I always felt
> most of Mike's criticism was unjustified.? BBN wrote a lot of papers, with
> ARPAs strong encouragement, about what we did do, and BBN did a lot.? We
> didn't write about what others did- that was up to them.? So if others
> didn't write so much, the written history got kind of BBN-centric.
>
> One notable exception:? Ray Tomlinson was credited by a lot of non-BBN
> people with "inventing email" and Mike was justifiably upset every time he
> heard that claim.? Mike seems to have blamed BBN for making that claim.
> However, I think you can look as carefully as you want at BBN publications
> and you will not find that claim made by BBN.
>
> Sincerely,
> Alex
>
> ________________________________
> From: Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com>
> To: David Elliott Bell <bell1945 at offthisweek.com>
> Cc: "internet-history at postel.org" <internet-history at postel.org>
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:59 PM
> Subject: Re: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fathers of the
> Internet?..
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:34 PM, David Elliott Bell
> <bell1945 at offthisweek.com> wrote:
>
> the need for layers (3 will do if you know what you're going; if you don't,
> 11 won't help you);
>
>
> Correction, it is canonically '17 won't help you' .
> The ironic allusion to the hol(e)y 7 of the Other?Reference?Model ("ISORM")
> makes this MAPhorism much funnier than mere?exaggeration.
>
> a world view about which layers and the rigidity required to enforce layers;
> proposing alternate protocols for achieving a desired goal; things like that
> are part of design-ARPANET.
>
>
> Mike having come to protocol design and programming via poetry rather than
> prosaic electrical engineering, yes, he viewed layering as the design, as
> the essense. The fact that both the IMPs and NCP have been retired but the
> network that ?(D)ARPA wrought lives on as "the Internet", over a hybrid
> hodgepodge of physical subnets, militates that his logical view of The Net
> has won out over the physical, just as the pragmatic, good-enough ARM has
> won out of the overly baroque OSI ISORM .
>
> However ...
>
> The Popular History of the Net has largely been told from the BBN POV. As an
> editorial/authorial decision, this is understandably so, much though it may
> annoy those who worked on upper layers. Having a for-profit's PR office on
> the case doesn't hurt, but that is not solely responsible. It's easier to
> follow BBN'S ?IMP/TIP narrative than a narrative spread over several
> campuses and multiple OS's no one uses anymore, and far easier to explain
> challenges of hardware than challenges of software to a general audience. I
> have corroboration on that bald assertion -- Tracey Kidder interviewed the
> DG 'Eagle' operating system team manager while researching 'Soul of the New
> Machine', and couldn't figure out how to explain it, so went back to
> focusing on hardware and microcode teams. Networking may be easier to make
> metaphor than an OS, but not compared to modems.
>
> [I worked for said DG manager at his next gig, and volunteered with a
> 'microkid' a few years later. The microkid taught me to drink cognac at ACM
> committee meetings; Mike's whisky lessons cured me of that quickly.]
>
> --
> Bill
> @n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
>
>



From vint at google.com  Fri May 11 15:46:02 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 18:46:02 -0400
Subject: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fathers of the
	Internet..
In-Reply-To: <4fad7599.c8bde00a.05c1.ffff8d83@mx.google.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<C1465EFF-C402-434F-A8DB-EEE3DA9C3723@gmail.com>
	<4FAD5F4A.80809@dcrocker.net>
	<4fad7599.c8bde00a.05c1.ffff8d83@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggesq1V0DdD74S64Gyhn+YRctCDo5hF_HjgpXDJmX42vow@mail.gmail.com>

i used the VDH on a PDP-11/40 (or 45??) at Stanford University.

v


On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Dave Walden
<dave.walden.family at gmail.com> wrote:
> At 02:49 PM 5/11/2012, Dave Crocker wrote:
> ? 4. Design of the standardized interface (and eventually plural)
>>
>> I don't know the history of the interface spec, but have the vague
>> impression that BBN did that, too.
>
>
>> Assuming Dave is talking about the 1822 interface, BBN spec'd that. ?The
>> original spec was for the host to be located more or less next to the IMP
>> (short electrical connection). ?This was how the original 4 site prototype
>> network was envision, and we were able to get that done in the nine months
>> before the UCLA IMP ?was delivered. But it needed extending very shortly
>> immediately to allow for a host to be father away (up to 1,000 feet ?? --
>> can't remember). ?The latter was his called the "distant host" interface
>> spec and was still all about electricity. ?That lasted a while longer before
>> we had to allow hosts to connect to IMPs when the hosts were a
>> communications circuit away from the IMP; this was called the Very Distant
>> Host spec and it was implemented shortly after September 1971. ?Success (not
>> just mistakes, as in the destination IMP storage lockup mentioned
>> yesterrday) drove a lot of changes.
>
>
>
> --
> home address: 12 Linden Rd., E. Sandwich, MA 02537
> home ph=508-888-7655; cell ph = 503-757-3137
> email address: ?dave at walden-family.com; website:
> <http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/>http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/



From bill.n1vux at gmail.com  Fri May 11 16:40:37 2012
From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 19:40:37 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CAAbKA3WHfSNj3jwGxmiOKe0w59wwb6RhtgG3NDxVzu975aRRZg@mail.gmail.com>

Alex,

BN wrote a lot of papers, with ARPAs strong

encouragement, about what we did do, and BBN did a lot.  We didn't write
> about what others did- that was up to them.  So if others didn't write so
> much, the written history got kind of BBN-centric.


True enough. Budget and rewards at other institutions were different, so
different priorities.  The RFC archives encode the history of the NWG, but
do not read like a history. The net result (pardon the pun) is that the
accessible history is largely of BBN's and Kleinrock's contributions.  This
list and postel.org exist for the whole community to get the rest of the
history recorded before it's too late.

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120511/23445d8c/attachment.htm>

From amckenzie3 at yahoo.com  Fri May 11 17:05:39 2012
From: amckenzie3 at yahoo.com (Alex McKenzie)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 17:05:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1336781139.29353.YahooMailNeo@web160201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Ray is generally acknowledged to have been the first person to 
build/adapt and demonstrate programs to transfer messages from one 
computer to another via the ARPAnet, and to use the symbol "@" to denote the specific computer where the intended recipient had an account.? But the transfer of messages from one computer user to another within a 
single computer was many years older, and this was email too, as MAP 
correctly pointed out. A recent article in the IEEE Annals of the History of Computing talks about several of the earlier single-computer message systems.



________________________________
 From: Vint Cerf <vint at google.com>
To: Alex McKenzie <amckenzie3 at yahoo.com> 
Cc: Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com>; "internet-history at postel.org" <internet-history at postel.org> 
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 6:41 PM
Subject: Re: [ih] MAP & BBN
 
I thought it was reasonable to assert that Ray Tomlinson invented
networked email, Alex - do you see it differently?

vint



On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Alex McKenzie <amckenzie3 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Bill,
>
> I know MAP was perpetually annoyed by BBN and always felt BBN claimed to
> have invented everything.? I was at BBN the entire time and I always felt
> most of Mike's criticism was unjustified.? BBN wrote a lot of papers, with
> ARPAs strong encouragement, about what we did do, and BBN did a lot.? We
> didn't write about what others did- that was up to them.? So if others
> didn't write so much, the written history got kind of BBN-centric.
>
> One notable exception:? Ray Tomlinson was credited by a lot of non-BBN
> people with "inventing email" and Mike was justifiably upset every time he
> heard that claim.? Mike seems to have blamed BBN for making that claim.
> However, I think you can look as carefully as you want at BBN publications
> and you will not find that claim made by BBN.
>
> Sincerely,
> Alex
>
> ________________________________
> From: Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com>
> To: David Elliott Bell <bell1945 at offthisweek.com>
> Cc: "internet-history at postel.org" <internet-history at postel.org>
> Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:59 PM
> Subject: Re: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fathers of the
> Internet?..
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:34 PM, David Elliott Bell
> <bell1945 at offthisweek.com> wrote:
>
> the need for layers (3 will do if you know what you're going; if you don't,
> 11 won't help you);
>
>
> Correction, it is canonically '17 won't help you' .
> The ironic allusion to the hol(e)y 7 of the Other?Reference?Model ("ISORM")
> makes this MAPhorism much funnier than mere?exaggeration.
>
> a world view about which layers and the rigidity required to enforce layers;
> proposing alternate protocols for achieving a desired goal; things like that
> are part of design-ARPANET.
>
>
> Mike having come to protocol design and programming via poetry rather than
> prosaic electrical engineering, yes, he viewed layering as the design, as
> the essense. The fact that both the IMPs and NCP have been retired but the
> network that ?(D)ARPA wrought lives on as "the Internet", over a hybrid
> hodgepodge of physical subnets, militates that his logical view of The Net
> has won out over the physical, just as the pragmatic, good-enough ARM has
> won out of the overly baroque OSI ISORM .
>
> However ...
>
> The Popular History of the Net has largely been told from the BBN POV. As an
> editorial/authorial decision, this is understandably so, much though it may
> annoy those who worked on upper layers. Having a for-profit's PR office on
> the case doesn't hurt, but that is not solely responsible. It's easier to
> follow BBN'S ?IMP/TIP narrative than a narrative spread over several
> campuses and multiple OS's no one uses anymore, and far easier to explain
> challenges of hardware than challenges of software to a general audience. I
> have corroboration on that bald assertion -- Tracey Kidder interviewed the
> DG 'Eagle' operating system team manager while researching 'Soul of the New
> Machine', and couldn't figure out how to explain it, so went back to
> focusing on hardware and microcode teams. Networking may be easier to make
> metaphor than an OS, but not compared to modems.
>
> [I worked for said DG manager at his next gig, and volunteered with a
> 'microkid' a few years later. The microkid taught me to drink cognac at ACM
> committee meetings; Mike's whisky lessons cured me of that quickly.]
>
> --
> Bill
> @n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120511/5bf49f91/attachment.htm>

From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Fri May 11 17:12:41 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 17:12:41 -0700
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <m2boluo9bl.wl%randy@psg.com>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
	<1336699976.86973.YahooMailNeo@web160204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<20120511162934.GA4605@isi.edu> <m2boluo9bl.wl%randy@psg.com>
Message-ID: <4FADAAF9.607@dcrocker.net>

On 5/11/2012 11:34 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
 > ucla had two /91s, the second being carol newton's in biomath, which i
 > used.  but i do not remember that it was connected, other than
 > bisync/rjs to city of hope and other LA area institutions in the late
 > '60s.


It wasn't, at least through the mid-70s.  I was an operator on that 
machine until I started at the UCLA Arpanet project.

The Health Sciences 360/91 had less memory but better-trained staff than 
the main campus computer.  As I understood it then, it was the 
pre-eminent NIH-funded machine in the nation.

d/
--
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


d/


From jeanjour at comcast.net  Fri May 11 17:12:37 2012
From: jeanjour at comcast.net (John Day)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 20:12:37 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <a06240802cbd35ad72a5a@[10.0.1.3]>

;-)  I am afraid that Alex is right!  ;-)  I 
mentioned Ritual for Catharsis #1 in an earlier 
message.

All about the Big Bad Neighbor who delivered coal one lump at a time.

Gee, I wonder what *that* referred to!?  ;-)

If you don't have a copy, you should!


At 14:55 -0700 2012/05/11, Alex McKenzie wrote:
>Bill,
>
>I know MAP was perpetually annoyed by BBN and 
>always felt BBN claimed to have invented 
>everything.  I was at BBN the entire time and I 
>always felt most of Mike's criticism was 
>unjustified.  BBN wrote a lot of papers, with 
>ARPAs strong encouragement, about what we did 
>do, and BBN did a lot.  We didn't write about 
>what others did- that was up to them.  So if 
>others didn't write so much, the written history 
>got kind of BBN-centric.
>
>One notable exception:  Ray Tomlinson was 
>credited by a lot of non-BBN people with 
>"inventing email" and Mike was justifiably upset 
>every time he heard that claim.  Mike seems to 
>have blamed BBN for making that claim.  However, 
>I think you can look as carefully as you want at 
>BBN publications and you will not find that 
>claim made by BBN.
>
>Sincerely,
>Alex
>
>
>
>From: Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com>
>To: David Elliott Bell <bell1945 at offthisweek.com>
>Cc: "internet-history at postel.org" <internet-history at postel.org>
>Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:59 PM
>Subject: Re: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with 
>one of the fathers of the Internet?..
>
>
>On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:34 PM, David Elliott 
>Bell 
><<mailto:bell1945 at offthisweek.com>bell1945 at offthisweek.com> 
>wrote:
>
>the need for layers (3 will do if you know what 
>you're going; if you don't, 11 won't help you);
>
>
>Correction, it is canonically '17 won't help you' .
>The ironic allusion to the hol(e)y 7 of the 
>Other Reference Model ("ISORM") makes this 
>MAPhorism much funnier than mere exaggeration.
>
>a world view about which layers and the rigidity 
>required to enforce layers; proposing alternate 
>protocols for achieving a desired goal; things 
>like that are part of design-ARPANET.
>
>
>Mike having come to protocol design and 
>programming via poetry rather than prosaic 
>electrical engineering, yes, he viewed layering 
>as the design, as the essense. The fact that 
>both the IMPs and NCP have been retired but the 
>network that  (D)ARPA wrought lives on as "the 
>Internet", over a hybrid hodgepodge of physical 
>subnets, militates that his logical view of The 
>Net has won out over the physical, just as the 
>pragmatic, good-enough ARM has won out of the 
>overly baroque OSI ISORM .
>
>However ...
>
>The Popular History of the Net has largely been 
>told from the BBN POV. As an editorial/authorial 
>decision, this is understandably so, much though 
>it may annoy those who worked on upper layers. 
>Having a for-profit's PR office on the case 
>doesn't hurt, but that is not solely 
>responsible. It's easier to follow BBN'S 
> IMP/TIP narrative than a narrative spread over 
>several campuses and multiple OS's no one uses 
>anymore, and far easier to explain challenges of 
>hardware than challenges of software to a 
>general audience. I have corroboration on that 
>bald assertion -- Tracey Kidder interviewed the 
>DG 'Eagle' operating system team manager while 
>researching 'Soul of the New Machine', and 
>couldn't figure out how to explain it, so went 
>back to focusing on hardware and microcode 
>teams. Networking may be easier to make metaphor 
>than an OS, but not compared to modems.
>
>[I worked for said DG manager at his next gig, 
>and volunteered with a 'microkid' a few years 
>later. The microkid taught me to drink cognac at 
>ACM committee meetings; Mike's whisky lessons 
>cured me of that quickly.] 
>
>
>--
>Bill
>@n1vux <mailto:bill.n1vux at gmail.com>bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120511/ffba431a/attachment.htm>

From lpress at csudh.edu  Fri May 11 17:41:44 2012
From: lpress at csudh.edu (Larry Press)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 17:41:44 -0700
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <20120511162934.GA4605@isi.edu>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
	<1336699976.86973.YahooMailNeo@web160204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>,
	<20120511162934.GA4605@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <6A424DE0AE59154CBAD11F78618CD7690110B7EE08C8@DHX7MBX.campus.csudh.edu>

>   CCBS

Was that Jerry Shure?

>  Initially located in the basement of the Business School building, Bunche Hall

A nit, but I think Bunche Hall -- "the waffle" -- was social science.  Business was in the building to the east of that, which also housed the Western Data Processing Center.

Larry


From bill.n1vux at gmail.com  Fri May 11 17:58:21 2012
From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 20:58:21 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAbKA3X7fHr3NV=qSdne+Jb8=UGqR5-W6_nc8heTkpm79wmukw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Vint Cerf <vint at google.com> wrote:

> I thought it was reasonable to assert that Ray Tomlinson invented
> networked email, Alex - do you see it differently?
>

Depends what you mean by 'Networked' and 'Invented' !

As an aside, I am surprised that no one has staked a prior claim for IBM
360's, but perhaps either the prevalence of ad hoc virtual reader / virtual
punch "mail" didn't immediately appear with CP68, or they weren't
sufficiently connected early enough?

If Email is the iconic '@', that is Tomlinson's, uncontested it seems. He
claimed the @ sign for it, elegantly mnemonic, an inspired choice.  (But to
the great frustration of all those whose LINEKILL it was !)  His
SNDMSG donated the ubiquitous @ copula to posterity, so SNDMSG is rightly
historic.

Tomlinson apparently indeed implemented inter-machine over-ARPA-net e-mail
first (even though it was within a single building) . But it was still
vendor specific (TENEX only), it was not usable by ARPANET hosts of other
brands.

However, the need for a general all-ARPANET vendor-neutral netmail was
conceived first, and was implemented shortly after.

If one omits multi-host, Tom van Vleck and Noel Morris on CTSS have
precedence on email over all, it seems.

If invention is an act of intellect separate from construction, van Vleck,
Licklider and R. W. Watson claim precedence for conception of
interoperable, networked email.

SNDMSG was first in in the limited sense as first inter-host over ARPANET
mail delivery reported as implemented and tested.  It was no doubt a
valuable proof of concept, and SNDMSG acquired an instance of  the netmail
protocols soon enough (as did the older Multics mail command).  But it did
not blossom into netmail on its own.

Internet email is not vendor partitioned today, and ARPANET mail was not so
envisioned when hypothesized in 1968/1969. Netmail is the ancestor of
vendor-neutral email as we know it today.

Mike regularly referred to  e-mail as "or what we called netmail when we
were inventing it", the plural pronoun recognizing the multiple
contributions of the working team of programmers from all interested hosts.

Reference -  http://www.multicians.org/thvv/mail-history.html
(Yes, i will re-post "And They Argued All Night..." to fix the broken link
there. Eventually. )

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120511/2f831b77/attachment.htm>

From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Fri May 11 19:41:23 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (Dave Walden)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 22:41:23 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <1336781139.29353.YahooMailNeo@web160201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com
 >
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336781139.29353.YahooMailNeo@web160201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4fadcce2.02d6e00a.7161.ffffc792@mx.google.com>

Dave Crocker has a website that points to several 
documents on the long history of contributions by 
various people to the "invention" of email as we know it today:
     http://emailhistory.org/
Most inventions involve prior technology; but as 
Dave noted to me recently, some come into 
existence relatively fully developed by one 
person or a small group of people, while others 
(like email) take a lot of small steps from here 
and there over a protracted period of time to 
reach a fairly fully developed state.

At 08:05 PM 5/11/2012, Alex McKenzie wrote:
>Ray is generally acknowledged to have been the 
>first person to build/adapt and demonstrate 
>programs to transfer messages from one computer 
>to another via the ARPAnet, and to use the 
>symbol "@" to denote the specific computer where 
>the intended recipient had an account.  But the 
>transfer of messages from one computer user to 
>another within a single computer was many years 
>older, and this was email too, as MAP correctly 
>pointed out. A recent article in the IEEE Annals 
>of the History of Computing talks about several 
>of the earlier single-computer message systems.
>
>
>From: Vint Cerf <vint at google.com>
>To: Alex McKenzie <amckenzie3 at yahoo.com>
>Cc: Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com>; 
>"internet-history at postel.org" <internet-history at postel.org>
>Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 6:41 PM
>Subject: Re: [ih] MAP & BBN
>
>I thought it was reasonable to assert that Ray Tomlinson invented
>networked email, Alex - do you see it differently?
>
>vint
>
>
>
>On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 5:55 PM, Alex McKenzie 
><<mailto:amckenzie3 at yahoo.com>amckenzie3 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Bill,
> >
> > I know MAP was perpetually annoyed by BBN and always felt BBN claimed to
> > have invented everything.  I was at BBN the entire time and I always felt
> > most of Mike's criticism was unjustified.  BBN wrote a lot of papers, with
> > ARPAs strong encouragement, about what we did do, and BBN did a lot.  We
> > didn't write about what others did- that was up to them.  So if others
> > didn't write so much, the written history got kind of BBN-centric.
> >
> > One notable exception:  Ray Tomlinson was credited by a lot of non-BBN
> > people with "inventing email" and Mike was justifiably upset every time he
> > heard that claim.  Mike seems to have blamed BBN for making that claim.
> > However, I think you can look as carefully as you want at BBN publications
> > and you will not find that claim made by BBN.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Alex
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Bill Ricker <<mailto:bill.n1vux at gmail.com>bill.n1vux at gmail.com>
> > To: David Elliott Bell 
> <<mailto:bell1945 at offthisweek.com>bell1945 at offthisweek.com>
> > Cc: 
> "<mailto:internet-history at postel.org>internet-history at postel.org" 
> <<mailto:internet-history at postel.org>internet-history at postel.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 10:59 PM
> > Subject: Re: [ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fathers of the
> > Internet
..
> >
> > On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:34 PM, David Ellliott Bell
> > <<mailto:bell1945 at offthisweek.com>bell1945 at offthisweek.com> wrote:
> >
> > the need for layers (3 will do if you know what you're going; if you don't,
> > 11 won't help you);
> >
> >
> > Correction, it is canonically '17 won't help you' .
> > The ironic allusion to the hol(e)y 7 of the Other Reference Model ("ISORM")
> > makes this MAPhorism much funnier than mere exaggeration.
> >
> > a world view about which layers and the 
> rigidity required to enforce layers;
> > proposing alternate protocols for achieving a 
> desired goal; things like that
> > are part of design-ARPANET.
> >
> >
> > Mike having come to protocol design and programming via poetry rather than
> > prosaic electrical engineering, yes, he viewed layering as the design, as
> > the essense. The fact that both the IMPs and NCP have been retired but the
> > network that  (D)ARPA wrought lives on as "the Internet", over a hybrid
> > hodgepodge of physical subnets, militates that his logical view of The Net
> > has won out over the physical, just as the pragmatic, good-enough ARM has
> > won out of the overly baroque OSI ISORM .
> >
> > However ...
> >
> > The Popular History of the Net has largely 
> been told from the BBN POV. As an
> > editorial/authorial decision, this is understandably so, much though it may
> > annoy those who worked on upper layers. Having a for-profit's PR office on
> > the case doesn't hurt, but that is not solely responsible. It's easier to
> > follow BBN'S  IMP/TIP narrative than a narrative spread over several
> > campuses and multiple OS's no one uses anymore, and far easier to explain
> > challenges of hardware than challenges of software to a general audience. I
> > have corroboration on that bald assertion -- Tracey Kidder interviewed the
> > DG 'Eagle' operating system team manager while researching 'Soul of the New
> > Machine', and couldn't figure out how to explain it, so went back to
> > focusing on hardware and microcode teams. Networking may be easier to make
> > metaphor than an OS, but not compared to modems.
> >
> > [I worked for said DG manager at his next gig, and volunteered with a
> > 'microkid' a few years later. The microkid taught me to drink cognac at ACM
> > committee meetings; Mike's whisky lessons cured me of that quickly.]
> >
> > --
> > Bill
> > @n1vux <mailto:bill.n1vux at gmail.com>bill.n1vux at gmail.com
> >
> >
>


--
home address: 12 Linden Rd., E. Sandwich, MA 02537
home ph=508-888-7655; cell ph = 503-757-3137
email address:  dave at walden-family.com; website: 
<http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/>http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120511/48f439c2/attachment.htm>

From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Fri May 11 20:24:39 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 23:24:39 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <4fadcce2.02d6e00a.7161.ffffc792@mx.google.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336781139.29353.YahooMailNeo@web160201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<4fadcce2.02d6e00a.7161.ffffc792@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <4FADD7F7.8040803@meetinghouse.net>

Dave Walden wrote:
> Dave Crocker has a website that points to several documents on the 
> long history of contributions by various people to the "invention" of 
> email as we know it today:
> http://emailhistory.org/
> Most inventions involve prior technology; but as Dave noted to me 
> recently, some come into existence relatively fully developed by one 
> person or a small group of people, while others (like email) take a 
> lot of small steps from here and there over a protracted period of 
> time to reach a fairly fully developed state.

One thing that always surprises me is that folks don't consider TELEX or 
TWX as an early form of electronic mail.  As I recall, in its later 
days, there was both inter-exchange routing and store-and-forward 
service.  Granted that Western Union and AUTODIN were sort of "the 
enemy" in the early days of the ARPANET, but still....

Miles Fidelman


-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From johnl at iecc.com  Fri May 11 20:42:06 2012
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 12 May 2012 03:42:06 -0000
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <CAAbKA3X7fHr3NV=qSdne+Jb8=UGqR5-W6_nc8heTkpm79wmukw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20120512034206.46686.qmail@joyce.lan>

>As an aside, I am surprised that no one has staked a prior claim for IBM
>360's, but perhaps either the prevalence of ad hoc virtual reader / virtual
>punch "mail" didn't immediately appear with CP68, or they weren't
>sufficiently connected early enough?

The virtual card chutes were fun, but it's been well documented that
there was email on CTSS in 1965, several years before CP-67 existed.
That's the earliest reference to it that I know.

R's,
John


From bill.n1vux at gmail.com  Fri May 11 21:58:33 2012
From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 00:58:33 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <20120512034206.46686.qmail@joyce.lan>
References: <CAAbKA3X7fHr3NV=qSdne+Jb8=UGqR5-W6_nc8heTkpm79wmukw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120512034206.46686.qmail@joyce.lan>
Message-ID: <CAAbKA3WMMv-P+3KMVZ6Pm1MTdxbF7ZndtEtBhEVkGVB3r6Gy=Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 11:42 PM, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:

> The virtual card chutes were fun,
>

Yup!  Magic named virtual devices combined with EXEC or REXX were quite a
toolbox.
(That was a much saner way to fake email than the earlier one i did with
the System 1022 DB for US DOT.)


> but it's been well documented that
> there was email on CTSS in 1965,
>
several years before CP-67 existed.
> That's the earliest reference to it that I know.
>

indeed. (i alluded to that.)

My aside musing was just wondering that RJE etc and local email based on
what you delightfully call Virtual Card Chutes must somewhere have been
combined to create *remote* email prior to BITNET launch in '81. I'm pretty
sure IBM CSC had it in '79, but I can't be certain. I'd quickly have added
RJE to my EXEC MAIL  in '82 if we'd had a second 370 we were *allowed* to
talk to. But how much before then? Could it have antedated the BBN/SNDMSG
as first (homogeneous systems) *networked* email? There's time enough
between CP-67 and '71 for someone to have tried it. RJE was nearly adequate
even without CP-67? But no claimants have surfaced in the Email Invention
debates?

Experiments lost to history are exactly so.

(Of course, the packet-switched community might question the network-ness
of a hypothetical small concatenation of RJE phonelines; but the historic
First Email is between two TENEX hosts on the same IMP in the same
building, also boundary condition in a definition of network.)


-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120512/b004d654/attachment.htm>

From bill.n1vux at gmail.com  Fri May 11 22:19:49 2012
From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 01:19:49 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <4FADD7F7.8040803@meetinghouse.net>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336781139.29353.YahooMailNeo@web160201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<4fadcce2.02d6e00a.7161.ffffc792@mx.google.com>
	<4FADD7F7.8040803@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <CAAbKA3U7=YMdkb0JN7Qjcp_O1PbCHuVCtvijFnAXNQ4CzEvCyw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 11:24 PM, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net
> wrote:

> One thing that always surprises me is that folks don't consider TELEX or
> TWX as an early form of electronic mail.  As I recall, in its later days,
> there was both inter-exchange routing and store-and-forward service.
>  Granted that Western Union and AUTODIN were sort of "the enemy" in the
> early days of the ARPANET, but still....
>

A key distinction for most folk is email is typically person to person,
whereas TELEX/TWX was station to station, firm to firm, battalion to
division; operators at the far end delivered to the addressed person (or to
in-tray of addressed Desk ).  The Mailbox person at site naming made email
personal as opposed to organizational.

A very different view would be that  computer scientists consider email to
be a service of a general purpose computing system; a separate
infrastructure without an associated computing utility is a something else
entierrly, outside our field of discourse, and of no interest.

Had the purpose of the D/ARPANET to create a follow-on to AUTODIN - which
it eventually did, after a fashion - email would have been very different
had it been designed for C2 desk-to-desk uses (latterly C3I, C4, ...)
instead of researchers eating their own dog food by scratching their own
itch for person-to-person uses.

But you are correct that TELEX/TWX/Autodin, and the WesternUnion
bicyclist/telegraphic hybid network, and Marconi radiograms were all a
prior art that may have and should have informed early email development
even if it was called 'mail'. Perhaps Tom van Vleck will comment.

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120512/174f1f24/attachment.htm>

From rogers at isi.edu  Sat May 12 00:17:35 2012
From: rogers at isi.edu (Craig Milo Rogers)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 00:17:35 -0700
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <6A424DE0AE59154CBAD11F78618CD7690110B7EE08C8@DHX7MBX.campus.csudh.edu>
References: <C320DA5634C94F04AA9339BB7DAD69BD@bng1>
	<4FAC3F51.10386.498BB5A@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<A524241D8F7C4EF19A9E7900BBDB0CF1@bng1>
	<20120511162934.GA4605@isi.edu>
	<6A424DE0AE59154CBAD11F78618CD7690110B7EE08C8@DHX7MBX.campus.csudh.edu>
Message-ID: <20120512071735.GA26305@isi.edu>

On 12.05.11, Larry Press wrote:
> >   CCBS
> 
> Was that Jerry Shure?

	Yes.  He passed away many years ago.

> >  Initially located in the basement of the Business School building, Bunche Hall
> 
> A nit, but I think Bunche Hall -- "the waffle" -- was social science.  Business was in the building to the east of that, which also housed the Western Data Processing Center.

	Ouch.  My mind is mush.  I've forgotten the landmarks.

					Craig Milo Rogers


From joly at punkcast.com  Sat May 12 01:08:44 2012
From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 04:08:44 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <CAAbKA3U7=YMdkb0JN7Qjcp_O1PbCHuVCtvijFnAXNQ4CzEvCyw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336781139.29353.YahooMailNeo@web160201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<4fadcce2.02d6e00a.7161.ffffc792@mx.google.com>
	<4FADD7F7.8040803@meetinghouse.net>
	<CAAbKA3U7=YMdkb0JN7Qjcp_O1PbCHuVCtvijFnAXNQ4CzEvCyw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAM9VJk012ZoU0=YA9b5VJ6LKSiprcBhdpT95c66FTqo_n70cWw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> But you are correct that TELEX/TWX/Autodin, and the WesternUnion
> bicyclist/telegraphic hybid network, and Marconi radiograms were all a
> prior art that may have and should have informed early email development
> even if it was called 'mail'.
>

I watched (via webcast) Tim Wu speak at the recent Legal Hackathon at
Brooklyn Law School. His theme, based on his Master Switch book, was that
many inventions are achieved by amateurs or outsiders as a result of
unconstrained thinking, something impossible in incumbents.. IIRC he gave
the example of Bell and the telephone - saying the telegraph incumbents
ignored the whole idea of voice over wire because a) they thought it an
impractical gimmick, but more importantly their conviction that residential
telegraph terminals were the future. Wu: "in other words, email".

Weren't electric text communications popularly known as "cables" in the
early 20th C?

j
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
 http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
 VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
-
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120512/0015f473/attachment.htm>

From craig at aland.bbn.com  Sat May 12 05:56:51 2012
From: craig at aland.bbn.com (Craig Partridge)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 08:56:51 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
Message-ID: <20120512125651.8B2E928E137@aland.bbn.com>

> On 5/11/2012 11:34 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>  > ucla had two /91s, the second being carol newton's in biomath, which i
>  > used.  but i do not remember that it was connected, other than
>  > bisync/rjs to city of hope and other LA area institutions in the late
>  > '60s.
> 
> 
> It wasn't, at least through the mid-70s.  I was an operator on that 
> machine until I started at the UCLA Arpanet project.
> 
> The Health Sciences 360/91 had less memory but better-trained staff than 
> the main campus computer.  As I understood it then, it was the 
> pre-eminent NIH-funded machine in the nation.

Hi Dave:

This is an interesting side note that may be of interest to Sytel in
writing fiction.

In the 1970s and 1980s, many leading universities had multiple computer
centers run by different departments/agencies (for instance, Harvard had
at least four around 1980).   In many cases this was a response to an
administrative unit (department, school) being unable to get the computing
resources from the main computing facility.

In most case I learned of, the relationship was one of cheerful competion
between the centers on the same campus, except when every few years the
main computing guys would attempt a takeover and get beaten back.

Later this split would show up in the CSNET/BITNET split (CSNET = computer
science dept, BITNET = main campus computing facility).

Thanks!

Craig


From craig at aland.bbn.com  Sat May 12 06:13:02 2012
From: craig at aland.bbn.com (Craig Partridge)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 09:13:02 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
Message-ID: <20120512131302.5C68A28E13B@aland.bbn.com>


> Depends what you mean by 'Networked' and 'Invented' !
> 
> As an aside, I am surprised that no one has staked a prior claim for IBM
> 360's, but perhaps either the prevalence of ad hoc virtual reader / virtual
> punch "mail" didn't immediately appear with CP68, or they weren't
> sufficiently connected early enough?
> 
> If Email is the iconic '@', that is Tomlinson's, uncontested it seems. He
> claimed the @ sign for it, elegantly mnemonic, an inspired choice.  (But to
> the great frustration of all those whose LINEKILL it was !)  His
> SNDMSG donated the ubiquitous @ copula to posterity, so SNDMSG is rightly
> historic.
> 
> Tomlinson apparently indeed implemented inter-machine over-ARPA-net e-mail
> first (even though it was within a single building) . But it was still
> vendor specific (TENEX only), it was not usable by ARPANET hosts of other
> brands.
> 
> However, the need for a general all-ARPANET vendor-neutral netmail was
> conceived first, and was implemented shortly after.
> 
> If one omits multi-host, Tom van Vleck and Noel Morris on CTSS have
> precedence on email over all, it seems.
> 
> If invention is an act of intellect separate from construction, van Vleck,
> Licklider and R. W. Watson claim precedence for conception of
> interoperable, networked email.

Having looked at the historical record in some depth and done a bunch of
interview for an article in IEEE Annals a few years ago (copy on my
web page for anyone who wants), I think this is a misreading.

Yes, single system email predated SNDMSG.  Indeed, the standalone version
of SNDMSG that Ray enhanced to do network email was itself a port to TENEX
from another system. (Ray no longer remembers which one and I couldn't find
the original system).  Tom and Noel's claim to be first on CTSS is the best
I've seen.

But for networked email, I found no evidence that Lick or Dick Watson devised
the idea.  Dick did propose an idea for printing memos on remote printers
that could then be delivered by the remote office's internal interoffice
mail system.  But that's not networked email.  Indeed, it was Dick's RFC 196
on this topic that struck Ray as the wrong idea and drove Ray to create
networked email in response.

Thanks!

Craig
http://www.ir.bbn.com/~craig


From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Sat May 12 06:30:21 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 06:30:21 -0700
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <20120512125651.8B2E928E137@aland.bbn.com>
References: <20120512125651.8B2E928E137@aland.bbn.com>
Message-ID: <4FAE65ED.1050002@dcrocker.net>



  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net

On 5/12/2012 5:56 AM, Craig Partridge wrote:
> In most case I learned of, the relationship was one of cheerful competion
> between the centers on the same campus, except when every few years the
> main computing guys would attempt a takeover and get beaten back.

Well, since you sorta asked for this...

The Campus /91 was tailored for mass processing.  It even had an area 
with a card reader for submitting jobs directly and a slot that printout 
came through.  The /91 was designed to take up to 2MB of main memory. 
The Campus machine had another 2MB attached through peripheral i/o. 
(Side effect was that the cost of a job varied depending upon which 
memory it ran on, since the latter incurred peripheral i/o charges...)

We, on the other hand, had a home-built timesharing service, called 
TORTOS, with the obvious logo.

One of our users that I was friendly with said she took jobs to the 
Campus machine that were simple to run, because the Campus machine had 
lower rates.  But she brought the special handling ones to us.

I didn't know it at the time, but operator training was quite different. 
  Our facility trained everyone to the level of shift supervisor.  (For 
us part-timers, some weekend shifts had us working alone.)

When I switched to the Arpanet project in computer science, my first 
assignment was to help with the planning for the Arpanet's coming out 
party in September, 1972 (Washington DC Hilton) and that meant lining up 
demo programs.  This included a meeting at the Campus facility one 
Saturday and several of us sat around a table in the machine room. I 
think Vint ran the meeting.

At one point there was some commotion over by the operator console.  It 
wound up going on for some 10s of minutes, with phone calls and 
consultation.  I finally asked one of the Campus folk at our table what 
was going on and he said the machine had crashed and they were talking 
to the facility manager about what the problem probably was and whether 
it would need a service call.

Without any thought to etiquette I said they had a bad memory module 
that needed to be replaced.  It was obvious from the pattern of red 
(hardware) lights on the top of the console.  Real hardware errors would 
light only a very few bulbs but memory problems would trigger a random 
pattern of many.

The guy looked at me rather strangely.  I don't remember whether he said 
anything to the folk over at the console.

That was the first time I realized what it meant to train for 
streamlined operations and costs, versus how we had been trained over at 
the Health Sciences machine...

d/


From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Sat May 12 06:42:24 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (Dave Walden)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 09:42:24 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <20120512125651.8B2E928E137@aland.bbn.com>
References: <20120512125651.8B2E928E137@aland.bbn.com>
Message-ID: <4fae6799.48c5e00a.514c.ffffb6f9@mx.google.com>


>Craig said:
>In the 1970s and 1980s, many leading universities had multiple computer
>centers run by different departments/agencies (for instance, Harvard had
>at least four around 1980).   In many cases this was a response to an
>administrative unit (department, school) being unable to get the computing
>resources from the main computing facility.

Two (barely?) related points:

1. My memory is that part of the "excuse" for ARPA building the 
ARPANET was because each ot their contractors wanted their own big 
computer system, and the ARPANET was supposed to get them to share 
resources on fewer big computer systems, i.e., with ARPA having to 
fund fewer computer facilities.

2. My feeling is that local areas networking with PCs took off (circa 
1980s) partly because company (not just university) branch  offices, 
departments, etc., could use that to escape the control (and perhaps 
cost) of the official company computer center.



--
home address: 12 Linden Rd., E. Sandwich, MA 02537
home ph=508-888-7655; cell ph = 503-757-3137
email address:  dave at walden-family.com; website: 
<http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/>http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/  



From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Sat May 12 06:57:16 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 09:57:16 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <20120512125651.8B2E928E137@aland.bbn.com>
References: <20120512125651.8B2E928E137@aland.bbn.com>
Message-ID: <4FAE6C3C.9010001@meetinghouse.net>

Craig Partridge wrote:

>>
>> This is an interesting side note that may be of interest to Sytel in
>> writing fiction.
>>
>> In the 1970s and 1980s, many leading universities had multiple computer
>> centers run by different departments/agencies (for instance, Harvard had
>> at least four around 1980).   In many cases this was a response to an
>> administrative unit (department, school) being unable to get the computing
>> resources from the main computing facility.
>>
>> In most case I learned of, the relationship was one of cheerful competion
>> between the centers on the same campus, except when every few years the
>> main computing guys would attempt a takeover and get beaten back.
>>

At MIT, circa early 1970s, the story was just a bit different.  The 
admin folks kept a 360 behind locked doors, with very controlled outside 
connections (or none, I really don't recall).  The story was that they 
were rapidly paranoid about students hacking grades, transcripts, bills, 
and so forth.

Now this could have been just a story, but... this was the same period 
where John Donovan taught an introductory programming course, jointly 
between the EE/Computer Science Dept. and the Sloan School.  The first 
problem set we delivered on punch cards, for execution on a 360, the 
second we ran terminals via 360/TSO, the third on MULTICS.  At least for 
the 360 problem sets, we had to wrap the jobs in JCL statements that 
invoked a grading test/grading program.  Notable among the instructions 
was something along the lines of 'you can try to hack the grading 
program - if you succeed in giving yourself an A on the problem set, it 
sticks, if we detect the hack, you get an F.'  Kind of suggests that the 
admin folks' paranoia, if real, would have been more than justified. 
:-)     [this was the same course where a buddy of mine answered a 
question on the final with "the bit bucket overflows and the bits spill 
out onto the floor" - not sure why, but that's always stuck with me, 
perhaps because it was an appropriate answer to the question]

Miles Fidelman

-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Sat May 12 07:01:31 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 10:01:31 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <4fae6799.48c5e00a.514c.ffffb6f9@mx.google.com>
References: <20120512125651.8B2E928E137@aland.bbn.com>
	<4fae6799.48c5e00a.514c.ffffb6f9@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <4FAE6D3B.7010302@meetinghouse.net>

Dave Walden wrote:
>
> 2. My feeling is that local areas networking with PCs took off (circa 
> 1980s) partly because company (not just university) branch  offices, 
> departments, etc., could use that to escape the control (and perhaps 
> cost) of the official company computer center.
>
Absolutely true.  One of my early jobs was managing a PDP-20 at Sanders 
(along with the company tech. library for some reason).  What they 
didn't tell me, and I was too naive to ask about at the time, was that 
the 5(?) engineering divisions had all launched coupes to purchase their 
own VAXen - precisely to escape the chargebacks for cycles on the PDP-20.


-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From leo at bind.org  Sat May 12 09:27:31 2012
From: leo at bind.org (Leo Vegoda)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 09:27:31 -0700
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <CAM9VJk012ZoU0=YA9b5VJ6LKSiprcBhdpT95c66FTqo_n70cWw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336781139.29353.YahooMailNeo@web160201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<4fadcce2.02d6e00a.7161.ffffc792@mx.google.com>
	<4FADD7F7.8040803@meetinghouse.net>
	<CAAbKA3U7=YMdkb0JN7Qjcp_O1PbCHuVCtvijFnAXNQ4CzEvCyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM9VJk012ZoU0=YA9b5VJ6LKSiprcBhdpT95c66FTqo_n70cWw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAPfiqjaMWr7wvmeU-9E_yun5-FNQ5PWheYCx1PggtDbyutJv5g@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 1:08 AM, Joly MacFie <joly at punkcast.com> wrote:

[...]

> Weren't electric text communications popularly known as "cables" in the
> early 20th C?

As I understand it, governments still refer to "cables" for certain
classes of inter-governmental communications. I doubt they still use
telex networks, though.

Regards,

Leo


From jack at 3kitty.org  Sat May 12 09:56:36 2012
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 09:56:36 -0700
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <4FAE6C3C.9010001@meetinghouse.net>
References: <20120512125651.8B2E928E137@aland.bbn.com>
	<4FAE6C3C.9010001@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <CAJLkZP=GEsNWAg_nW7-JHvKkdD=w4Sk=QGjAO-FZ_gEFXOfWDw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 6:57 AM, Miles Fidelman
<mfidelman at meetinghouse.net> wrote:

> Now this could have been just a story, but... this was the same period where
> John Donovan taught an introductory programming course, jointly between the
> EE/Computer Science Dept. and the Sloan School. ?The first problem set we
> delivered on punch cards, for execution on a 360, the second we ran
> terminals via 360/TSO, the third on MULTICS. ?At least for the 360 problem
> sets, we had to wrap the jobs in JCL statements that invoked a grading
> test/grading program. ?Notable among the instructions was something along
> the lines of 'you can try to hack the grading program - if you succeed in
> giving yourself an A on the problem set, it sticks, if we detect the hack,
> you get an F.' ?Kind of suggests that the admin folks' paranoia, if real,
> would have been more than justified. :-)

True story.  I took Donovan's course, aka "6.251", in 1967 at MIT,
when the venue was the
IBM 7094.  It wasn't really "introductory programming", but had a name
like "Systems
Programming".  Donovan (and TA Stu Madnick) explicitly laid out the rules - you
could either write code to do the assigned task, or write code to infiltrate the
grading program.  Everything was in Assembler of course - "FAP" or
"Fortran Assembly
Program".  As far as I can remember, no one tried to hack the grading program,
probably because it was just easier to do the actual assignment.  But
we thought about it...

I doubt there was much concern of hacking school administration data
which probably
weren't even online (tapes mounted) at the same time.  However, the
years after 1967
got to be pretty wild, with campus protests and such even at MIT, so
by the 70s there
may have been justified paranoia.

Besides, it was apparently much more interesting to hack TPC - The
Phone Company. This
was the era of the "blue boxes" and such too.

Aaah, JCL...  //EXEC and all that stuff.  Memories....getting hazier...

/Jack
[MIT 1966-1971 as student, 1971-1978 staff]



From vint at google.com  Sat May 12 09:58:39 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 12:58:39 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <CAPfiqjaMWr7wvmeU-9E_yun5-FNQ5PWheYCx1PggtDbyutJv5g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336781139.29353.YahooMailNeo@web160201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<4fadcce2.02d6e00a.7161.ffffc792@mx.google.com>
	<4FADD7F7.8040803@meetinghouse.net>
	<CAAbKA3U7=YMdkb0JN7Qjcp_O1PbCHuVCtvijFnAXNQ4CzEvCyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM9VJk012ZoU0=YA9b5VJ6LKSiprcBhdpT95c66FTqo_n70cWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPfiqjaMWr7wvmeU-9E_yun5-FNQ5PWheYCx1PggtDbyutJv5g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggemcrKBpD2O037oMWXwJnftJduP7Vvsmf0XGdG+M1dRZg@mail.gmail.com>

that was telegraph and telex...
v


On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Leo Vegoda <leo at bind.org> wrote:
> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 1:08 AM, Joly MacFie <joly at punkcast.com> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> Weren't electric text communications popularly known as "cables" in the
>> early 20th C?
>
> As I understand it, governments still refer to "cables" for certain
> classes of inter-governmental communications. I doubt they still use
> telex networks, though.
>
> Regards,
>
> Leo


From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Sat May 12 10:05:02 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 13:05:02 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <CAPfiqjaMWr7wvmeU-9E_yun5-FNQ5PWheYCx1PggtDbyutJv5g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336781139.29353.YahooMailNeo@web160201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<4fadcce2.02d6e00a.7161.ffffc792@mx.google.com>
	<4FADD7F7.8040803@meetinghouse.net>
	<CAAbKA3U7=YMdkb0JN7Qjcp_O1PbCHuVCtvijFnAXNQ4CzEvCyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM9VJk012ZoU0=YA9b5VJ6LKSiprcBhdpT95c66FTqo_n70cWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPfiqjaMWr7wvmeU-9E_yun5-FNQ5PWheYCx1PggtDbyutJv5g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FAE983E.5060504@meetinghouse.net>

Leo Vegoda wrote:
> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 1:08 AM, Joly MacFie<joly at punkcast.com>  wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> Weren't electric text communications popularly known as "cables" in the
>> early 20th C?
> As I understand it, governments still refer to "cables" for certain
> classes of inter-governmental communications. I doubt they still use
> telex networks, though.
>
You know, that raises an interesting question:  What has taken the place 
of "international record carriers" for inter-governmental electronic 
messages?

I mean, inside the US Government, a lot of official traffic travels as 
formatted email messages, over classified networks, with various 
encryption mechanisms applied.

But what about government-to-government?  At the tactical level, 
interconnecting networks is a nightmare ? and that's when there's formal 
attention to setting up, say, an allied operations center.  But what 
about when the State Department sends an electronic message to another 
country?  Now that we don't have "international record carriers," what's 
the current medium for "diplomatic cables?"  Encrypted fax?

Miles Fidelman


-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From bernie at fantasyfarm.com  Sat May 12 11:14:47 2012
From: bernie at fantasyfarm.com (Bernie Cosell)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 14:14:47 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <4fae6799.48c5e00a.514c.ffffb6f9@mx.google.com>
References: <20120512125651.8B2E928E137@aland.bbn.com>,
	<4fae6799.48c5e00a.514c.ffffb6f9@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <4FAEA897.5684.8FB3E27@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>

On 12 May 2012 at 9:42, Dave Walden wrote:

> 1. My memory is that part of the "excuse" for ARPA building the 
> ARPANET was because each ot their contractors wanted their own big 
> computer system, and the ARPANET was supposed to get them to share 
> resources on fewer big computer systems, i.e., with ARPA having to 
> fund fewer computer facilities.

At the time we were working on it, I didn't know anything about 
Licklider's papers and I'm sure that that's what I was told [perhaps by 
Larry Roberts directly, I forget].  The two things that I recall being 
mentioned were the Illiac IV, which ARPA was for-sure only going to make  
[at most..:o)] one of and so they wanted to be able to use the ARPAnet to 
allow researchers around the country to submit jobs for it.  And the AI 
folk --  I don't recall the details on that one so well, but apparently 
every AI project they were funding was asking for a PDP-10 [to run either 
SAIL or BBN-Lisp].

  /bernie\

-- 
Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie at fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--       





From jaap at NLnetLabs.nl  Sat May 12 11:32:12 2012
From: jaap at NLnetLabs.nl (Jaap Akkerhuis)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 20:32:12 +0200
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <CAHxHggemcrKBpD2O037oMWXwJnftJduP7Vvsmf0XGdG+M1dRZg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336781139.29353.YahooMailNeo@web160201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<4fadcce2.02d6e00a.7161.ffffc792@mx.google.com>
	<4FADD7F7.8040803@meetinghouse.net>
	<CAAbKA3U7=YMdkb0JN7Qjcp_O1PbCHuVCtvijFnAXNQ4CzEvCyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM9VJk012ZoU0=YA9b5VJ6LKSiprcBhdpT95c66FTqo_n70cWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPfiqjaMWr7wvmeU-9E_yun5-FNQ5PWheYCx1PggtDbyutJv5g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggemcrKBpD2O037oMWXwJnftJduP7Vvsmf0XGdG+M1dRZg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <201205121832.q4CIWChg083358@bartok.nlnetlabs.nl>


    that was telegraph and telex...

Some more trivia: The Dutch Queeen is still sending telegrams at
special occasions.

At one moment I wondered how that worked and found out that apparently
the Dutch national telegraph service has been sold to UTS, a Swiss
company. They claim (at <http://www.uniteltelegram.com/services.htm>)
to "operate the official telegram services of more than 45 countries"
although the transport is likely to be more modern.

	jaap


From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Sat May 12 11:42:33 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 14:42:33 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <CAHxHggemcrKBpD2O037oMWXwJnftJduP7Vvsmf0XGdG+M1dRZg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336781139.29353.YahooMailNeo@web160201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<4fadcce2.02d6e00a.7161.ffffc792@mx.google.com>
	<4FADD7F7.8040803@meetinghouse.net>
	<CAAbKA3U7=YMdkb0JN7Qjcp_O1PbCHuVCtvijFnAXNQ4CzEvCyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM9VJk012ZoU0=YA9b5VJ6LKSiprcBhdpT95c66FTqo_n70cWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPfiqjaMWr7wvmeU-9E_yun5-FNQ5PWheYCx1PggtDbyutJv5g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggemcrKBpD2O037oMWXwJnftJduP7Vvsmf0XGdG+M1dRZg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FAEAF19.9000407@meetinghouse.net>

actually, I was reminded of this by some of the wikileaks material - 
which is described as inter-governmental "diplomatic cables" - which 
look like formal message traffic -- which leads one to wonder what they 
were transmitted over

Vint Cerf wrote:
> that was telegraph and telex...
> v
>
>
> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Leo Vegoda<leo at bind.org>  wrote:
>> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 1:08 AM, Joly MacFie<joly at punkcast.com>  wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> Weren't electric text communications popularly known as "cables" in the
>>> early 20th C?
>> As I understand it, governments still refer to "cables" for certain
>> classes of inter-governmental communications. I doubt they still use
>> telex networks, though.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Leo


-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From braden at isi.edu  Sat May 12 11:54:55 2012
From: braden at isi.edu (Robert Braden)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 11:54:55 -0700
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
Message-ID: <4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>

The side discussion of the two IBM 360/91s at UCLA would
seem to have little to do with Internet history. However, I
want to point out that the "other" 360/91 at UCLA was in
fact a relatively early (1971) ARPAnet host, and it became
an Internet host after the Big Switch in Jan 1983. It supported
Telnet, FTP (a rich version, suited to the baroque IBM file
system), and SMTP.  This machine was distinguished by being
one of two 91s with 4M bytes of main memory (the other
belonged to a secret facility in the DC area). Its TCP/IP
implementation was one of the 5 experimental
implementations of TCP[/IP] put together by members of
the Internet* working group . I wrote the code in the 1977-
1983 time frame. The initial code V 2 of TCP. When
IP was split off  (V 2.5, as I recall), I applied a virtual scalpel
to the TCP code to split off the IP layer.

  I left UCLA for ISI in 1986 before I got around to adding Van's
  congestion control to TCP, sadly.

One other historic note: during 1981-1983 I maintained
  the /91 TCP/IP code remotely  over the ARPAnet from UCL
  in London. Kirstein had a TIP on the ARPAnet,
Remote debugging over the ARPAnet was certainly not new,
but I could probably can claim a distance record at the time ;-)

Bob Braden

*Perhaps called the Catenet working group at the time?



From bill.n1vux at gmail.com  Sat May 12 12:24:49 2012
From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 15:24:49 -0400
Subject: [ih] Vint Cerf on BBC WS
Message-ID: <CAAbKA3WfrD0WMTtk8xZ2O58pM9FF_j+Xa6fS5H0ZaaN6nyNfHQ@mail.gmail.com>

Shocked that BBC interviewed someone knowledgeable of Internet History for
their internet dangers series !

*Danger in the Download* - Part Two

Tue, 8 May 12

Is the Internet's original architecture and governance still fit for
> purpose? Or has it gone out of control and become hopelessly insecure?

http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/worldservice/docarchive/docarchive_20120508-1708a.mp3


(Vint is in there twice, near the beginning and near the end. He made a
good point that the Net's insecure origin is excusable as it was most of a
decade prior to public key crypto becoming public.)

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120512/ba021622/attachment.htm>

From vint at google.com  Sat May 12 12:41:50 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 15:41:50 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <4FAEAF19.9000407@meetinghouse.net>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336781139.29353.YahooMailNeo@web160201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<4fadcce2.02d6e00a.7161.ffffc792@mx.google.com>
	<4FADD7F7.8040803@meetinghouse.net>
	<CAAbKA3U7=YMdkb0JN7Qjcp_O1PbCHuVCtvijFnAXNQ4CzEvCyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM9VJk012ZoU0=YA9b5VJ6LKSiprcBhdpT95c66FTqo_n70cWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPfiqjaMWr7wvmeU-9E_yun5-FNQ5PWheYCx1PggtDbyutJv5g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggemcrKBpD2O037oMWXwJnftJduP7Vvsmf0XGdG+M1dRZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAEAF19.9000407@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggdb7NeN0=JJ9wyuT4pbkykoFb7CVgQAt=MiPAdXwMe_0Q@mail.gmail.com>

i will check with state dept.

v


On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Miles Fidelman
<mfidelman at meetinghouse.net> wrote:
> actually, I was reminded of this by some of the wikileaks material - which
> is described as inter-governmental "diplomatic cables" - which look like
> formal message traffic -- which leads one to wonder what they were
> transmitted over
>
>
> Vint Cerf wrote:
>>
>> that was telegraph and telex...
>> v
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Leo Vegoda<leo at bind.org> ?wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 1:08 AM, Joly MacFie<joly at punkcast.com> ?wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> Weren't electric text communications popularly known as "cables" in the
>>>> early 20th C?
>>>
>>> As I understand it, governments still refer to "cables" for certain
>>> classes of inter-governmental communications. I doubt they still use
>>> telex networks, though.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Leo
>
>
>
> --
> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
> In practice, there is. ? .... Yogi Berra
>
>



From vint at google.com  Sat May 12 12:43:56 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 15:43:56 -0400
Subject: [ih] MAP & BBN
In-Reply-To: <CAHxHggdb7NeN0=JJ9wyuT4pbkykoFb7CVgQAt=MiPAdXwMe_0Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AD168725-4A98-4CB7-A9B2-2AD37A8AA5A6@offthisweek.com>
	<CAHxHggc0Lgw+OBnrb4D+ejmrt7Z8MmhbLarnd0CV4naJ6G8c1w@mail.gmail.com>
	<5438F806-C0B8-4AE3-B5A4-087F4C7D0BEC@offthisweek.com>
	<CAAbKA3Vb=kJyStEL0smQ+Fx=TyKCOVSbi2vLTCLyxsNOck7-sw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336773304.25751.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<CAHxHggfaWLpMW8J4Ut9KK4rNqL5hBW1p1dJZrFYYO+UgHp=-VA@mail.gmail.com>
	<1336781139.29353.YahooMailNeo@web160201.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
	<4fadcce2.02d6e00a.7161.ffffc792@mx.google.com>
	<4FADD7F7.8040803@meetinghouse.net>
	<CAAbKA3U7=YMdkb0JN7Qjcp_O1PbCHuVCtvijFnAXNQ4CzEvCyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAM9VJk012ZoU0=YA9b5VJ6LKSiprcBhdpT95c66FTqo_n70cWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAPfiqjaMWr7wvmeU-9E_yun5-FNQ5PWheYCx1PggtDbyutJv5g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggemcrKBpD2O037oMWXwJnftJduP7Vvsmf0XGdG+M1dRZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAEAF19.9000407@meetinghouse.net>
	<CAHxHggdb7NeN0=JJ9wyuT4pbkykoFb7CVgQAt=MiPAdXwMe_0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHxHgge1bSRzp67pMGmC_CmxJVdvkYwO2br77iZWP2P-Sup3GA@mail.gmail.com>

it may be fax.

v


On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Vint Cerf <vint at google.com> wrote:
> i will check with state dept.
>
> v
>
>
> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 2:42 PM, Miles Fidelman
> <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net> wrote:
>> actually, I was reminded of this by some of the wikileaks material - which
>> is described as inter-governmental "diplomatic cables" - which look like
>> formal message traffic -- which leads one to wonder what they were
>> transmitted over
>>
>>
>> Vint Cerf wrote:
>>>
>>> that was telegraph and telex...
>>> v
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 12:27 PM, Leo Vegoda<leo at bind.org> ?wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 1:08 AM, Joly MacFie<joly at punkcast.com> ?wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> Weren't electric text communications popularly known as "cables" in the
>>>>> early 20th C?
>>>>
>>>> As I understand it, governments still refer to "cables" for certain
>>>> classes of inter-governmental communications. I doubt they still use
>>>> telex networks, though.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Leo
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>> In practice, there is. ? .... Yogi Berra
>>
>>



From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Sat May 12 12:49:42 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 12:49:42 -0700
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <4FAEBED6.7090803@dcrocker.net>

On 5/12/2012 11:54 AM, Robert Braden wrote:
 > The side discussion of the two IBM 360/91s at UCLA would
 > seem to have little to do with Internet history. However, I
 > want to point out that the "other" 360/91 at UCLA was in
 > fact a relatively early (1971) ARPAnet host, and it became
 > an Internet host after the Big Switch in Jan 1983. It supported
 > Telnet, FTP (a rich version, suited to the baroque IBM file
 > system), and SMTP.  This machine was distinguished by being


It also supported a remote job entry protocol.

My job was documentation for the CS arpanet project and local 
timesharing (sigma executive) o/s.

We would do our text creation on the SRI NLS system, ship it down to ISI 
thru FTP and then RJE it to Bob's /91 for output, because it had a 
high-speed upper/lower case printer that could produce 8.5x11" sheets...


d/
--
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net



From bernie at fantasyfarm.com  Sat May 12 14:19:19 2012
From: bernie at fantasyfarm.com (Bernie Cosell)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 17:19:19 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>,
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <4FAED3D7.20757.9A4316E@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>

On 12 May 2012 at 11:54, Robert Braden wrote:

> The side discussion of the two IBM 360/91s at UCLA would
> seem to have little to do with Internet history. ...

all this talk of UCLAs connections to the ARPAnet got me wondering:, am I 
misremembering?   Didn't UCLA have a Sigma 7 that connected to the 
ARPAnet [I vaguely recall Mike Wingfield did the interface and I had to 
work with him to debug something about it].

  /bernie\

-- 
Bernie Cosell                     Fantasy Farm Fibers
mailto:bernie at fantasyfarm.com     Pearisburg, VA
    -->  Too many people, too few sheep  <--       





From vint at google.com  Sat May 12 14:42:52 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 17:42:52 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <4FAED3D7.20757.9A4316E@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<4FAED3D7.20757.9A4316E@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggfhtMzbdpuYit4+6q+Fp2oj2+BP8M3hXAsU0Mdf8bsFhw@mail.gmail.com>

yes, that was the first machine connected at UCLA - Mike W did the
hardware. Charley Kline and others had a hand in the i/o software. I
wrote a modified version of the Sigma-7 operating system to run
measurements and to generate artificial traffic into the network. Bob
Kahn and Dave Walden paid visits to UCLA where we did particular
experiments. We used this system to test the predictions of Len
Kleinrock and his students about the performance of the ARPANET based
on queueing models. Steve Crocker led the group that developed the
Sigma-7 Experiment Timesharing system. We called it SEX and the most
popular document among the geeks was the SEX Users Manual....

v


On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Bernie Cosell <bernie at fantasyfarm.com> wrote:
> On 12 May 2012 at 11:54, Robert Braden wrote:
>
>> The side discussion of the two IBM 360/91s at UCLA would
>> seem to have little to do with Internet history. ...
>
> all this talk of UCLAs connections to the ARPAnet got me wondering:, am I
> misremembering? ? Didn't UCLA have a Sigma 7 that connected to the
> ARPAnet [I vaguely recall Mike Wingfield did the interface and I had to
> work with him to debug something about it].
>
> ?/bernie\
>
> --
> Bernie Cosell ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Fantasy Farm Fibers
> mailto:bernie at fantasyfarm.com ? ? Pearisburg, VA
> ? ?--> ?Too many people, too few sheep ?<--
>
>
>



From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Sat May 12 15:35:13 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 18:35:13 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
Message-ID: <20120512223513.C59AA18C0B3@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: Craig Milo Rogers <rogers at ISI.EDU>

    >> From: Dave Walden <dave.walden.family at gmail.com>

    >> I think SDC was on the ARPANET, host number 10??

    > SDC was on earlier than I remembered; they show up on the 1970 ARPANET
    > map. They dropped off the map, so to speak, around 1977. 

You saved me from making a big mistake! I consulted the entire series of
"Network Host Status" RFCs, and according to them it was 0/8 ("SDC
IBM-360/155") _but_ none of them ever showed it online. I tried looking in
such host tables as I have, and a host table I have from '77 shows IMP 8
being NRL. Which led me to guess they'd never been on... but that was clearly
wrong: looking at some maps, I see they did.

Speaking of maps, I've been accumulating a big collection of them, and will
put them up on a web page shortly. Of particular interest are the logical
ones (not many of which are online), which also show the hosts.

(Looking online for ones to add to the large collection I have here, I'm
amazed how much stuff has 404'd. Lots of collections pages, and most of the
links to things don't work... :-( I saw a link to MSGGROUP archives, but it
was gone - and when I Google'd for it, it wasn't anywhere else. Luckily, I
found a copy in WayBack, but that doesn't seem to be indexed.)


Oh, about host tables: I think I have asked about these before? I have one
from '77 (sort of - I think it's a list from an ARPANET Directory), one from
'79, and then a lot from '82 on, but nothing early (and I seem to recall
looking hard).

Does anyone have any early ones?



    > Ari Shoshonan or something like that is a name that comes to mind.

The contact name given in the RFCs is "Bob Long", FWTW.

	Noel


From jeanjour at comcast.net  Sat May 12 17:40:40 2012
From: jeanjour at comcast.net (John Day)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 20:40:40 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <20120512223513.C59AA18C0B3@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120512223513.C59AA18C0B3@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <a0624080dcbd4b2630da5@[10.0.1.3]>

For the first few years, there was a well-known socket at NMC that 
would return a logical ARPANET map indicating who was up and down at 
that moment.  It would print on a single 8.5 x 11 page of paper on a 
Model 33 Teletype.  It was discontinued when it would no longer fit.

SDC did have a node in Santa Monica and in DC.  I don't remember what 
was connected to it.  It may have been a TIP.  We were doing stuff 
with them in the late 70s.  The question is was it DARPA or DCA? or 
DISA?

John


At 18:35 -0400 2012/05/12, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>     > From: Craig Milo Rogers <rogers at ISI.EDU>
>
>     >> From: Dave Walden <dave.walden.family at gmail.com>
>
>     >> I think SDC was on the ARPANET, host number 10??
>
>     > SDC was on earlier than I remembered; they show up on the 1970 ARPANET
>     > map. They dropped off the map, so to speak, around 1977.
>
>You saved me from making a big mistake! I consulted the entire series of
>"Network Host Status" RFCs, and according to them it was 0/8 ("SDC
>IBM-360/155") _but_ none of them ever showed it online. I tried looking in
>such host tables as I have, and a host table I have from '77 shows IMP 8
>being NRL. Which led me to guess they'd never been on... but that was clearly
>wrong: looking at some maps, I see they did.
>
>Speaking of maps, I've been accumulating a big collection of them, and will
>put them up on a web page shortly. Of particular interest are the logical
>ones (not many of which are online), which also show the hosts.
>
>(Looking online for ones to add to the large collection I have here, I'm
>amazed how much stuff has 404'd. Lots of collections pages, and most of the
>links to things don't work... :-( I saw a link to MSGGROUP archives, but it
>was gone - and when I Google'd for it, it wasn't anywhere else. Luckily, I
>found a copy in WayBack, but that doesn't seem to be indexed.)
>
>
>Oh, about host tables: I think I have asked about these before? I have one
>from '77 (sort of - I think it's a list from an ARPANET Directory), one from
>'79, and then a lot from '82 on, but nothing early (and I seem to recall
>looking hard).
>
>Does anyone have any early ones?
>
>
>
>     > Ari Shoshonan or something like that is a name that comes to mind.
>
>The contact name given in the RFCs is "Bob Long", FWTW.
>
>	Noel



From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Sat May 12 17:58:48 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 17:58:48 -0700
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <CAHxHggfhtMzbdpuYit4+6q+Fp2oj2+BP8M3hXAsU0Mdf8bsFhw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<4FAED3D7.20757.9A4316E@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<CAHxHggfhtMzbdpuYit4+6q+Fp2oj2+BP8M3hXAsU0Mdf8bsFhw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FAF0748.8080504@dcrocker.net>



On 5/12/2012 2:42 PM, Vint Cerf wrote:
> Steve Crocker led the group that developed the
> Sigma-7 Experiment Timesharing system. We called it SEX and the most
> popular document among the geeks was the SEX Users Manual....


Cycling back to the topic of Arpa's wanting to share resources, when we 
tried to get funding for 32K more memory for the system, Arpa instead 
said we should get a PDP-11 and use one of the terminal concentrator 
systems (ANTS from Illinois or ELF from Santa Barbara) and do remote 
computing.

The concentrator systems weren't up to snuff, but Unix was coming 
available on PDP-11s and we got that.

So Arpa took away our Sex and gave us Unix.

Our original superuser password was, of course, eunuchs.

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From vint at google.com  Sat May 12 18:19:04 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 21:19:04 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <a0624080dcbd4b2630da5@10.0.1.3>
References: <20120512223513.C59AA18C0B3@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
	<a0624080dcbd4b2630da5@10.0.1.3>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggfq6NqEazQF7gptOGHGWTi1G7aoT__93euqd=fqtVQ9Vg@mail.gmail.com>

i am pretty sure that DCA had charge of ARPANET from about 1975-early
1983; heidi heiden might be good to consult about that.

On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 8:40 PM, John Day <jeanjour at comcast.net> wrote:
> For the first few years, there was a well-known socket at NMC that would
> return a logical ARPANET map indicating who was up and down at that moment.
> ?It would print on a single 8.5 x 11 page of paper on a Model 33 Teletype.
> ?It was discontinued when it would no longer fit.
>
> SDC did have a node in Santa Monica and in DC. ?I don't remember what was
> connected to it. ?It may have been a TIP. ?We were doing stuff with them in
> the late 70s. ?The question is was it DARPA or DCA? or DISA?
>
> John
>
>
>
> At 18:35 -0400 2012/05/12, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>>
>> ? ?> From: Craig Milo Rogers <rogers at ISI.EDU>
>>
>> ? ?>> From: Dave Walden <dave.walden.family at gmail.com>
>>
>> ? ?>> I think SDC was on the ARPANET, host number 10??
>>
>> ? ?> SDC was on earlier than I remembered; they show up on the 1970
>> ARPANET
>> ? ?> map. They dropped off the map, so to speak, around 1977.
>>
>> You saved me from making a big mistake! I consulted the entire series of
>> "Network Host Status" RFCs, and according to them it was 0/8 ("SDC
>> IBM-360/155") _but_ none of them ever showed it online. I tried looking in
>> such host tables as I have, and a host table I have from '77 shows IMP 8
>> being NRL. Which led me to guess they'd never been on... but that was
>> clearly
>> wrong: looking at some maps, I see they did.
>>
>> Speaking of maps, I've been accumulating a big collection of them, and
>> will
>> put them up on a web page shortly. Of particular interest are the logical
>> ones (not many of which are online), which also show the hosts.
>>
>> (Looking online for ones to add to the large collection I have here, I'm
>> amazed how much stuff has 404'd. Lots of collections pages, and most of
>> the
>> links to things don't work... :-( I saw a link to MSGGROUP archives, but
>> it
>> was gone - and when I Google'd for it, it wasn't anywhere else. Luckily, I
>> found a copy in WayBack, but that doesn't seem to be indexed.)
>>
>>
>> Oh, about host tables: I think I have asked about these before? I have one
>> from '77 (sort of - I think it's a list from an ARPANET Directory), one
>> from
>> '79, and then a lot from '82 on, but nothing early (and I seem to recall
>> looking hard).
>>
>> Does anyone have any early ones?
>>
>>
>>
>> ? ?> Ari Shoshonan or something like that is a name that comes to mind.
>>
>> The contact name given in the RFCs is "Bob Long", FWTW.
>>
>> ? ? ? ?Noel
>
>



From jeanjour at comcast.net  Sat May 12 18:26:37 2012
From: jeanjour at comcast.net (John Day)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 21:26:37 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <4FAF0748.8080504@dcrocker.net>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<4FAED3D7.20757.9A4316E@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<CAHxHggfhtMzbdpuYit4+6q+Fp2oj2+BP8M3hXAsU0Mdf8bsFhw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF0748.8080504@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <a06240810cbd4bdc5b8b3@[10.0.1.3]>

Right, we put the first Unix up on the 'Net on a PDP-11/45 in the 
summer of 75.  Its IPC was terrible (and still is).  We shoehorned 
NCP into the kernel and Telnet as an application in the first 
version.  Then went back to fix the IPC.

John


At 17:58 -0700 2012/05/12, Dave Crocker wrote:
>On 5/12/2012 2:42 PM, Vint Cerf wrote:
>>Steve Crocker led the group that developed the
>>Sigma-7 Experiment Timesharing system. We called it SEX and the most
>>popular document among the geeks was the SEX Users Manual....
>
>
>Cycling back to the topic of Arpa's wanting to share resources, when 
>we tried to get funding for 32K more memory for the system, Arpa 
>instead said we should get a PDP-11 and use one of the terminal 
>concentrator systems (ANTS from Illinois or ELF from Santa Barbara) 
>and do remote computing.
>
>The concentrator systems weren't up to snuff, but Unix was coming 
>available on PDP-11s and we got that.
>
>So Arpa took away our Sex and gave us Unix.
>
>Our original superuser password was, of course, eunuchs.
>
>d/
>--
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net



From sytel at shaw.ca  Sat May 12 18:38:42 2012
From: sytel at shaw.ca (Sytel)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 18:38:42 -0700
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<4FAED3D7.20757.9A4316E@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<CAHxHggfhtMzbdpuYit4+6q+Fp2oj2+BP8M3hXAsU0Mdf8bsFhw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <006882DB56EB466FAAC866F1DEECD360@bng1>

In all seriousness, this sounds very informative-- is this manual available 
somewhere? Would love to know more about the "sit down, log in and do stuff" 
specifics of it, especially that original UCLA Sigma 7...

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Vint Cerf" <vint at google.com>
To: "Bernie Cosell" <bernie at fantasyfarm.com>
Cc: <internet-history at postel.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 2:42 PM
Subject: Re: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet


> yes, that was the first machine connected at UCLA - Mike W did the
> hardware. Charley Kline and others had a hand in the i/o software. I
> wrote a modified version of the Sigma-7 operating system to run
> measurements and to generate artificial traffic into the network. Bob
> Kahn and Dave Walden paid visits to UCLA where we did particular
> experiments. We used this system to test the predictions of Len
> Kleinrock and his students about the performance of the ARPANET based
> on queueing models. Steve Crocker led the group that developed the
> Sigma-7 Experiment Timesharing system. We called it SEX and the most
> popular document among the geeks was the SEX Users Manual....
>
> v
>
>
> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Bernie Cosell <bernie at fantasyfarm.com> 
> wrote:
>> On 12 May 2012 at 11:54, Robert Braden wrote:
>>
>>> The side discussion of the two IBM 360/91s at UCLA would
>>> seem to have little to do with Internet history. ...
>>
>> all this talk of UCLAs connections to the ARPAnet got me wondering:, am I
>> misremembering? Didn't UCLA have a Sigma 7 that connected to the
>> ARPAnet [I vaguely recall Mike Wingfield did the interface and I had to
>> work with him to debug something about it].
>>
>> /bernie\
>>
>> --
>> Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers
>> mailto:bernie at fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA
>> --> Too many people, too few sheep <--
>>
>>
>>
> 



From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Sat May 12 18:45:47 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 21:45:47 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
Message-ID: <20120513014547.0C02118C0AE@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: John Day <jeanjour at comcast.net>

    > SDC did have a node in Santa Monica and in DC. I don't remember what
    > was connected to it. It may have been a TIP.

For the one in California, it was originally apparently a 360/67, per this map:

  http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/jpg/L70Dec.jpg

but later it was a 370/145:

  http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/jpg/L72Aug.jpg

It disappeared a couple of years later, the last map I have which shows it is:

  http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/jpg/G76Jul.jpg

I don't see an SDC node in Washington - are you thinking of MITRE? (They were
kind of organizational siblings, both being formed to work on SAGE, MITRE on
system engineering, and SDC for the coding.)

	Noel


From jeanjour at comcast.net  Sat May 12 19:54:38 2012
From: jeanjour at comcast.net (John Day)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 22:54:38 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <20120513014547.0C02118C0AE@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120513014547.0C02118C0AE@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <a06240813cbd4d248877e@[10.0.1.3]>

No, but same area.  MITRE was down on Dolly Madison in McLean.  SDC 
was up the road on a road behind the Tyson Corner Holiday Inn, when 
there was a.most nothing back there  I remember seeing deer at the 
office window about dusk in the woods between SDC and the Holiday Inn.

>
>
>I don't see an SDC node in Washington - are you thinking of MITRE? (They were
>kind of organizational siblings, both being formed to work on SAGE, MITRE on
>system engineering, and SDC for the coding.)
>
>	Noel



From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Sat May 12 20:28:38 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (dave.walden.family at gmail.com)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 23:28:38 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <006882DB56EB466FAAC866F1DEECD360@bng1>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<4FAED3D7.20757.9A4316E@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<CAHxHggfhtMzbdpuYit4+6q+Fp2oj2+BP8M3hXAsU0Mdf8bsFhw@mail.gmail.com>
	<006882DB56EB466FAAC866F1DEECD360@bng1>
Message-ID: <CD742FB3-250C-42BB-9AC8-4CA4EBFDCA6F@gmail.com>

Go to the UCLA Internet Archive web site.  It has scans of the log book from the Sigma 7 in those earliest days.  Various of the people mention in this discussion are noted in the log book.  Dr. Brad Fidler is the staff archivist if you want a contact there.  The archive is apparently in Boelter Hall where the IMP and Sigma 7 were.   I think the IMP is still there.  

Sent from my iPad

On May 12, 2012, at 9:38 PM, "Sytel" <sytel at shaw.ca> wrote:

> In all seriousness, this sounds very informative-- is this manual available somewhere? Would love to know more about the "sit down, log in and do stuff" specifics of it, especially that original UCLA Sigma 7...
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vint Cerf" <vint at google.com>
> To: "Bernie Cosell" <bernie at fantasyfarm.com>
> Cc: <internet-history at postel.org>
> Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2012 2:42 PM
> Subject: Re: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
> 
> 
>> yes, that was the first machine connected at UCLA - Mike W did the
>> hardware. Charley Kline and others had a hand in the i/o software. I
>> wrote a modified version of the Sigma-7 operating system to run
>> measurements and to generate artificial traffic into the network. Bob
>> Kahn and Dave Walden paid visits to UCLA where we did particular
>> experiments. We used this system to test the predictions of Len
>> Kleinrock and his students about the performance of the ARPANET based
>> on queueing models. Steve Crocker led the group that developed the
>> Sigma-7 Experiment Timesharing system. We called it SEX and the most
>> popular document among the geeks was the SEX Users Manual....
>> 
>> v
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Bernie Cosell <bernie at fantasyfarm.com> wrote:
>>> On 12 May 2012 at 11:54, Robert Braden wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The side discussion of the two IBM 360/91s at UCLA would
>>>> seem to have little to do with Internet history. ...
>>> 
>>> all this talk of UCLAs connections to the ARPAnet got me wondering:, am I
>>> misremembering? Didn't UCLA have a Sigma 7 that connected to the
>>> ARPAnet [I vaguely recall Mike Wingfield did the interface and I had to
>>> work with him to debug something about it].
>>> 
>>> /bernie\
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Bernie Cosell Fantasy Farm Fibers
>>> mailto:bernie at fantasyfarm.com Pearisburg, VA
>>> --> Too many people, too few sheep <--
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
> 



From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Sat May 12 20:33:12 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (dave.walden.family at gmail.com)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 23:33:12 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <a06240813cbd4d248877e@[10.0.1.3]>
References: <20120513014547.0C02118C0AE@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
	<a06240813cbd4d248877e@[10.0.1.3]>
Message-ID: <8F9ED3EA-912D-4891-9091-ACC2ACE2F3F1@gmail.com>

Is this mention of SDC in DC, do people perhaps mean SDAC in Alexandria?  

Sent from my iPad

On May 12, 2012, at 10:54 PM, John Day <jeanjour at comcast.net> wrote:

> No, but same area.  MITRE was down on Dolly Madison in McLean.  SDC was up the road on a road behind the Tyson Corner Holiday Inn, when there was a.most nothing back there  I remember seeing deer at the office window about dusk in the woods between SDC and the Holiday Inn.
> 
>> 
>> 
>> I don't see an SDC node in Washington - are you thinking of MITRE? (They were
>> kind of organizational siblings, both being formed to work on SAGE, MITRE on
>> system engineering, and SDC for the coding.)
>> 
>>    Noel
> 



From vint at google.com  Sun May 13 03:10:47 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 06:10:47 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>

it was international and it did include louis pouzin. However, the
TCP/IP development was undertaken first by bob kahn and me (and we
briefed INWG in Sept 1973 at University of Sussex), then by my group
at Stanford University during 1974 (including yogen dalal, carl
sunshine, dick karp, judy estrin, jim mathis, darryl rubin and seminar
attendees john shoch and occasionally bob metcalfe. Gerard LeLann came
from Louis Pouzin's group for a year; Dag Belsnes from Univ of Oslo,
Kuninobu Tanno from Japan, Paal Spilling from NDRE; I am sure I have
left out a few others); and then Ray Tomlinson and Bill Plummer at BBN
as well as Peter Kirstein and his group at UCL (there is a long list
here but I can't reproduce it from memory) in 1975. In 1976 we start
seeing more implementations and tests - the big one in Nov 1977 with
all three networks. We generated Internet Experiment Notes. I don't
think we had a name for the group of implementors sponsored by ARPA.
By 1979 we are well on the way to standardizing version 4 including
the split. By 1980 or so, BBN and Berkeley are working the Unix
version; ultimately BSD 4.2 is released with TCP/IP by Bill Joy (among
others). I don't recall exactly when you did the IBM 360/91 and 360/75
versions but it must have been 1976 or later? Dave Clark did his IBM
PC version probably around 1980? Jim Mathis did a version for the DEC
LSI-11/23 that we used for the packet radio testing in the 1976-1980
period. Bob Kahn urged me to create the ICCB, which I did in 1979 with
Dave Clark as chair. After I left ARPA, Barry Leiner assumed
responsibility for further Internet development and created the
Internet Activities Board again with Dave Clark in the chairman's
post.

As for the group that did the original tcp/ip design, implementation
and testing, I think the principals were on the ICCB  - so that
included Bob Braden, steve kent (security - BCR project w/NSA and
DCEC), Dave Clark, Dan Lynch, Jon Postel, Jack Haverty, Dave Mills,
who else? Danny Cohen and David Reed were proponents of splitting off
IP but I don't think they were on the ICCB (boy, memory is hazy). I
don't remember whether Ed Cain was on the ICCB but he was the active
technical proponent of TCP/IP at the Defense Communications
Engineering Center in Reston and was involved in the testing of the
BCR packet Encryptors. Ray McFarland was the primary contact at NSA
for BCR and for the Internet protocol development starting around
1975, if memory serves.

regarding the term "Internet" it was applied to RFC 675, December
1974, the first full TCP spec that had three authors: vint cerf, yogen
dalal and carl sunshine.

i am copying the history list hoping they will add to this summary
and, in particular, pick up names I've missed.

vint


On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Robert Braden <braden at isi.edu> wrote:
> Vint,
>
> I had the idea that INWG was international and included eg Louis Pouzin.
>
> There was a group of ARPA contractors and a few others ( e.g. , ??? from
> DCEC) , which I think you formed and which you certainly led,
> that worked out the TCP/IP protocol specs. You subdivided it into the TCP
> sub-group (to which you assigned me) and the IP sub group. From this
> group came 5 (or 6?) prototype implementations of the developing TCP
> spec. What was this group called? I don't think we had settled on the
> term "Internet" yet; I recall an ICCB meeting where that issue
> as settled.
>
> I have never read any recognition of this group, nor seen its membership
> recognized.
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>
>
> On 5/12/2012 12:45 PM, Vint Cerf wrote:
>>
>> i think we settled on "international network working group" (INWG) in
>> October 1972 but IEN 48 was titled "The Catenet Model" as I recall -
>> and credit was given to Louis Pouzin and his group for inventing that
>> term.
>>
>> v
>>
>


From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Sun May 13 03:33:10 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (dave.walden.family at gmail.com)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 06:33:10 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
Message-ID: <76C0289E-50A7-432C-9A5E-93569CA28D2D@gmail.com>

Regarding a second ARPANET host at UCLA, and other places, e.g. MIT: my memory is that a lot of ARPANET traffic was intra IMP site.  

Also, I never thought before where the word "host" came from -- perhaps from hosting some of those "shared resources" that were supposed to be used cross network.


On May 12, 2012, at 2:54 PM, Robert Braden <braden at ISI.EDU> wrote:

> The side discussion of the two IBM 360/91s at UCLA would
> seem to have little to do with Internet history. However, I
> want to point out that the "other" 360/91 at UCLA was in
> fact a relatively early (1971) ARPAnet host, 



From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Sun May 13 06:58:54 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 09:58:54 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
Message-ID: <20120513135854.CE17C18C0A9@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: Vint Cerf <vint at google.com>

    > I don't think we had a name for the group of implementors sponsored by
    > ARPA.

I think at the time we informally called it the 'Internet working group' - I
didn't realize at the time that that was a duplication of the name of the
earlier international high-level design effort! (No doubt this will confuse
unwary historians in the future! :-) I've seen it referred to in IEN's that
way too (e.g. IEN-3, IEN-191).

Just for additional confusion, at that point we referred to the Internet
Protocol as "IN" (see IEN-53 for an example of this), not "IP".


    > Dave Clark did his IBM PC version probably around 1980?

Dave didn't do the PC version - that was John Romkey and Dave Bridgham. Dave
had worked on the Multics TCP to start with (I'm not sure who wrote most of
it - see:

  http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/internet-history/2006-January/000513.html

for more - I think Michael Greenwald took over maintaining on it after Dave,
and then Charlie Hornig); he then did one in BCPL for Tripos while on
sabatical at Cambridge, and after he got back, and MIT got the Xerox
Alto/Dover donation, he moved that one to the Alto.

Some of the ideas he did on his "user TELNET centric TCP" were used in a TCP
we did for PDP-11 Unix (by Larry Allen - Liza Martin did a more classical TCP
for the same machine - both used the same kernel support, where only the
packet de-mux was in the kernel, and the rest of the TCP was in the user
space). I then did a TCP for Bridge based on the Allen one. The IBM PC one
came after all those, I think (maybe not after the Bridge one, but definitely
after the others).

I don't have dates off the top of my head for much of that (although I could
probably research it in my archives if anyone needs to know); I can say for
sure that the Alto one was done around March 1980.


    > Danny Cohen and David Reed were proponents of splitting off IP but I
    > don't think they were on the ICCB

I'm pretty sure Dave didn't. He phased out of network work shortly after
doing UDP (January 1979). I don't recall what he switched to working on (I
had thought it was his PhD thesis, but I see that was done by '78).

	Noel


From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Sun May 13 07:24:16 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (Dave Walden)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 10:24:16 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <20120513135854.CE17C18C0A9@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120513135854.CE17C18C0A9@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <4fafc314.47d0e00a.1a1e.ffff9e7a@mx.google.com>

I think we called it the Network Working Group during the ARPANET 
pre-Internet days -- the group writing RFCs to each other.  (Or am I 
talking about some different topic than Noel is talking about.)

At 09:58 AM 5/13/2012, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>I think at the time we informally called it the 'Internet working group' -


--
home address: 12 Linden Rd., E. Sandwich, MA 02537
home ph=508-888-7655; cell ph = 503-757-3137
email address:  dave at walden-family.com; website: 
<http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/>http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/  



From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Sun May 13 07:40:59 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 07:40:59 -0700
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <CD742FB3-250C-42BB-9AC8-4CA4EBFDCA6F@gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<4FAED3D7.20757.9A4316E@bernie.fantasyfarm.com>
	<CAHxHggfhtMzbdpuYit4+6q+Fp2oj2+BP8M3hXAsU0Mdf8bsFhw@mail.gmail.com>
	<006882DB56EB466FAAC866F1DEECD360@bng1>
	<CD742FB3-250C-42BB-9AC8-4CA4EBFDCA6F@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FAFC7FB.90108@dcrocker.net>



On 5/12/2012 8:28 PM, dave.walden.family at gmail.com wrote:
> Go to the UCLA Internet Archive web site.  It has scans of the log book from the Sigma 7 in those earliest days.  Various of the people mention in this discussion are noted in the log book.  Dr. Brad Fidler is the staff archivist if you want a contact there.  The archive is apparently in Boelter Hall where the IMP and Sigma 7 were.   I think the IMP is still there.


Developing and maintaining the SEX (user) Manual was one of my jobs at 
the UCLA Arpanet project.  It's the only document that has co-authorship 
with Vint, Jon, Charlie, Steve, and me (and others).

Alas, I don't have a snapshot of it.

As I recall, it wasn't very interesting reading.  Given how little 
computer science I knew at the time, writing for it kept me up at night, 
but I suspect reading it now would have the opposite effect for most folk.

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Sun May 13 08:07:24 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 11:07:24 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
Message-ID: <20120513150724.AF7DC18C0A8@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: Dave Walden <dave.walden.family at gmail.com>

    > I think we called it the Network Working Group during the ARPANET
    > pre-Internet days -- the group writing RFCs to each other. (Or am I
    > talking about some different topic than Noel is talking about.)

I think so. You seem to be talking about the group that did the Host-Host
protocol (aka NCP), whereas I'm talking about the group that did TCP/IP.

	Noel


From vint at google.com  Sun May 13 08:09:07 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 11:09:07 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <4fafc314.47d0e00a.1a1e.ffff9e7a@mx.google.com>
References: <20120513135854.CE17C18C0A9@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
	<4fafc314.47d0e00a.1a1e.ffff9e7a@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <CAHxHgge9Gg8we6VRreL3yQR+j-4owm-MDgrxg=qv-giSGv0DKA@mail.gmail.com>

The network working group did nco, telnet, FTP, eventually smtp, although
the latter might have been post-1982 and for Internet and not Arpanet (?).
On May 13, 2012 10:32 AM, "Dave Walden" <dave.walden.family at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I think we called it the Network Working Group during the ARPANET
> pre-Internet days -- the group writing RFCs to each other.  (Or am I
> talking about some different topic than Noel is talking about.)
>
> At 09:58 AM 5/13/2012, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>
>> I think at the time we informally called it the 'Internet working group' -
>>
>
>
> --
> home address: 12 Linden Rd., E. Sandwich, MA 02537
> home ph=508-888-7655; cell ph = 503-757-3137
> email address:  dave at walden-family.com; website: <
> http://www.walden-family.com/**bbn/ <http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/>>
> http://www.walden-family.**com/bbn/ <http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120513/36e0d3d6/attachment.htm>

From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Sun May 13 09:39:06 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 12:39:06 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
Message-ID: <20120513163906.703A518C0A1@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: Vint Cerf <vint at google.com>

    > The network working group did nco, telnet, FTP, eventually smtp,
    > although the latter might have been post-1982 and for Internet and not
    > Arpanet (?).

I thought SMTP came out of MSGROUP, or perhaps some hybrid of MSGGROUP and
the old NWG? (I vaguely recall chit-chat from other hackers in the MIT AI Lab
about it.) It _definitely_ was not from the TCP/Ip group(s).

None of RFCs 772, 780, 788 or 821 says anything definitive about where it
came from, alas. There are some (much earlier) RFCs about nail which I didn't
delve into which may help on this.

(Amusingly, 772 expands 'NCP' to "Network Control Protocol", which is what I
for many years thought/assumed it was - but it turns out that in the
beginning, it means 'Network Control Program'. Nice to know there is some
formal backup for 'Protocol'... :-)

SMTP was always intended for use with both NCP and TCP, and saw most of its
early use under NCP.


    > From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com

    > Regarding a second ARPANET host at UCLA, and other places, e.g. MIT: my
    > memory is that a lot of ARPA NET traffic was intra IMP site.

Indeed - especially between the ITS machines at MIT, which had a shared file
system across the ARPANET (and built into the OS, so all apps automatically
had access to it), so that any place you could name/use a file on the machine
you were on, you could just as easily name/use one on one of the others. So
that tended to generate a lot of traffic.

I recall seeing some numbers for packets at MIT, which split the data up into
inter-site and intra-site, but alas I don't think I have access to them any
more (there were weekly reports from BBN, IIRC).

	Noel


From mbgreen at seas.upenn.edu  Sun May 13 09:41:59 2012
From: mbgreen at seas.upenn.edu (Michael Greenwald)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 09:41:59 -0700
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <20120513135854.CE17C18C0A9@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120513135854.CE17C18C0A9@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <4FAFE457.9040806@seas.upenn.edu>

On 5/13/12 6:58 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>      >  From: Vint Cerf<vint at google.com>
>
>      >  I don't think we had a name for the group of implementors sponsored by
>      >  ARPA.
>
> I think at the time we informally called it the 'Internet working group' - I
> didn't realize at the time that that was a duplication of the name of the
> earlier international high-level design effort! (No doubt this will confuse
> unwary historians in the future! :-) I've seen it referred to in IEN's that
> way too (e.g. IEN-3, IEN-191).
>
> Just for additional confusion, at that point we referred to the Internet
> Protocol as "IN" (see IEN-53 for an example of this), not "IP".
>
>
>      >  Dave Clark did his IBM PC version probably around 1980?
>
> Dave didn't do the PC version - that was John Romkey and Dave Bridgham. Dave
> had worked on the Multics TCP to start with (I'm not sure who wrote most of
Just to clarify in the wealth of 'Dave's: Dave 
Clark worked on Multics IP/TCP and not Dave 
Bridgham (as far as I remember).
> it - see:
>
>    http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/internet-history/2006-January/000513.html
>
> for more - I think Michael Greenwald took over maintaining on it after Dave,
> and then Charlie Hornig);
Yes.  We actually split the IP stack; I'm not 100% 
sure of my memory (I wish I had my multics email), 
but I think that by 1979-80 Charlie was handling 
TCP and I was handling everything else (IP, the 
Internet Imp daemon), GGP (Multics actually ran 
experimentally as a gateway), TFTP, UDP, the mail 
protocol (I think I wrote an MTP implementation 
before the SMTP spec was written?  Although, I 
think SMTP was a set of minor modifications to 
MTP), ICMP when it turned up, TELNET (I think I 
needed to rewrite it to handle some new option 
negotiation, and interact with echo negotiation to 
make emacs work) -- I'm not sure of the dates of 
any of those).  After Charlie left we did a few 
rewrites of TCP and IP to reduce the number of 
context switches, to deal with congestion, and 
then a rewrite to have the IP stack run in an 
inner ring.  Dave Vinograd at Honeywell CISL hired 
me to come over and turn it into a product.  I 
worked on this transfer for a couple of months, I 
am pretty sure that J Spencer Love took over from 
me there, and did all of the hard work.

I'm not sure if this level of detail is useful to 
anyone, or just noise.
> he then did one in BCPL for Tripos while on
> sabatical at Cambridge, and after he got back, and MIT got the Xerox
> Alto/Dover donation, he moved that one to the Alto.
Double check with Dave.  I think the Alto donation 
occurred well before his stay at Cambridge, and I 
think we had an Alto TFTP implementation well 
before he left.  I don't remember if Dave's 
original small TCP/Telnet client on the Alto 
predated his Tripos implementation --- I have a 
vague memory that he rewrote the Alto 
implementation when he came back, but I may be 
totally off there -- he may have written it from 
scratch afterwards.
>
> Some of the ideas he did on his "user TELNET centric TCP" were used in a TCP
> we did for PDP-11 Unix (by Larry Allen - Liza Martin did a more classical TCP
> for the same machine - both used the same kernel support, where only the
> packet de-mux was in the kernel, and the rest of the TCP was in the user
> space). I then did a TCP for Bridge based on the Allen one. The IBM PC one
> came after all those, I think (maybe not after the Bridge one, but definitely
> after the others).
>
> I don't have dates off the top of my head for much of that (although I could
> probably research it in my archives if anyone needs to know); I can say for
> sure that the Alto one was done around March 1980.
>
>
>      >  Danny Cohen and David Reed were proponents of splitting off IP but I
>      >  don't think they were on the ICCB
>
> I'm pretty sure Dave didn't. He phased out of network work shortly after
> doing UDP (January 1979). I don't recall what he switched to working on (I
> had thought it was his PhD thesis, but I see that was done by '78).
Dave Reed was still working on networking, in 
addition to Swallow, after 79.  He worked on what 
he called "non-FIFO protocols", BLAST (a 
disk-to-disk transfer protocol, predating NETBLT, 
but influencing it) and Blink (a remote display 
protocol that was contemporary with Bob Scheiffler 
starting X down the hall, but we thought 
(incorrectly, it turns out) that the sequencing 
imposed by TCP would make it too slow for running 
the graphic displays for our operating system 
(Swift)).  This doesn't say anything about whether 
Dave Reed was on the ICCB (but you can ask him).
>
> 	Noel
>



From LarrySheldon at cox.net  Sun May 13 12:02:09 2012
From: LarrySheldon at cox.net (Larry Sheldon)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 14:02:09 -0500
Subject: [ih] Nomenclature
Message-ID: <4FB00531.5010200@cox.net>

Another question from the "F" row.....

For background, met the Internet when Creighton joined MIDNet in the 
early 1990s.

I am a nomenclature freak--trying always to discover "where on Earth did 
THAT name come from?"

I am finding the recent burst of really interesting history recitations 
fascinating but it stirred up some old questions.

It seems to me that most often when somebody talk about TCP or IP they 
will say "TCP/IP" but I never hear "UDP/IP", "ICMP/IP", "BGP/IP.....

I stopped there to check my memory and found or remembered that most of 
the protocols I know anything about (e. g. BGP) ride either TCP or UDP.

Which means I need to go understand the IP  - TCP split.  I thought I 
knew that, but if I do, I have forgotten.

(Along the way, a new question for me to chase:  Does VoIP use IP? 
TCP/IP?  UDP? (Wiki seems to say Yes, No, and No.

-- 
Requiescas in pace o email           Two identifying characteristics
                                         of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio      Infallibility, and the ability to
                                         learn from their mistakes.
ICBM Data:  http://g.co/maps/e5gmy        (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)


From craig at aland.bbn.com  Sun May 13 12:58:36 2012
From: craig at aland.bbn.com (Craig Partridge)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 15:58:36 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
Message-ID: <20120513195836.3ED4A28E137@aland.bbn.com>

> The network working group did nco, telnet, FTP, eventually smtp, although
> the latter might have been post-1982 and for Internet and not Arpanet (?).

MTP and its successor, SMTP, were for the Internet, not ARPANET.  As best
I can reconstruct from RFCs and various people's recollections, the
initial plan was to launch TCP/IP with a new and improved email that
did multimedia mail.  But the DARPA PM (initials VC) realized in early
1980 that TCP/IP was going to mature ahead of multimedia -- and also felt
that the Internet needed something better than a hacked FTP supporting such
an important application.  So he created a transition plan, documented
in RFCs 771 and 773.  RFC 772, by Postel and Sluizer, introduced MTP, the
planned Internet email protocol.  After a year of working on MTP, and in
response to regular criticism of the MTP design, apparently led by Peter
Kirstein, Jon tossed MTP for a simpler SMTP (which, it appears, was
inspired by the RFC 785 documentation of the MTP TOPS-20 envelope -- as
each SMTP command fills in a line in the TOPS-20 envelope file).

Thanks!

Craig


From vint at google.com  Sun May 13 15:54:14 2012
From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 18:54:14 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>

Jack this is helpful!

I am reasonably sure that Bob Kahn nudged me to create a "cabinet" in
1979 and that I did do so - but it is possible that the group was not
convened separately and  formally until 1981. Plainly we would be in
planning mode for the big cutover by that time.

Berkeley BSD4.2 had the first TCP/IP code in it from Bill Joy who did
not use the BBN code.

Kirstein chaired the International Coordination Board (ICB) rather
than serving on the ICCB. ICB was notably focused on SATNET access to
the ARPANET hosts using TCP/IP at least a year ahead of the big
ARPANET cutover.


v



On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Jack Haverty <jack at 3kitty.org> wrote:
> [Please preface every sentence with "As far as I can remember..."]
>
> I did a little garage archaeology and found my notebooks from the late
> 70s/80s. ?The earliest mention I found of "ICCB" was notes from the
> ICCB meeting of 9/21/1981 at UCL - the day before the full quarterly
> Internet Group meeting, which by then had become quite large.
>
> Since I don't have any ICCB notes from the previous Internet meeting
> at COMSAT in June 1981, I suspect that the UCL meeting was the first
> ICCB meeting. ?Vint had asked a small group of people who also
> attended the regular Internet meeting to come a day early and help him
> brainstorm some longer-term and architectural issues, which were
> increasingly difficult to do in the ever-larger Internet meeting. ?But
> the 1981 date conflicts with Vint's 1979 date. ?Perhaps the ICCB
> started earlier, but I think I recall being at the formative meeting
> where the term "configuration control" was selected. ?Maybe someone
> else knows more....?
>
> I recall that the name "Internet Configuration Control Board" was
> explicitly chosen to make the activity sound boring and unattractive -
> otherwise everybody would have wanted to be there. ?This had already
> happened in the prior working groups which had gotten unwieldy.
>
> As I recall, the ICCB membership was:
> Vint Cerf - DARPA
> Ed Cain - DCA/DCEC
> Ray McFarland - DoD
> Jim Mathis - SRI
> Jon Postel - ISI
> Bob Braden - UCLA
> Dave Mills - Comsat? ?Udel?
> Dave Clark - MIT
> Steve Kent - BBN
> Jack Haverty - BBN
>
> I can't recall whether or not Peter Kirstein and/or John Laws was
> involved. ? Danny Cohen and Dave Reed were not on the ICCB. ? There
> were many meetings in various Internet-based projects with highly
> overlapping membership, so it's hard to remember who was in what
> groups any more. ? Maybe a little more garage archaeology will help.
>
> I don't think Dan Lynch was on the ICCB, but he was everywhere so I
> could be wrong. ? He did solve one of Vint's problems rather neatly.
> Everyone wanted to go to the Internet meetings, so it became difficult
> to "get a ticket" from Vint to attend. ?Dan noticed this, and being a
> true entrepreneur solved it by booking a conference center and
> charging hundreds of dollars to attend - plus inviting and encouraging
> all of the regular Internet meeting denizens to present papers, etc.
> Problem solved. ?As more and more people attended, it just required a
> bigger and bigger conference facility. ?That's how the Interop shows
> got started.
>
> The ICCB continued as a regular meeting colocated with the expanding
> Internet meeting, acting as a sort of steering committee/advisor for
> Vint, and we could go back after the meetings to our various
> organizations and try to get the whole crew to head in the same
> direction based on the ICCB consensus.
>
> I've attached a scan of my notes from that first meeting. ? If anybody
> can read my horrible handwriting, they might prove interesting. ?The
> motivation for the ICCB seemed to be the need to plan out the "January
> 1983 System" which would be able to support "heavy load". ? ?That of
> course turned out to be the milestone when the Arpanet was converted
> to TCP, and the transformation of the research Internet into the
> operational service net. ?At some point along the way, the ICCB "came
> out of the closet" and was renamed the Internet Activities Board.
>
> I'm pretty sure that no one had any idea that this would lead to what
> we have today....we would have run away screaming in disbelief!
>
> /Jack
>
> PS - my introductory role to the Internet in the 1977/78 timeframe was
> to implement TCP 2.5 for a PDP-11/40 running Unix, using Jim Mathis'
> implementation for the LSI-11 as a base. ?AFAIK, that was the first
> TCP implementation for any Unix system. ?Because the 11/40 was so
> limited, my implementation was done in user address space, which
> severely hampered performance. ?Mike Wingfield subsequently did an
> implementation in C for the PDP-11/70, and Rob Gurwitz did one for the
> VAX. ?Rob's code was supplied to Berkeley for incorporation in BSD,
> but whether they used it in the BSD TCP for anything other than a
> bookend is unknown. ? John Sax did TCP for the HP-3000. ?Bob Hinden
> did TCP for the Arpanet TIP/TACs. ?Bill Plummer did the PDP-10 TOPS
> and Tenex implementations. ? All of these were done at BBN
>
> On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 3:10 AM, Vint Cerf <vint at google.com> wrote:
>> it was international and it did include louis pouzin. However, the
>> TCP/IP development was undertaken first by bob kahn and me (and we
>> briefed INWG in Sept 1973 at University of Sussex), then by my group
>> at Stanford University during 1974 (including yogen dalal, carl
>> sunshine, dick karp, judy estrin, jim mathis, darryl rubin and seminar
>> attendees john shoch and occasionally bob metcalfe. Gerard LeLann came
>> from Louis Pouzin's group for a year; Dag Belsnes from Univ of Oslo,
>> Kuninobu Tanno from Japan, Paal Spilling from NDRE; I am sure I have
>> left out a few others); and then Ray Tomlinson and Bill Plummer at BBN
>> as well as Peter Kirstein and his group at UCL (there is a long list
>> here but I can't reproduce it from memory) in 1975. In 1976 we start
>> seeing more implementations and tests - the big one in Nov 1977 with
>> all three networks. We generated Internet Experiment Notes. I don't
>> think we had a name for the group of implementors sponsored by ARPA.
>> By 1979 we are well on the way to standardizing version 4 including
>> the split. By 1980 or so, BBN and Berkeley are working the Unix
>> version; ultimately BSD 4.2 is released with TCP/IP by Bill Joy (among
>> others). I don't recall exactly when you did the IBM 360/91 and 360/75
>> versions but it must have been 1976 or later? Dave Clark did his IBM
>> PC version probably around 1980? Jim Mathis did a version for the DEC
>> LSI-11/23 that we used for the packet radio testing in the 1976-1980
>> period. Bob Kahn urged me to create the ICCB, which I did in 1979 with
>> Dave Clark as chair. After I left ARPA, Barry Leiner assumed
>> responsibility for further Internet development and created the
>> Internet Activities Board again with Dave Clark in the chairman's
>> post.
>>
>> As for the group that did the original tcp/ip design, implementation
>> and testing, I think the principals were on the ICCB ?- so that
>> included Bob Braden, steve kent (security - BCR project w/NSA and
>> DCEC), Dave Clark, Dan Lynch, Jon Postel, Jack Haverty, Dave Mills,
>> who else? Danny Cohen and David Reed were proponents of splitting off
>> IP but I don't think they were on the ICCB (boy, memory is hazy). I
>> don't remember whether Ed Cain was on the ICCB but he was the active
>> technical proponent of TCP/IP at the Defense Communications
>> Engineering Center in Reston and was involved in the testing of the
>> BCR packet Encryptors. Ray McFarland was the primary contact at NSA
>> for BCR and for the Internet protocol development starting around
>> 1975, if memory serves.
>>
>> regarding the term "Internet" it was applied to RFC 675, December
>> 1974, the first full TCP spec that had three authors: vint cerf, yogen
>> dalal and carl sunshine.
>>
>> i am copying the history list hoping they will add to this summary
>> and, in particular, pick up names I've missed.
>>
>> vint
>>
>>
>> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Robert Braden <braden at isi.edu> wrote:
>>> Vint,
>>>
>>> I had the idea that INWG was international and included eg Louis Pouzin.
>>>
>>> There was a group of ARPA contractors and a few others ( e.g. , ??? from
>>> DCEC) , which I think you formed and which you certainly led,
>>> that worked out the TCP/IP protocol specs. You subdivided it into the TCP
>>> sub-group (to which you assigned me) and the IP sub group. From this
>>> group came 5 (or 6?) prototype implementations of the developing TCP
>>> spec. What was this group called? I don't think we had settled on the
>>> term "Internet" yet; I recall an ICCB meeting where that issue
>>> as settled.
>>>
>>> I have never read any recognition of this group, nor seen its membership
>>> recognized.
>>>
>>> Bob
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 5/12/2012 12:45 PM, Vint Cerf wrote:
>>>>
>>>> i think we settled on "international network working group" (INWG) in
>>>> October 1972 but IEN 48 was titled "The Catenet Model" as I recall -
>>>> and credit was given to Louis Pouzin and his group for inventing that
>>>> term.
>>>>
>>>> v
>>>>
>>>



From craig at aland.bbn.com  Sun May 13 16:13:03 2012
From: craig at aland.bbn.com (Craig Partridge)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 19:13:03 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
Message-ID: <20120513231303.2E8CF28E137@aland.bbn.com>

> > PS - my introductory role to the Internet in the 1977/78 timeframe was
> > to implement TCP 2.5 for a PDP-11/40 running Unix, using Jim Mathis'
> > implementation for the LSI-11 as a base. ?AFAIK, that was the first
> > TCP implementation for any Unix system. ?Because the 11/40 was so
> > limited, my implementation was done in user address space, which
> > severely hampered performance. ?Mike Wingfield subsequently did an
> > implementation in C for the PDP-11/70, and Rob Gurwitz did one for the
> > VAX. ?Rob's code was supplied to Berkeley for incorporation in BSD,
> > but whether they used it in the BSD TCP for anything other than a
> > bookend is unknown.

Yes, they used to justify their bugs on the grounds that the bugs were
also present in the BSD code.  Half :-) but half serious as I did hear
the excuse at least once from a Berkeley person.

Thanks!

Craig


From jaap at NLnetLabs.nl  Sun May 13 16:14:02 2012
From: jaap at NLnetLabs.nl (Jaap Akkerhuis)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 01:14:02 +0200
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <201205132314.q4DNE2bm018127@bartok.nlnetlabs.nl>

Vint,

Testing the BSD distributions at that time, I remember it differently.
    
    Berkeley BSD4.2 had the first TCP/IP code in it from Bill Joy who did
    not use the BBN code.
    
The first non-BBN TCP/IP code appeared in BSD 4.1C. That distribution
had actually both versions in it and one could choose during system
generation which one to use. At that time Bill Jou already left for
SUN. Later SUN released a system which had the BSD TCP/IP stack and
SUN called it BSD4.2 (based), but that was quite some time before
the real BSD4.2 actually appeared.

	jaap


From jeanjour at comcast.net  Sun May 13 17:12:51 2012
From: jeanjour at comcast.net (John Day)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 20:12:51 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <20120513231303.2E8CF28E137@aland.bbn.com>
References: <20120513231303.2E8CF28E137@aland.bbn.com>
Message-ID: <a06240809cbd5fd63dccd@[10.0.1.3]>

We did two or three TCP implementations for the 
11/70 in the 77-80 time frame.  My memory is a 
bit vague.  I know we did two iterations.  What I 
can't remember was did we do one before we left 
the University, if so that one would have been on 
an 11/45.  As I said, we put Unix up (on the 
11.45) in the summer of 75, by the Spring of 76 
we had a stripped down version of Unix on the 
LSI-11 with a plasma panel and early touch screen 
as an intelligent terminal, sort of an early 
attempt at an X-terminal.

At 19:13 -0400 2012/05/13, Craig Partridge wrote:
>  > > PS - my introductory role to the Internet in the 1977/78 timeframe was
>>  > to implement TCP 2.5 for a PDP-11/40 running Unix, using Jim Mathis'
>>  > implementation for the LSI-11 as a base. ?AFAIK, that was the first
>>  > TCP implementation for any Unix system. ?Because the 11/40 was so
>>  > limited, my implementation was done in user address space, which
>>  > severely hampered performance. ?Mike Wingfield subsequently did an
>>  > implementation in C for the PDP-11/70, and Rob Gurwitz did one for the
>>  > VAX. ?Rob's code was supplied to Berkeley for incorporation in BSD,
>>  > but whether they used it in the BSD TCP for anything other than a
>>  > bookend is unknown.
>
>Yes, they used to justify their bugs on the grounds that the bugs were
>also present in the BSD code.  Half :-) but half serious as I did hear
>the excuse at least once from a Berkeley person.
>
>Thanks!
>
>Craig




From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Sun May 13 18:01:23 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 18:01:23 -0700
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <CAHxHgge9Gg8we6VRreL3yQR+j-4owm-MDgrxg=qv-giSGv0DKA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20120513135854.CE17C18C0A9@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
	<4fafc314.47d0e00a.1a1e.ffff9e7a@mx.google.com>
	<CAHxHgge9Gg8we6VRreL3yQR+j-4owm-MDgrxg=qv-giSGv0DKA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FB05963.30208@dcrocker.net>


On 5/13/2012 8:09 AM, Vint Cerf wrote:
> The network working group did nco, telnet, FTP, eventually smtp,
> although the latter might have been post-1982 and for Internet and not
> Arpanet (?).


Right.  SMTP was done in 1982, for the Internet Mail.(*)  Postel held 
some meetings that various folk attended.

At the same time, for RFC822, I only did mailing list discussion with 
folk.  But then, 822 was a relatively minor upgrade to RFC 733 from 1977 
(which was for Arpanet mail).


> On 5/13/2012 9:39 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>> I thought SMTP came out of MSGROUP, or perhaps some hybrid of MSGGROUP and
>> the old NWG? (I vaguely recall chit-chat from other hackers in the MIT AI Lab
>> about it.) It _definitely_ was not from the TCP/Ip group(s).

Well, Jon created and ran the effort.  I don't remember what mailing 
list he used for 821 (nor which I used for 822).  Might have been 
msggroup, I suppose.  For 822 it might have been hdr-people...


>> SMTP was always intended for use with both NCP and TCP, and saw most of its
>> early use under NCP.

Mumble.  SMTP doesn't care about the underlying transport details, but 
its motivation was definitely the move to the Internet.


d/

(*) Beside upgrading to domain names, the main benefit of having SMTP 
over the FTP-based mail commands we'd been using for 10 years was 
allowing multiple addressees per transmitted message.  This has become 
ironic as current mail-sending softrware tends towards one-addressee per 
message, for management control -- different message identifiers and 
logging for different addressees and content tailoring.  sigh.

-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From jack at 3kitty.org  Sun May 13 19:03:29 2012
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 19:03:29 -0700
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>

Curious - obviously my message got through, or at least part of it.
But I got this response:

"
Your mail to 'internet-history' with the subject
   Re: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
Is being held until the list moderator can review it for approval.
The reason it is being held:
   Message body is too big: 1386210 bytes with a limit of 400 KB
"
I guess the nuances of email protocol still escape me....

/Jack


On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 3:54 PM, Vint Cerf <vint at google.com> wrote:
> Jack this is helpful!
>
> I am reasonably sure that Bob Kahn nudged me to create a "cabinet" in
> 1979 and that I did do so - but it is possible that the group was not
> convened separately and ?formally until 1981. Plainly we would be in
> planning mode for the big cutover by that time.
>
> Berkeley BSD4.2 had the first TCP/IP code in it from Bill Joy who did
> not use the BBN code.
>
> Kirstein chaired the International Coordination Board (ICB) rather
> than serving on the ICCB. ICB was notably focused on SATNET access to
> the ARPANET hosts using TCP/IP at least a year ahead of the big
> ARPANET cutover.
>
>
> v
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 6:45 PM, Jack Haverty <jack at 3kitty.org> wrote:
>> [Please preface every sentence with "As far as I can remember..."]
>>
>> I did a little garage archaeology and found my notebooks from the late
>> 70s/80s. ?The earliest mention I found of "ICCB" was notes from the
>> ICCB meeting of 9/21/1981 at UCL - the day before the full quarterly
>> Internet Group meeting, which by then had become quite large.
>>
>> Since I don't have any ICCB notes from the previous Internet meeting
>> at COMSAT in June 1981, I suspect that the UCL meeting was the first
>> ICCB meeting. ?Vint had asked a small group of people who also
>> attended the regular Internet meeting to come a day early and help him
>> brainstorm some longer-term and architectural issues, which were
>> increasingly difficult to do in the ever-larger Internet meeting. ?But
>> the 1981 date conflicts with Vint's 1979 date. ?Perhaps the ICCB
>> started earlier, but I think I recall being at the formative meeting
>> where the term "configuration control" was selected. ?Maybe someone
>> else knows more....?
>>
>> I recall that the name "Internet Configuration Control Board" was
>> explicitly chosen to make the activity sound boring and unattractive -
>> otherwise everybody would have wanted to be there. ?This had already
>> happened in the prior working groups which had gotten unwieldy.
>>
>> As I recall, the ICCB membership was:
>> Vint Cerf - DARPA
>> Ed Cain - DCA/DCEC
>> Ray McFarland - DoD
>> Jim Mathis - SRI
>> Jon Postel - ISI
>> Bob Braden - UCLA
>> Dave Mills - Comsat? ?Udel?
>> Dave Clark - MIT
>> Steve Kent - BBN
>> Jack Haverty - BBN
>>
>> I can't recall whether or not Peter Kirstein and/or John Laws was
>> involved. ? Danny Cohen and Dave Reed were not on the ICCB. ? There
>> were many meetings in various Internet-based projects with highly
>> overlapping membership, so it's hard to remember who was in what
>> groups any more. ? Maybe a little more garage archaeology will help.
>>
>> I don't think Dan Lynch was on the ICCB, but he was everywhere so I
>> could be wrong. ? He did solve one of Vint's problems rather neatly.
>> Everyone wanted to go to the Internet meetings, so it became difficult
>> to "get a ticket" from Vint to attend. ?Dan noticed this, and being a
>> true entrepreneur solved it by booking a conference center and
>> charging hundreds of dollars to attend - plus inviting and encouraging
>> all of the regular Internet meeting denizens to present papers, etc.
>> Problem solved. ?As more and more people attended, it just required a
>> bigger and bigger conference facility. ?That's how the Interop shows
>> got started.
>>
>> The ICCB continued as a regular meeting colocated with the expanding
>> Internet meeting, acting as a sort of steering committee/advisor for
>> Vint, and we could go back after the meetings to our various
>> organizations and try to get the whole crew to head in the same
>> direction based on the ICCB consensus.
>>
>> I've attached a scan of my notes from that first meeting. ? If anybody
>> can read my horrible handwriting, they might prove interesting. ?The
>> motivation for the ICCB seemed to be the need to plan out the "January
>> 1983 System" which would be able to support "heavy load". ? ?That of
>> course turned out to be the milestone when the Arpanet was converted
>> to TCP, and the transformation of the research Internet into the
>> operational service net. ?At some point along the way, the ICCB "came
>> out of the closet" and was renamed the Internet Activities Board.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure that no one had any idea that this would lead to what
>> we have today....we would have run away screaming in disbelief!
>>
>> /Jack
>>
>> PS - my introductory role to the Internet in the 1977/78 timeframe was
>> to implement TCP 2.5 for a PDP-11/40 running Unix, using Jim Mathis'
>> implementation for the LSI-11 as a base. ?AFAIK, that was the first
>> TCP implementation for any Unix system. ?Because the 11/40 was so
>> limited, my implementation was done in user address space, which
>> severely hampered performance. ?Mike Wingfield subsequently did an
>> implementation in C for the PDP-11/70, and Rob Gurwitz did one for the
>> VAX. ?Rob's code was supplied to Berkeley for incorporation in BSD,
>> but whether they used it in the BSD TCP for anything other than a
>> bookend is unknown. ? John Sax did TCP for the HP-3000. ?Bob Hinden
>> did TCP for the Arpanet TIP/TACs. ?Bill Plummer did the PDP-10 TOPS
>> and Tenex implementations. ? All of these were done at BBN
>>
>> On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 3:10 AM, Vint Cerf <vint at google.com> wrote:
>>> it was international and it did include louis pouzin. However, the
>>> TCP/IP development was undertaken first by bob kahn and me (and we
>>> briefed INWG in Sept 1973 at University of Sussex), then by my group
>>> at Stanford University during 1974 (including yogen dalal, carl
>>> sunshine, dick karp, judy estrin, jim mathis, darryl rubin and seminar
>>> attendees john shoch and occasionally bob metcalfe. Gerard LeLann came
>>> from Louis Pouzin's group for a year; Dag Belsnes from Univ of Oslo,
>>> Kuninobu Tanno from Japan, Paal Spilling from NDRE; I am sure I have
>>> left out a few others); and then Ray Tomlinson and Bill Plummer at BBN
>>> as well as Peter Kirstein and his group at UCL (there is a long list
>>> here but I can't reproduce it from memory) in 1975. In 1976 we start
>>> seeing more implementations and tests - the big one in Nov 1977 with
>>> all three networks. We generated Internet Experiment Notes. I don't
>>> think we had a name for the group of implementors sponsored by ARPA.
>>> By 1979 we are well on the way to standardizing version 4 including
>>> the split. By 1980 or so, BBN and Berkeley are working the Unix
>>> version; ultimately BSD 4.2 is released with TCP/IP by Bill Joy (among
>>> others). I don't recall exactly when you did the IBM 360/91 and 360/75
>>> versions but it must have been 1976 or later? Dave Clark did his IBM
>>> PC version probably around 1980? Jim Mathis did a version for the DEC
>>> LSI-11/23 that we used for the packet radio testing in the 1976-1980
>>> period. Bob Kahn urged me to create the ICCB, which I did in 1979 with
>>> Dave Clark as chair. After I left ARPA, Barry Leiner assumed
>>> responsibility for further Internet development and created the
>>> Internet Activities Board again with Dave Clark in the chairman's
>>> post.
>>>
>>> As for the group that did the original tcp/ip design, implementation
>>> and testing, I think the principals were on the ICCB ?- so that
>>> included Bob Braden, steve kent (security - BCR project w/NSA and
>>> DCEC), Dave Clark, Dan Lynch, Jon Postel, Jack Haverty, Dave Mills,
>>> who else? Danny Cohen and David Reed were proponents of splitting off
>>> IP but I don't think they were on the ICCB (boy, memory is hazy). I
>>> don't remember whether Ed Cain was on the ICCB but he was the active
>>> technical proponent of TCP/IP at the Defense Communications
>>> Engineering Center in Reston and was involved in the testing of the
>>> BCR packet Encryptors. Ray McFarland was the primary contact at NSA
>>> for BCR and for the Internet protocol development starting around
>>> 1975, if memory serves.
>>>
>>> regarding the term "Internet" it was applied to RFC 675, December
>>> 1974, the first full TCP spec that had three authors: vint cerf, yogen
>>> dalal and carl sunshine.
>>>
>>> i am copying the history list hoping they will add to this summary
>>> and, in particular, pick up names I've missed.
>>>
>>> vint
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Robert Braden <braden at isi.edu> wrote:
>>>> Vint,
>>>>
>>>> I had the idea that INWG was international and included eg Louis Pouzin.
>>>>
>>>> There was a group of ARPA contractors and a few others ( e.g. , ??? from
>>>> DCEC) , which I think you formed and which you certainly led,
>>>> that worked out the TCP/IP protocol specs. You subdivided it into the TCP
>>>> sub-group (to which you assigned me) and the IP sub group. From this
>>>> group came 5 (or 6?) prototype implementations of the developing TCP
>>>> spec. What was this group called? I don't think we had settled on the
>>>> term "Internet" yet; I recall an ICCB meeting where that issue
>>>> as settled.
>>>>
>>>> I have never read any recognition of this group, nor seen its membership
>>>> recognized.
>>>>
>>>> Bob
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5/12/2012 12:45 PM, Vint Cerf wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> i think we settled on "international network working group" (INWG) in
>>>>> October 1972 but IEN 48 was titled "The Catenet Model" as I recall -
>>>>> and credit was given to Louis Pouzin and his group for inventing that
>>>>> term.
>>>>>
>>>>> v
>>>>>
>>>>



From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Sun May 13 19:31:59 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 19:31:59 -0700
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>



On 5/13/2012 7:03 PM, Jack Haverty wrote:
> I guess the nuances of email protocol still escape me....


in case you're interested, it's just an amusing effort to enforce basic 
security.  you have to use the same From: field address for posting as 
you used for registering.  (Some systems let you do multiple 
registrations, to permit a variety of posting addresses, but suppress 
delivery on the additional ones.)  As security measures go, it's all 
rather charming...

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From jack at 3kitty.org  Sun May 13 21:13:08 2012
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 21:13:08 -0700
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>

Wow - you mean that because I happened to use an unexpected address,
the mail server rejected my message and, for extra security, lied to
me and told me my message was rejected because it was too big?

Amusing, but it's also very sad that, after four decades, we still
don't have reliable, secure, and private email in common use.  I
rarely see any email which is even signed to verify its source, except
in some hardcore techie neighborhoods like linux developers mailing
lists.

By the way, my own little-used current PGP key is available online:
user: "John F Haverty (Jack Haverty) <jackhaverty at alum.mit.edu>"
96-bit RSA key, ID 4C34BB67, created 2012-03-05.  Anyone who knows
what that means will probably know what to do....

/Jack

On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 7:31 PM, Dave Crocker <dhc2 at dcrocker.net> wrote:
>
>
> On 5/13/2012 7:03 PM, Jack Haverty wrote:
>>
>> I guess the nuances of email protocol still escape me....
>
>
>
> in case you're interested, it's just an amusing effort to enforce basic
> security. ?you have to use the same From: field address for posting as you
> used for registering. ?(Some systems let you do multiple registrations, to
> permit a variety of posting addresses, but suppress delivery on the
> additional ones.) ?As security measures go, it's all rather charming...
>
> d/
>
> --
> ?Dave Crocker
> ?Brandenburg InternetWorking
> ?bbiw.net



From LarrySheldon at cox.net  Sun May 13 21:54:37 2012
From: LarrySheldon at cox.net (Larry Sheldon)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 23:54:37 -0500
Subject: [ih] Unhappy with the free service (was Re: The UCLA 360/91 on the
 ARPAnet/Internet)
In-Reply-To: <CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FB0900D.2030505@cox.net>

On 5/13/2012 11:13 PM, Jack Haverty wrote:
> Wow - you mean that because I happened to use an unexpected address,
> the mail server rejected my message and, for extra security, lied to
> me and told me my message was rejected because it was too big?

Are you saying that you would prefer that anybody that can spell your 
name correctly ought to be permitted anything they any on any subject 
and include a load of malware in your name from anywhere on the planet?

Really?

As for the lie, I have no interest in gathering what I need to make a 
professional analysis, but I will telly you that when I saw your first 
screed I said to myself something along the lines of "Wow!  Almost a 
million and half characters--I'll bet that is a load of trojan they got 
stopped".

As I used to say to folks, Demand you money back and take your business 
someplace else.

And as an outsider let me say that I am fond of the "if you change the 
subject, change the Subject: notion.
-- 
Requiescas in pace o email           Two identifying characteristics
                                         of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio      Infallibility, and the ability to
                                         learn from their mistakes.
ICBM Data:  http://g.co/maps/e5gmy        (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)


From tony.li at tony.li  Sun May 13 23:15:28 2012
From: tony.li at tony.li (Tony Li)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 23:15:28 -0700
Subject: [ih] Unhappy with the free service (was Re: The UCLA 360/91 on
	the ARPAnet/Internet)
In-Reply-To: <4FB0900D.2030505@cox.net>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0900D.2030505@cox.net>
Message-ID: <35550EB1-D50F-4FC3-A786-8FAA600B6529@tony.li>


On May 13, 2012, at 9:54 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:

> On 5/13/2012 11:13 PM, Jack Haverty wrote:
>> Wow - you mean that because I happened to use an unexpected address,
>> the mail server rejected my message and, for extra security, lied to
>> me and told me my message was rejected because it was too big?
> 
> Are you saying that you would prefer that anybody that can spell your name correctly ought to be permitted anything they any on any subject and include a load of malware in your name from anywhere on the planet?
> 
> Really?


I suspect that Jack was instead suggesting that we really need a secure identity mechanism.  If we had that, then mail servers would be able to truly identify senders and small details like multiple accounts used by one person would be a trivial case.

We are not done with the work that we need to do.

Tony




From casner at acm.org  Mon May 14 00:07:31 2012
From: casner at acm.org (Stephen Casner)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 00:07:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ih] Nomenclature
In-Reply-To: <4FB00531.5010200@cox.net>
References: <4FB00531.5010200@cox.net>
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.1.10.1205140005390.9190@luft.gateway.2wire.net>

On Sun, 13 May 2012, Larry Sheldon wrote:

> (Along the way, a new question for me to chase:  Does VoIP use IP? TCP/IP?
> UDP? (Wiki seems to say Yes, No, and No.

VoIP implementations that use RTP (Real-time Transport Protocol) use a
stack of RTP/UDP/IP.  Where does Wiki say No to UDP?

                                                        -- Steve


From LarrySheldon at cox.net  Mon May 14 00:37:28 2012
From: LarrySheldon at cox.net (Larry Sheldon)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 02:37:28 -0500
Subject: [ih] Nomenclature
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.1.10.1205140005390.9190@luft.gateway.2wire.net>
References: <4FB00531.5010200@cox.net>
	<alpine.OSX.1.10.1205140005390.9190@luft.gateway.2wire.net>
Message-ID: <4FB0B638.3020907@cox.net>

On 5/14/2012 2:07 AM, Stephen Casner wrote:
> On Sun, 13 May 2012, Larry Sheldon wrote:
>
>> (Along the way, a new question for me to chase:  Does VoIP use IP? TCP/IP?
>> UDP? (Wiki seems to say Yes, No, and No.
>
> VoIP implementations that use RTP (Real-time Transport Protocol) use a
> stack of RTP/UDP/IP.  Where does Wiki say No to UDP?

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/05/ron-paul-nuts-boo-romneys-son-off-az-stage-video/ 
  _seems_ to say that the VoIP (as does the popular name) protocol(s) 
runs under IP.

(Side and mostly irrelevant note -- the last time I dealt with "RTP" it 
was the RJE protocol over dial-up lines to IBMish hosts from UNIVAC 
machines which didn't support transparent operation (for I-know-not-why 
reasons), so we had to use assembler code to emulate transparency.)

Let me me emphasis--the wiki article must have been written by a 
professional politician because, while it seems to say what I said, I 
can see how it says something else.  I just don't know what.

-- 
Requiescas in pace o email           Two identifying characteristics
                                         of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio      Infallibility, and the ability to
                                         learn from their mistakes.
ICBM Data:  http://g.co/maps/e5gmy        (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)


From paul at redbarn.org  Mon May 14 00:43:18 2012
From: paul at redbarn.org (paul vixie)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 07:43:18 +0000
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org>

On 5/14/2012 4:13 AM, Jack Haverty wrote:
> ... very sad that, after four decades, we still
> don't have reliable, secure, and private email in common use.  I
> rarely see any email which is even signed to verify its source, except
> in some hardcore techie neighborhoods like linux developers mailing
> lists.

the people who are willing to put that much effort into their e-mail
communications are few and far between. we can build for utility at
scale, or privacy and authenticity at scale, but not both. in this
heterogeneous distributed system the quality of your used experience
will depend on other people's tools and other people's skill levels.

so, sad, but inevitable. "show me a system that even a fool can use" and
so on.

On 5/14/2012 6:15 AM, Tony Li wrote:
> I suspect that Jack was instead suggesting that we really need a secure identity mechanism.  If we had that, then mail servers would be able to truly identify senders and small details like multiple accounts used by one person would be a trivial case.

i don't see how we'd ever do that. have only one such mechanism, that
is. or several that interoperate in ways that don't combine into a
hairball similar to the one we have now. we already have dozens of
things that work this way for their own walled gardens, each of which
exists because of profitability for somebody. doing it universally,
interoperably, at internet scale, would by definition lack that incentive.

> We are not done with the work that we need to do.

yea, verily.

paul

-- 
"I suspect I'm not known as a font of optimism." (VJS, 2012)



From tony.li at tony.li  Mon May 14 06:02:16 2012
From: tony.li at tony.li (Tony Li)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 06:02:16 -0700
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org>
Message-ID: <97D5C15A-B29A-41CB-BAFA-B0F7CEC62A64@tony.li>


On May 14, 2012, at 12:43 AM, paul vixie wrote:

> i don't see how we'd ever do that. have only one such mechanism, that
> is. or several that interoperate in ways that don't combine into a
> hairball similar to the one we have now. we already have dozens of
> things that work this way for their own walled gardens, each of which
> exists because of profitability for somebody. doing it universally,
> interoperably, at internet scale, would by definition lack that incentive.


All it takes is one motivated, knowledgeable, altruistic individual to lead the way?

Tony




From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Mon May 14 06:24:55 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 06:24:55 -0700
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org>
Message-ID: <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>



On 5/14/2012 12:43 AM, paul vixie wrote:
> the people who are willing to put that much effort into their e-mail
> communications are few and far between. we can build for utility at
> scale, or privacy and authenticity at scale, but not both.

I think we do not have an existence proof for privacy and authenticity 
at scale.

There is some foundation for believing that the issue is not a matter of 
trade-offs but of state of the art, especially the human factors 
(usability) art.

A common view is that good security cannot be easy to use.  It might 
even be true.

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From galmes at tamu.edu  Mon May 14 07:23:56 2012
From: galmes at tamu.edu (Guy Almes)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 09:23:56 -0500
Subject: [ih] Vint Cerf on BBC WS
In-Reply-To: <CAAbKA3WfrD0WMTtk8xZ2O58pM9FF_j+Xa6fS5H0ZaaN6nyNfHQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAbKA3WfrD0WMTtk8xZ2O58pM9FF_j+Xa6fS5H0ZaaN6nyNfHQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FB1157C.6090500@tamu.edu>

Bill,
   Actually very interesting.  And your comment is correct about Vint's 
first appearance in the program.
   The appearance near the end was more problematic.  Vint was enthusing 
about google's self-driving cars and similar projects.  But the context 
in which he was quoted (which I suspect he was not aware of) was all 
about an increasingly *insecure* net in which hackers could access your 
systems.  After discussing hackers accessing photos you think are 
private, the obvious implication is that they could hack into your 
self-driving car and other machine-to-machine applications.
   In that context, Vint's second quote (while quite correct and even 
insightful) came off as na?ve.
   Reporters.  Grumble,
	-- Guy

On 5/12/12 2:24 PM, Bill Ricker wrote:
> Shocked that BBC interviewed someone knowledgeable of Internet History
> for their internet dangers series !
>
>         *Danger in the Download* - Part Two
>
>         Tue, 8 May 12
>
>         Is the Internet's original architecture and governance still fit
>         for purpose? Or has it gone out of control and become hopelessly
>         insecure?
>
>         http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/worldservice/docarchive/docarchive_20120508-1708a.mp3
>
>
> (Vint is in there twice, near the beginning and near the end. He made a
> good point that the Net's insecure origin is excusable as it was most of
> a decade prior to public key crypto becoming public.)
>
> --
> Bill
> @n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com <mailto:bill.n1vux at gmail.com>


From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Mon May 14 07:56:02 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 07:56:02 -0700
Subject: [ih] Vint Cerf on BBC WS
In-Reply-To: <4FB1157C.6090500@tamu.edu>
References: <CAAbKA3WfrD0WMTtk8xZ2O58pM9FF_j+Xa6fS5H0ZaaN6nyNfHQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB1157C.6090500@tamu.edu>
Message-ID: <4FB11D02.4070902@dcrocker.net>


On 5/14/2012 7:23 AM, Guy Almes wrote:
>    In that context, Vint's second quote (while quite correct and even
> insightful) came off as na?ve.
>    Reporters.  Grumble,


Right.  Reporters.  After all, the rest of us understand the issues 
thoroughly and are in complete agreement about them?

For all of the truly terrible reporting that does occur, I think we have 
deeper problems to tackle in this problem space...

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From LarrySheldon at cox.net  Mon May 14 09:10:33 2012
From: LarrySheldon at cox.net (Larry Sheldon)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 11:10:33 -0500
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <97D5C15A-B29A-41CB-BAFA-B0F7CEC62A64@tony.li>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org>
	<97D5C15A-B29A-41CB-BAFA-B0F7CEC62A64@tony.li>
Message-ID: <4FB12E79.5060200@cox.net>

On 5/14/2012 8:02 AM, Tony Li wrote:
>
> On May 14, 2012, at 12:43 AM, paul vixie wrote:
>
>> i don't see how we'd ever do that. have only one such mechanism, that
>> is. or several that interoperate in ways that don't combine into a
>> hairball similar to the one we have now. we already have dozens of
>> things that work this way for their own walled gardens, each of which
>> exists because of profitability for somebody. doing it universally,
>> interoperably, at internet scale, would by definition lack that incentive.
>
>
> All it takes is one motivated, knowledgeable, altruistic individual to lead the way?

I really feel presumptuous disagreeing in this company, but I must, 
vehemently.

My beef is with "All".

It also takes a company with the major market share to be willing 
(marketing) and able (legal, regulatory) to sell, install, train, and 
maintain; and a using population willing and able to make it work.  We 
are competing with SMS here.


-- 
Requiescas in pace o email           Two identifying characteristics
                                         of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio      Infallibility, and the ability to
                                         learn from their mistakes.
ICBM Data:  http://g.co/maps/e5gmy        (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)


From LarrySheldon at cox.net  Mon May 14 09:17:22 2012
From: LarrySheldon at cox.net (Larry Sheldon)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 11:17:22 -0500
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org> <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <4FB13012.1000600@cox.net>

On 5/14/2012 8:24 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:

> A common view is that good security cannot be easy to use. It might even
> be true.

There is one of the "rugs", in my humble opinion.

The bigger one, in my mind, is that I can not imagine such a system that 
will operate securely and dependably without information about and 
provided by the destination entity with the absolute assurance that the 
destination provided the information, AND THAT the information provided 
is honest, accurate, and timely.

-- 
Requiescas in pace o email           Two identifying characteristics
                                         of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio      Infallibility, and the ability to
                                         learn from their mistakes.
ICBM Data:  http://g.co/maps/e5gmy        (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)


From johnl at iecc.com  Mon May 14 09:34:46 2012
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 14 May 2012 16:34:46 -0000
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20120514163446.7537.qmail@joyce.lan>

>Amusing, but it's also very sad that, after four decades, we still
>don't have reliable, secure, and private email in common use.

I'm not surprised.  After 500 years, we don't have it for paper mail,
either.

R's,
John


From LarrySheldon at cox.net  Mon May 14 09:44:00 2012
From: LarrySheldon at cox.net (Larry Sheldon)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 11:44:00 -0500
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FB13012.1000600@cox.net>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org> <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB13012.1000600@cox.net>
Message-ID: <4FB13650.5000008@cox.net>

On 5/14/2012 11:17 AM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
> On 5/14/2012 8:24 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>
>> A common view is that good security cannot be easy to use. It might even
>> be true.
>
> There is one of the "rugs", in my humble opinion.

ruBs!  There is one of the ruBs, in my humble opinion.

[Note:  I have never in 73 years told anybody I could type.]

> The bigger one, in my mind, is that I can not imagine such a system that
> will operate securely and dependably without information about and
> provided by the destination entity with the absolute assurance that the
> destination provided the information, AND THAT the information provided
> is honest, accurate, and timely.


-- 
Requiescas in pace o email           Two identifying characteristics
                                         of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio      Infallibility, and the ability to
                                         learn from their mistakes.
ICBM Data:  http://g.co/maps/e5gmy        (Adapted from Stephen Pinker)


From casner at acm.org  Mon May 14 10:21:25 2012
From: casner at acm.org (Stephen Casner)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 10:21:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ih] Nomenclature
In-Reply-To: <4FB0B638.3020907@cox.net>
References: <4FB00531.5010200@cox.net>
	<alpine.OSX.1.10.1205140005390.9190@luft.gateway.2wire.net>
	<4FB0B638.3020907@cox.net>
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.1.10.1205141003460.9430@luft.gateway.2wire.net>

On Mon, 14 May 2012, Larry Sheldon wrote:
> On 5/14/2012 2:07 AM, Stephen Casner wrote:
> > On Sun, 13 May 2012, Larry Sheldon wrote:
> >
> > > (Along the way, a new question for me to chase:  Does VoIP use
> > > IP? TCP/IP?  UDP? (Wiki seems to say Yes, No, and No.
> >
> > VoIP implementations that use RTP (Real-time Transport Protocol)
> > use a stack of RTP/UDP/IP.  Where does Wiki say No to UDP?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VoIP _seems_ to say that the VoIP (as
> does the popular name) protocol(s) runs under IP.

I read that introduction as saying that the voice is carried over IP
networks, but it does not preclude other protocols between the voice
and IP.  Since there is no codepoint assigned for "voice" to go in the
Protocol field of the IP header, and since some framing and other
services are needed for the voice transport, there are other protocols
required in the stack.

> (Side and mostly irrelevant note -- the last time I dealt with "RTP"
> it was the RJE protocol over dial-up lines to IBMish hosts from
> UNIVAC machines which didn't support transparent operation (for
> I-know-not-why reasons), so we had to use assembler code to emulate
> transparency.)

Indeed, we who worked on Real-time Transport Protocol did receive a
communication from some IBM folks about the acronym clash, but there
was some debate about which came first, and we decided to proceed
without making a change.

> Let me me emphasis--the wiki article must have been written by a
> professional politician because, while it seems to say what I said,
> I can see how it says something else.  I just don't know what.

The article does reference RTP in the section "Protocols", but that is
it.  I would prefer to see more, for example in the milestone list.
H.323 is described in more detail, but it is not mentioned that H.323
incorporates RTP (as part of H.225.0) to packetize the voice.

                                                        -- Steve


From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Mon May 14 10:24:58 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 13:24:58 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <20120514163446.7537.qmail@joyce.lan>
References: <20120514163446.7537.qmail@joyce.lan>
Message-ID: <4FB13FEA.20300@meetinghouse.net>

John Levine wrote:
>> Amusing, but it's also very sad that, after four decades, we still
>> don't have reliable, secure, and private email in common use.
> I'm not surprised.  After 500 years, we don't have it for paper mail,
> either.

Well... it's not complete coverage, but there is International 
Registered Mail.  Domestically, Registered Mail is considered sufficient 
for shipping classified documents (at least it used to be, when I had to 
worry about such things).

Miles Fidelman



-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From jack at 3kitty.org  Mon May 14 11:03:39 2012
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 11:03:39 -0700
Subject: [ih] Unhappy with the free service (was Re: The UCLA 360/91 on
 the ARPAnet/Internet)
In-Reply-To: <4FB0900D.2030505@cox.net>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0900D.2030505@cox.net>
Message-ID: <CAJLkZPmqKX61x7+GXOLiP92AHxb2ZEf7bnev+YEw_HvRbgkBvA@mail.gmail.com>

As Tony pointed out, I simply yearn for an environment where I can
send something to another person (or computer program), with some
reasonably high level of confidence that the content will get to the
addressee intact, be kept from prying eyes along the way, and that the
recipient can be confident that it came from me.  And same for the
reverse.

Some such technology exists today.  For example, I'm using GMail right
now, but I can bring up Evolution instead.  By simply clicking a
checkbox, it will send my email signed, so the recipient can believe
it's from me and/or encrypted so that only the recipient can read it.
Similarly when I receive such email, I can be confident of its content
and source.  However it seems that few email users have embraced such
technology, and few if any organizations promote it.

As others have pointed out, "we" - the Internet community - have a lot
of work to do.  But I think time is running out.  There are
alternatives.   I've noticed lately that people like my relatives -
very non-techie - are enraptured with their new-found ability to
communicate with each other and their friends and neighbors.  It looks
like email, but it's actually social networking layered on top of the
Internet.  They have email accounts, but they prefer using the social
network.  They can send text, pictures, videos, etc., and not worry
about malware, phishing, or other such frightening Internet
"features".  Of course, they all have to be inside the same "walled
garden" to interact - but that constraint is preferable to the
perceived risks of the wild and wooly world of Internet email.   They
are at best dimly aware of all the robots watching over their
shoulders, and don't seem to care - at least as long as everyone they
want to interact with is inside the same garden and therefore
accessible.   Email, and even the Web, may be overshadowed by The
Garden(s).  Soon.

---
In the 1980s, I would have been soundly flamed if I sent an email with
graphics.  In 2012, millions of people are constantly snapping photos
and shooting videos and emailing them to all their friends.  So, it
seemed reasonable to expect that my email with a few pages of a
document attached wouldn't be a problem.  When I receive email with
large attachments, I can simply choose not to download the attachment
- the recipients' decision, rather than some server somewhere along
the route.  That's why I sent my notes as an attachment, but described
what they were in the message body.   Sorry if that caused anyone
problems.

---
Email, or any "free" service for that matter, is not free.   Capital
and labor are used to move those bits and that costs money.  It's
virtually impossible in Internet email to "follow the money", but
eventually it reappears somewhere for you to pay - perhaps in your
taxes or in the price of the products you buy.  That lack of tying the
service to its costs makes it impossible to demand your money back.
You don't know who to ask.   The advent of SmartPhones is wreaking
economic havoc in the carriers' "unlimited data" services - they're
scrambling to reroute the flow of money back to the user, and they
have the mechanisms to do so.  We tried to put into the Internet a
foundation for tying resource usage to user starting back in the late
80s - see RFC1272 et al.  I've lost track of that effort though, so I
don't know how much "follow the money" infrastructure is in place by
now.

---
BTW, I agree with the philosophy that email Subjects should match the
content.  Unfortunately we're very much in the minority.  That
previous message thread had lost it's theme of 360/91 long before I
sent my email.  I've learned to mostly ignore the Subject especially
after a thread has gotten more than a few messages long.  It does make
it much harder to find old messages that you seek.

---
Getting back to the realm of Internet History...  I think that the
historical record of what *did not* happen can be as interesting and
enlightening as what *did* happen.   With all the technology and
expertise that's been working on The Internet over the last 3+
decades, why haven't we made more progress in email?    What happened,
or failed to happen, to cause the world of spam, phishing, malware, et
al that we suffer today?  That might be an enlightening history topic,
if anybody's interested.

/Jack


On Sun, May 13, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Larry Sheldon <LarrySheldon at cox.net> wrote:
> On 5/13/2012 11:13 PM, Jack Haverty wrote:
>>
>> Wow - you mean that because I happened to use an unexpected address,
>> the mail server rejected my message and, for extra security, lied to
>> me and told me my message was rejected because it was too big?
>
>
> Are you saying that you would prefer that anybody that can spell your name
> correctly ought to be permitted anything they any on any subject and include
> a load of malware in your name from anywhere on the planet?
>
> Really?
>
> As for the lie, I have no interest in gathering what I need to make a
> professional analysis, but I will telly you that when I saw your first
> screed I said to myself something along the lines of "Wow! ?Almost a million
> and half characters--I'll bet that is a load of trojan they got stopped".
>
> As I used to say to folks, Demand you money back and take your business
> someplace else.
>
> And as an outsider let me say that I am fond of the "if you change the
> subject, change the Subject: notion.
> --
> Requiescas in pace o email ? ? ? ? ? Two identifying characteristics
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?of System Administrators:
> Ex turpi causa non oritur actio ? ? ?Infallibility, and the ability to
> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?learn from their mistakes.
> ICBM Data: ?http://g.co/maps/e5gmy ? ? ? ?(Adapted from Stephen Pinker)



From jcurran at istaff.org  Mon May 14 13:02:53 2012
From: jcurran at istaff.org (John Curran)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 16:02:53 -0400
Subject: [ih] Unhappy with the free service (was Re: The UCLA 360/91 on
	the ARPAnet/Internet)
In-Reply-To: <CAJLkZPmqKX61x7+GXOLiP92AHxb2ZEf7bnev+YEw_HvRbgkBvA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0900D.2030505@cox.net>
	<CAJLkZPmqKX61x7+GXOLiP92AHxb2ZEf7bnev+YEw_HvRbgkBvA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <99FB4ADB-6499-42FD-AA60-EBA52195B7D3@istaff.org>

On May 14, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Jack Haverty wrote:
> With all the technology and expertise that's been working on
> The Internet over the last 3+ decades, why haven't we made more
> progress in email?    
> 
> What happened, or failed to happen, to cause the world of spam,
> phishing, malware, et al that we suffer today?  That might be an
> enlightening history topic, if anybody's interested.

We provided no systematically effective recourse against bad actors 
within the Internet system, and insufficient association between 
Internet entities and "real world" entities (i.e. people, companies)
to allow for any meaningful legal recourse.

Ut sementem feceris ita metes,
/John



From sm at resistor.net  Mon May 14 13:52:26 2012
From: sm at resistor.net (SM)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 13:52:26 -0700
Subject: [ih] Unhappy with the free service (was Re: The UCLA 360/91 on
 the ARPAnet/Internet)
In-Reply-To: <CAJLkZPmqKX61x7+GXOLiP92AHxb2ZEf7bnev+YEw_HvRbgkBvA@mail.g
	mail.com>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0900D.2030505@cox.net>
	<CAJLkZPmqKX61x7+GXOLiP92AHxb2ZEf7bnev+YEw_HvRbgkBvA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.5.6.2.20120514132209.094ff3d0@resistor.net>

Hi Jack,
At 11:03 14-05-2012, Jack Haverty wrote:
>Some such technology exists today.  For example, I'm using GMail right
>now, but I can bring up Evolution instead.  By simply clicking a
>checkbox, it will send my email signed, so the recipient can believe
>it's from me and/or encrypted so that only the recipient can read it.
>Similarly when I receive such email, I can be confident of its content
>and source.  However it seems that few email users have embraced such
>technology, and few if any organizations promote it.

Some organizations take a faith-based approach when it comes to email. :-)

>As others have pointed out, "we" - the Internet community - have a lot
>of work to do.  But I think time is running out.  There are
>alternatives.   I've noticed lately that people like my relatives -
>very non-techie - are enraptured with their new-found ability to
>communicate with each other and their friends and neighbors.  It looks
>like email, but it's actually social networking layered on top of the
>Internet.  They have email accounts, but they prefer using the social
>network.  They can send text, pictures, videos, etc., and not worry

Yes.

>about malware, phishing, or other such frightening Internet
>"features".  Of course, they all have to be inside the same "walled
>garden" to interact - but that constraint is preferable to the

The "walled garden" is not apparent.  It is only seen as a constraint 
by the user can no longer enter the "walled garden".  That's a 
statistically insignificant number.

>perceived risks of the wild and wooly world of Internet email.   They
>are at best dimly aware of all the robots watching over their
>shoulders, and don't seem to care - at least as long as everyone they
>want to interact with is inside the same garden and therefore
>accessible.   Email, and even the Web, may be overshadowed by The
>Garden(s).  Soon.

Why should they care?

Coming back to the subject line, one might argue that if someone is 
unhappy with the free service, nobody is forcing the person to use 
it.  I wonder whether it is understood that the free service would be 
history if it wasn't for the content provided by some people to the 
free service.

Regards,
-sm 



From paul at redbarn.org  Mon May 14 15:59:32 2012
From: paul at redbarn.org (paul vixie)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 22:59:32 +0000
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org> <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org>

On 5/14/2012 1:24 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 5/14/2012 12:43 AM, paul vixie wrote:
>> the people who are willing to put that much effort into their e-mail
>> communications are few and far between. we can build for utility at
>> scale, or privacy and authenticity at scale, but not both.
>
> I think we do not have an existence proof for privacy and authenticity
> at scale.

i would have said that your messaging work at compuserve qualified as
such, dave. in fact that was one of the visions in my head when spoke
the words, 'walled garden'.

> ...
> A common view is that good security cannot be easy to use.  It might
> even be true.

i know that incompatibility, i just think in the other direction.
anything that's easy for a human to use will also be easy for all of the
malware infesting that human's devices to use. (and thus, neither secure
nor securable). something that's easy for way-way-way-smarter humans
(for example, my kids and their friends) is likely to borderline
unusable by me (and maybe even by dave). the tension is, as one ratchets
up the minimum skill level required then security goes up but utility
(by definition) goes down.

anyway this isn't history (sadly).

paul

-- 
"I suspect I'm not known as a font of optimism." (VJS, 2012)



From jack at 3kitty.org  Mon May 14 17:38:40 2012
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 17:38:40 -0700
Subject: [ih] Unhappy with the free service (was Re: The UCLA 360/91 on
 the ARPAnet/Internet)
In-Reply-To: <99FB4ADB-6499-42FD-AA60-EBA52195B7D3@istaff.org>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0900D.2030505@cox.net>
	<CAJLkZPmqKX61x7+GXOLiP92AHxb2ZEf7bnev+YEw_HvRbgkBvA@mail.gmail.com>
	<99FB4ADB-6499-42FD-AA60-EBA52195B7D3@istaff.org>
Message-ID: <CAJLkZP=iZbY4EUy=CpAzsMwf-jAfkhx-_n1GPTyPmi4_dpE-aA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi John - yes, I agree.  Those are key system components that "we"
never provided.   Good summary.

I was curious though about *why* such important aspects seem to have
been neglected, when so many other hard problems have been handled
pretty well over the decades.  Was it too hard a problem?  Was there
no one who "picked up the ball"?   Did we just forget and it fell into
that long list of have-to-do-this-someday items that always graced the
corner of the whiteboard at Internet meetings?  Maybe it was a
side-effect of the culture of distrust of authority and "the
establishment" from the era?    Did the forces seeking anonymity
prevail over those seeking privacy and security?  Did it just become
uninteresting to everyone when more fun or profitable opportunities
were competing for attention?   Did it get so encumbered by the
installed base growing so quickly that the technology got effectively
frozen before it was complete - in the same glacier that IPV6 is just
now escaping?  Did it get sandbagged by X.400 et al, which then failed
to appear on stage?   Did government(s) fail to set in place some
legal or regulatory machinery - adapting the rules and processes of
the last several centuries of physical mail for use in the network
environment?  Did whoever should have done something even know they
should do it?  All of the above?

Over the last 40 years, it seems to me that there must have been a
bunch of things like the above that happened, and prevented the
introduction of the mechanisms you listed.  Historians rarely pay
attention to what didn't happen.   But engineers and scientists often
wonder why things didn't turn out as expected and desired.   We
techies should all know that to be stable, systems require negative
feedback - i.e., the mechanisms you listed.   Hoiw'd we miss that...?

I guess I'm one of those kinds of historians.

/Jack


On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 1:02 PM, John Curran <jcurran at istaff.org> wrote:
> On May 14, 2012, at 2:03 PM, Jack Haverty wrote:
>> With all the technology and expertise that's been working on
>> The Internet over the last 3+ decades, why haven't we made more
>> progress in email?
>>
>> What happened, or failed to happen, to cause the world of spam,
>> phishing, malware, et al that we suffer today? ?That might be an
>> enlightening history topic, if anybody's interested.
>
> We provided no systematically effective recourse against bad actors
> within the Internet system, and insufficient association between
> Internet entities and "real world" entities (i.e. people, companies)
> to allow for any meaningful legal recourse.
>
> Ut sementem feceris ita metes,
> /John
>



From bill.n1vux at gmail.com  Mon May 14 20:00:13 2012
From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 23:00:13 -0400
Subject: [ih] Vint Cerf on BBC WS
In-Reply-To: <4FB1157C.6090500@tamu.edu>
References: <CAAbKA3WfrD0WMTtk8xZ2O58pM9FF_j+Xa6fS5H0ZaaN6nyNfHQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB1157C.6090500@tamu.edu>
Message-ID: <CAAbKA3XZ37kc_3JqdG7TJBumaPe_qGHzR2kYZsesr5uqSqrtCg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 10:23 AM, Guy Almes <galmes at tamu.edu> wrote:

>  Reporters.  Grumble,
>

It's not the "reporter" but editor/producer who cut quotes out of context.

But yes. anyone who knows anything about any story in the media -- even
non-technical police-beat reporting -- will find annoying inaccuracies. (a)
humans (b) peter principal (c) hurried rush rush newscycle, so what fact
checking?

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120514/a476d9f8/attachment.htm>

From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Mon May 14 20:04:00 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 23:04:00 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] Header-people archive, etc
Message-ID: <20120515030400.609F318C0B8@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

I was troubled the by the difference between my recollection of the SMTP
history, and Craig's and Dave's, so I decided to research it a bit.

One of the things I wanted to look at to do this was the Header-People
archives, but at first glance, it seemed like they weren't available any more
(at least, a net search didn't turn them up). However, I (we?) had a stroke of
luck: the archives had been on an ITS machine at MIT, and I _had_ downloaded a
lot of that material (from www.its.os.org) before that site went offline some
years back.

So, they are now back online, here:

  http://www.chiappa.net/~jnc/tech/header/

at least, those from 6 November 1976 onwards. My collection starts with
archive #2 - I have files for #0 and #1, but the (minimal) contents are not
email archives - they may have been bashed during one of the many disk
insanities during the dying days of the ITS machines.

If anyone has the older archives (if they exist), could they _please_ let me
know, so I can bring the archive up to complete?


While I was in the process of doing that, I kind of got into the whole
'what's available online' thing, and so I now have a page:

  http://www.chiappa.net/~jnc/tech/archives.html

which lists the location of early/important mailing list archives (some are
in fairly obscure places).

   Noel


From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Mon May 14 20:36:44 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 20:36:44 -0700
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org> <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org>
Message-ID: <4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net>



On 5/14/2012 3:59 PM, paul vixie wrote:
> On 5/14/2012 1:24 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>> On 5/14/2012 12:43 AM, paul vixie wrote:
>>> the people who are willing to put that much effort into their e-mail
>>> communications are few and far between. we can build for utility at
>>> scale, or privacy and authenticity at scale, but not both.
>>
>> I think we do not have an existence proof for privacy and authenticity
>> at scale.
>
> i would have said that your messaging work at compuserve qualified as
> such, dave. in fact that was one of the visions in my head when spoke
> the words, 'walled garden'.

1.  I never worked at compuserve, but I'll guess you meant MCI.

2.  MCI Mail had no interested distributed security technologies that 
are relevant here, that I can think of.

Please note that I'm imposing a particular meaning for "scale" that has 
has less to do with number of users than with number of independent 
administration and lack of central control (except perhaps a central 
control for a registration hierarchy.)


>> A common view is that good security cannot be easy to use.  It might
>> even be true.
>
> i know that incompatibility, i just think in the other direction.
> anything that's easy for a human to use will also be easy for all of the
> malware infesting that human's devices to use.

There's an inherent and even obvious logic to that view.  And I can't 
provide anything like an adequate contrary proof.  But I believe it 
isn't true.  I'm pretty sure I mean that as an engineering, rather than 
religious, belief.

There's probably also some adjustment to the definition of 'security', 
and no, I can provide details for that either.


(and thus, neither secure
> nor securable). something that's easy for way-way-way-smarter humans
> (for example, my kids and their friends) is likely to borderline
> unusable by me (and maybe even by dave). the tension is, as one ratchets
> up the minimum skill level required then security goes up but utility
> (by definition) goes down.
>
> anyway this isn't history (sadly).

except the long history of failure in gaining adoption for strong 
security technologies over the open Internet, for a sufficient range of 
features.

d/

-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From paul at redbarn.org  Mon May 14 20:50:26 2012
From: paul at redbarn.org (paul vixie)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 03:50:26 +0000
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org> <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org> <4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org>

On 5/15/2012 3:36 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>> anyway this isn't history (sadly).
>
> except the long history of failure in gaining adoption for strong
> security technologies over the open Internet, for a sufficient range
> of features.

sorry for the subtlety. i mean that two ways. first, it's not on-topic
for this m/l, and second, it's still happening so it's more "past,
present, and future" than "history".

we digress.

paul

-- 
"I suspect I'm not known as a font of optimism." (VJS, 2012)



From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Mon May 14 21:25:06 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 21:25:06 -0700
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org> <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org> <4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org>
Message-ID: <4FB1DAA2.3030203@dcrocker.net>



On 5/14/2012 8:50 PM, paul vixie wrote:
> sorry for the subtlety. i mean that two ways. first, it's not on-topic
> for this m/l, and second, it's still happening so it's more "past,
> present, and future" than "history".
>
> we digress.


possibly not.  to the extent the list seeks to agree on explanations for 
what happened (or didn't happen), some agreement about analytic criteria 
could help.  And the meaning of 'at scale' strikes me as worth 
distinguishing for Internet discussions.

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From paul at redbarn.org  Mon May 14 21:39:09 2012
From: paul at redbarn.org (paul vixie)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 04:39:09 +0000
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FB1DAA2.3030203@dcrocker.net>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org> <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org> <4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org> <4FB1DAA2.3030203@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <4FB1DDED.4060508@redbarn.org>

On 5/15/2012 4:25 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>
>
> On 5/14/2012 8:50 PM, paul vixie wrote:
>> ...
>> we digress.
>
> possibly not.  to the extent the list seeks to agree on explanations
> for what happened (or didn't happen), some agreement about analytic
> criteria could help.  And the meaning of 'at scale' strikes me as
> worth distinguishing for Internet discussions.

very well. i prefer your wider (multiple administrations) meaning for
'at scale' over my narrower (walled garden) meaning. in that case i'd
say, human to human messaging at scale remains an unsolved problem. and
i'd go further and say, doing human messaging at scale in a way that
secures the interests of the humans at the endpoints against unwanted
traffic, undeserved rejection, eavesdropping, corruption of format or
content, forgery or identity theft, or misdirection is Hard to even Imagine.

noting, i'm a happy user of pgp, but i have only 2*10^3 keys in my key
ring, whereas there are 2*10^9 internet users today out of a worldwide
population of 6*10^9. i don't think we're going to get where we need to
go using pgp, nor anything like pgp.

the economics here favour the walled gardens. the quality of human to
human communications one gets within a walled garden like facebook or
google, or within an enterprise e-mail environment like microsoft
exchange or digital all-in-one, has always been higher than what we've
had on The Internet. the historical take on this is, quality isn't as
compelling as reach.

paul

-- 
"I suspect I'm not known as a font of optimism." (VJS, 2012)



From johnl at iecc.com  Mon May 14 21:46:58 2012
From: johnl at iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Date: 15 May 2012 00:46:58 -0400
Subject: [ih] The UCLA 360/91 on the ARPAnet/Internet
In-Reply-To: <4FB13FEA.20300@meetinghouse.net>
References: <20120514163446.7537.qmail@joyce.lan>
	<4FB13FEA.20300@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1205150046150.51444@joyce.lan>

>>> Amusing, but it's also very sad that, after four decades, we still
>>> don't have reliable, secure, and private email in common use.
>> I'm not surprised.  After 500 years, we don't have it for paper mail, either.
>
> Well... it's not complete coverage, but there is International Registered 
> Mail.  Domestically, Registered Mail is considered sufficient for shipping 
> classified documents (at least it used to be, when I had to worry about such 
> things).

If you want S/MIME, you know where to find it.

Regards,
John Levine, johnl at iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2056 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120515/e41fdbcc/attachment.p7s>

From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Tue May 15 04:24:17 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 04:24:17 -0700
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FB1DDED.4060508@redbarn.org>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org> <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org> <4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org> <4FB1DAA2.3030203@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1DDED.4060508@redbarn.org>
Message-ID: <4FB23CE1.5090206@dcrocker.net>



On 5/14/2012 9:39 PM, paul vixie wrote:
> in that case i'd
> say, human to human messaging at scale remains an unsolved problem.

wow.  some one or two billion regular users; massive numbers of 
independent administrations.  no central control.

what remaining requirements for basic messaging are on the list?

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From craig at aland.bbn.com  Tue May 15 10:41:33 2012
From: craig at aland.bbn.com (Craig Partridge)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 13:41:33 -0400
Subject: [ih] Header-people archive, etc
Message-ID: <20120515174133.3F2C228E137@aland.bbn.com>

> I was troubled the by the difference between my recollection of the SMTP
> history, and Craig's and Dave's, so I decided to research it a bit.

Quick comment, as this is a list devoted to history.  Differences between
recollections are common.  Also common are differences between written records
and recollections.  Figuring out which one is right (even between written
records and recollections, where you might think the contemporary written
records are more accurate) is not easy.  When writing up a technical history
of email for the IEEE Annals, I found the Rashomon effect was often present.

A simple example: some of the early ARPANET meetings kept minutes including
the list of attendees.  When interviewing folks for the article, I had people 
tell me what they'd heard/observed/said at the meeting. Later I would
find they were not on the list of attendees. I would have to puzzle out if
(a) they were there and not recorded; or (b) they were confusing meetings
(often easy to do); or (c) their memory simply was playing tricks (e.g.
confusing what had been told to them by a meeting attendee with being
there).

Craig


From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Tue May 15 12:08:06 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 15:08:06 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] Header-people archive, etc
Message-ID: <20120515190806.CF48018C0B2@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: Craig Partridge <craig at aland.bbn.com>

    > Quick comment, as this is a list devoted to history. Differences
    > between recollections are common. Also common are differences between
    > written records and recollections. Figuring out which one is right
    > (even between written records and recollections, where you might think
    > the contemporary written records are more accurate) is not easy. 

As an amateur historian in a number of fields, I am so very aware of this
effect. For an amusing story of this kind of thing in another field, see:

  http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/nontech/tmlotus.html

And then there was the time I totally ripped apart the fuel system on my Lotus
7 (including making a hole in the fuel tank! :-) to find the plastic funnel
tip ... which some months later I found in the side pocket of my toolbag. (I
was _absolutely certain_ I remembered losing it down the fuel filler....)

	Noel


From jack at 3kitty.org  Tue May 15 12:50:18 2012
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 12:50:18 -0700
Subject: [ih] Header-people archive, etc
In-Reply-To: <20120515174133.3F2C228E137@aland.bbn.com>
References: <20120515174133.3F2C228E137@aland.bbn.com>
Message-ID: <CAJLkZP=nsMkmvafCPgo0ruafgju-fDpRuKuTTdo-u0cfvcKcKA@mail.gmail.com>

Noel!   Great job!   I thought the header-people annals were lost long
ago.   From what I recall,  they should be a gold mine as source of what
was actually happening through those projects.   They document what went on
between official meetings,  and outside the realm of any formal documents
that might have eventually appeared.

Craig - I agree with your causes for discrepancies,  but there's an aspect
I think you missed.   Meetings were rather nebulous things.   There was
always a semi-formal agenda,  but even more interactions,  discussions,
arguments,  and occasionally agreements or commitments happened outside of
the more formal sessions.    In the corridors,  at meals or the hotel bar,
in the afterhours bull sessions as we also discussed where to go to eat
until it was late enough that the choices were few - all were important.
There were many people who were involved in such discussions but were not
necessarily on the formal list of attendees.    They may have worked at or
near the meeting site,  or been in the area for another meeting,  or even
have come because they knew they could find an elusive person they had been
trying to contact (Hint,  initials might be VGC or REK).

So it was common to hear something,  or say something,  "at the meeting"
even without being recorded as an attendee.    It may even be that the
"meat" of a meeting actually happened outside of the formal sessions,  and
of course didn't appear in any minutes.    During one period of the
Internet meetings,  the formal sessions became largely status reports,
which conveyed what had happened recently.   The interactions outside of
the sessions, and outside of the minutes,  congealed what would happen
next.

I think that a while ago I related one such interaction that I had with Bob
Kahn while hanging on a subway strap in some city.   I don't think Bob was
in the formal list of attendees for whatever meeting it was,  but I
certainly remember him as being "at the meeting".

If you think of a meeting as a venue,  rather than as a session in a room,
you might explain many such discrepancies.   Whoever wrote the minutes
might not have been in the hall or restaurant.   Whoever said something
happened at the meeting might have not been in the formal sessions.   But
they both remember what happened at "the meeting".

Meetings were messy,  and not captured very well by minutes and
documents.   I trust recollections more,  but always remembering that no
one could be in every hallway,  bar,  and restaurant.   IMHO,  that was
important to the success of the Net.

/Jack
On May 15, 2012 10:41 AM, "Craig Partridge" <craig at aland.bbn.com> wrote:

> > I was troubled the by the difference between my recollection of the SMTP
> > history, and Craig's and Dave's, so I decided to research it a bit.
>
> Quick comment, as this is a list devoted to history.  Differences between
> recollections are common.  Also common are differences between written
> records
> and recollections.  Figuring out which one is right (even between written
> records and recollections, where you might think the contemporary written
> records are more accurate) is not easy.  When writing up a technical
> history
> of email for the IEEE Annals, I found the Rashomon effect was often
> present.
>
> A simple example: some of the early ARPANET meetings kept minutes including
> the list of attendees.  When interviewing folks for the article, I had
> people
> tell me what they'd heard/observed/said at the meeting. Later I would
> find they were not on the list of attendees. I would have to puzzle out if
> (a) they were there and not recorded; or (b) they were confusing meetings
> (often easy to do); or (c) their memory simply was playing tricks (e.g.
> confusing what had been told to them by a meeting attendee with being
> there).
>
> Craig
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120515/7298356c/attachment.htm>

From dot at dotat.at  Tue May 15 13:11:58 2012
From: dot at dotat.at (Tony Finch)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 21:11:58 +0100
Subject: [ih] Vint Cerf on BBC WS
In-Reply-To: <4FB1157C.6090500@tamu.edu>
References: <CAAbKA3WfrD0WMTtk8xZ2O58pM9FF_j+Xa6fS5H0ZaaN6nyNfHQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB1157C.6090500@tamu.edu>
Message-ID: <7EDB4AB6-A3B3-431B-B813-B3B0111A3B8C@dotat.at>

On 14 May 2012, at 15:23, Guy Almes <galmes at tamu.edu> wrote:
> 
> The appearance near the end was more problematic.  Vint was enthusing about google's self-driving cars and similar projects.  But the context in which he was quoted (which I suspect he was not aware of) was all about an increasingly *insecure* net in which hackers could access your systems.  After discussing hackers accessing photos you think are private, the obvious implication is that they could hack into your self-driving car and other machine-to-machine applications.
> In that context, Vint's second quote (while quite correct and even insightful) came off as na?ve.

I don't think apparent na?vet? is the biggest problem: Vint makes it sound as if cars are not already online (they are) and the programme suggests these vulnerabilities don't yet exist (they do). Read these papers, if you haven't already. Astounding.

http://www.autosec.org/publications.html

Tony (apologies for lack of historical content).
--
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot at dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120515/bb40ab95/attachment.htm>

From craig at aland.bbn.com  Tue May 15 13:17:40 2012
From: craig at aland.bbn.com (Craig Partridge)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 16:17:40 -0400
Subject: [ih] Header-people archive, etc
Message-ID: <20120515201740.ED5DE28E137@aland.bbn.com>


Jack, good point about the informal stuff around the meeting.  Indeed,
when I went off to find the origins of the Internet Protocol, I discovered
it was in an undocumented hallway conversation (I'd have to go dig into
my notes but recollection [warning!] says it was between Jon Postel, Dave
Reed and Danny Cohen).

Thanks!

Craig

> 
> Noel!   Great job!   I thought the header-people annals were lost long
> ago.   From what I recall,  they should be a gold mine as source of what
> was actually happening through those projects.   They document what went on
> between official meetings,  and outside the realm of any formal documents
> that might have eventually appeared.
> 
> Craig - I agree with your causes for discrepancies,  but there's an aspect
> I think you missed.   Meetings were rather nebulous things.   There was
> always a semi-formal agenda,  but even more interactions,  discussions,
> arguments,  and occasionally agreements or commitments happened outside of
> the more formal sessions.    In the corridors,  at meals or the hotel bar,
> in the afterhours bull sessions as we also discussed where to go to eat
> until it was late enough that the choices were few - all were important.
> There were many people who were involved in such discussions but were not
> necessarily on the formal list of attendees.    They may have worked at or
> near the meeting site,  or been in the area for another meeting,  or even
> have come because they knew they could find an elusive person they had been
> trying to contact (Hint,  initials might be VGC or REK).
> 
> So it was common to hear something,  or say something,  "at the meeting"
> even without being recorded as an attendee.    It may even be that the
> "meat" of a meeting actually happened outside of the formal sessions,  and
> of course didn't appear in any minutes.    During one period of the
> Internet meetings,  the formal sessions became largely status reports,
> which conveyed what had happened recently.   The interactions outside of
> the sessions, and outside of the minutes,  congealed what would happen
> next.
> 
> I think that a while ago I related one such interaction that I had with Bob
> Kahn while hanging on a subway strap in some city.   I don't think Bob was
> in the formal list of attendees for whatever meeting it was,  but I
> certainly remember him as being "at the meeting".
> 
> If you think of a meeting as a venue,  rather than as a session in a room,
> you might explain many such discrepancies.   Whoever wrote the minutes
> might not have been in the hall or restaurant.   Whoever said something
> happened at the meeting might have not been in the formal sessions.   But
> they both remember what happened at "the meeting".
> 
> Meetings were messy,  and not captured very well by minutes and
> documents.   I trust recollections more,  but always remembering that no
> one could be in every hallway,  bar,  and restaurant.   IMHO,  that was
> important to the success of the Net.
> 
> /Jack
> On May 15, 2012 10:41 AM, "Craig Partridge" <craig at aland.bbn.com> wrote:
> 
> > > I was troubled the by the difference between my recollection of the SMTP
> > > history, and Craig's and Dave's, so I decided to research it a bit.
> >
> > Quick comment, as this is a list devoted to history.  Differences between
> > recollections are common.  Also common are differences between written
> > records
> > and recollections.  Figuring out which one is right (even between written
> > records and recollections, where you might think the contemporary written
> > records are more accurate) is not easy.  When writing up a technical
> > history
> > of email for the IEEE Annals, I found the Rashomon effect was often
> > present.
> >
> > A simple example: some of the early ARPANET meetings kept minutes including
> > the list of attendees.  When interviewing folks for the article, I had
> > people
> > tell me what they'd heard/observed/said at the meeting. Later I would
> > find they were not on the list of attendees. I would have to puzzle out if
> > (a) they were there and not recorded; or (b) they were confusing meetings
> > (often easy to do); or (c) their memory simply was playing tricks (e.g.
> > confusing what had been told to them by a meeting attendee with being
> > there).
> >
> > Craig


From amckenzie3 at yahoo.com  Tue May 15 14:38:19 2012
From: amckenzie3 at yahoo.com (Alex McKenzie)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 14:38:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ih] ARPANET traffic statistics
In-Reply-To: <4FB0B638.3020907@cox.net>
References: <4FB00531.5010200@cox.net>
	<alpine.OSX.1.10.1205140005390.9190@luft.gateway.2wire.net>
	<4FB0B638.3020907@cox.net>
Message-ID: <1337117899.14341.YahooMailNeo@web160202.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Someone raised the issue of ARPAnet traffic having a large intra-site (a host exchanging traffic with other Hosts connected to the same IMP) component and wondered about statistics.? There are a series of RFCs titled "Traffic Statistics" covering the period August 1972 through December 1973 which provide this information.

Alex
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120515/0b8e7337/attachment.htm>

From amckenzie3 at yahoo.com  Tue May 15 14:44:24 2012
From: amckenzie3 at yahoo.com (Alex McKenzie)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 14:44:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <24EF098081574E1FB2379D125F00B3BD@bng1>
References: <24EF098081574E1FB2379D125F00B3BD@bng1>
Message-ID: <1337118264.89489.YahooMailNeo@web160205.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

Sytel asked what an ARPAnet message looked like.? A few people talked about the specification for message exchange between a Host and an IMP in BBN Report 1822.

One level up from that is the specification of message exchanged between Network Control Programs in the Hosts.? These were specified by the Host-Host Protocol.? The Host-Host Protocol specification did not get put in the RFC series at the time, but can now be found in RFC 6529.

Other protocols built on top of the Host-Host Protocol (eg TELNET, FTP, RJE) were documented in the RFC series at the time.

Alex
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120515/533100eb/attachment.htm>

From amckenzie3 at yahoo.com  Tue May 15 14:47:52 2012
From: amckenzie3 at yahoo.com (Alex McKenzie)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 14:47:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ih] SDC on the ARPANET
Message-ID: <1337118472.21756.YahooMailNeo@web160204.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

The SDC office in southern California had an IMP with at least one Host installed in 1970.? To the best of my knowledge there was no other SDC office connected to the ARPAnet during the time prior to the ARPAnet/MILNET split.

Alex
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120515/bc875bd0/attachment.htm>

From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Tue May 15 15:26:04 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 18:26:04 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
Message-ID: <20120515222604.B78B118C0C2@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: Alex McKenzie <amckenzie3 at yahoo.com>

    > Sytel asked what an ARPAnet message looked like.

I'm working on a page about them - it's partway done (have all the images,
both Host-IMP and IMP-IMP - only two of the latter, I imagine there must have
been more, but that's what I could find), but I got distracted to work on an
ARPANET maps page (almost done, hope to have it out soon), and then the
archives stuff! Popping my way back to it, though... :-)

	Noel


From louie at transsys.com  Tue May 15 22:22:34 2012
From: louie at transsys.com (Louis Mamakos)
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 01:22:34 -0400
Subject: [ih] Historical fiction
In-Reply-To: <20120515222604.B78B118C0C2@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120515222604.B78B118C0C2@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <0F3D2EA5-860D-4A0B-A278-A17AB8879124@transsys.com>


On May 15, 2012, at 6:26 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote:

>> From: Alex McKenzie <amckenzie3 at yahoo.com>
> 
>> Sytel asked what an ARPAnet message looked like.
> 
> I'm working on a page about them - it's partway done (have all the images,
> both Host-IMP and IMP-IMP - only two of the latter, I imagine there must have
> been more, but that's what I could find), but I got distracted to work on an
> ARPANET maps page (almost done, hope to have it out soon), and then the
> archives stuff! Popping my way back to it, though... :-)
> 
> 	Noel

In some respects, the syntax of an 1822 frame on the host interface is less
interesting than the service model that the IMP/PSN subnet exposed.  I think
it's interesting to see what the capabilities of that L2 subnetwork were as
compared to what followed, later with the Ethernet and other multipoint
network technologies like FDDI, Frame Relay and ATM networks.  Sure, X.25
networks had some of these capabilities, and perhaps it was in that context
and lack of the layered architecture we take for granted today that naturally
led to a "thicker", more feature-rich IMP subnetwork.

What other subnet layers deployed could transport arbitrary bit-length messages?
That had end-to-end flow control (e.g, RFNM messages)?  

Of course, I still have nightmares of X.25 host/PSN connections.  Not a good fit
for a "host" that was actually a "gateway" (router) between the ARPANET and
the NSFNET, with more flows to ARPANET hosts than available X.25 VCs.  
Thrash, thrash, lose, lose.

Louis Mamakos




From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Wed May 16 12:20:04 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 15:20:04 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] ARPANET/MILNET maps
Message-ID: <20120516192004.D64E918C08F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > I got distracted to work on an ARPANET maps page (almost done, hope to
    > have it out soon)

OK, these are 'done':

  http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/arpageo.html
  http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/arpalog.html
  http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/milnet.html

Those URLs are just for 'temporary' use, for anyone here to quickly see; I
have an overall 'ARPANET technical info' page which is done, and another page
for packet formats which is almost done, and the whole works will be linked
together, so just going to the main page will give you links to these other
ones. (It was originally all one page, but it got so huge it was unwieldy, so
I split it up.)


Now, for the important bit:

Although these pages contain roughly 45 maps between them, BBN of course did
many, many more maps that I don't have here. (These are mostly just what I
happened to have lying around in my paper files.) I have found images of some
online, but the quality was so poor (usually due to small images) that I
decided not to include them.

If anyone has any that I am missing, I would be happy to receive images of
them (although of course there's no urgency). I have pretty good coverage up
to about 1977, so after that would be the most appreciated. At least 1000
pixels, please, and scanned, preferably. 

I found several inside the covers of ARPANET/DDN directories and ARPANET
Protocol Handbooks (don't worry if they are in colour, some of these were
too, before I converted them to B+W), so there's one place to look. Also, my
copy of "A History of the ARPANET: The First Decade" (BBN #4799) lists, on
pg. B-1, a long list of logical maps - not all of which my copy (photocopied)
includes. If anyone would like to scan the ones I am missing (March '72,
November '74, June '75, July '76, January '77) that would also be useful.

	Noel


From jack at 3kitty.org  Wed May 16 13:53:09 2012
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 13:53:09 -0700
Subject: [ih] ARPANET/MILNET maps
In-Reply-To: <20120516192004.D64E918C08F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120516192004.D64E918C08F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <CAJLkZPkaKEQYpXxgg1XB4v0HrtzzXRWPoD2A4MSJv3aEAYHYVQ@mail.gmail.com>

Noel,

In my 12 years at BBN I saw many, many such maps.  I can't find any of
them in my garage archaeology.

BBN, and I assume other contractors, had contracts which required
submission of many reports, including the QTRs - Quarterly Technical
Reports.  Some of these surely had maps in them.

There were other reports too.  E.G., there were a series of hefty
(200+ page) semiannual reports on topics like the "Arpanet Routing
Algorithm Improvements" which would be a treasure trove of information
on what was going on *inside* the network.  I have one of these - the
March 1982 report, which I had the job of editting/compiling.  It is
full of details about how the IMP code was structured, how IMPs
interacted, etc.   (No maps though.)  Anyone curious about what was
going on *inside* the network might find a lot of good historical info
here, almost as accurate as looking at the IMP code.   Possibly a
little easier to understand too - but just a little.

DTIC might be a source for such old reports.  The Arpanet ones I have
were under contract MDA90-78-C-0129 from Arpa Order 3491.

Google found that March 1982 report - see
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA121350   It's a 285 page
pdf scan of that report.  But it's the only report Google found in a
search of "MDA90-78-C-0129" - there were many more.  And there were a
number of different contracts involved over time as well, so there's
potentially a lot of reports buried somewhere.

If you can get the various reports which were submitted under that
contract, it would be a significant piece of Arpanet History.   There
were, just at BBN, a variety of such contracts covering different
Internet-related projects.  E.G., one of them covered a bunch of the
"core Internet" projects - gateways, satnet, wbnet, etc.  For several
years, I was the one who had to make sure the QTR got submitted
promptly.  The government wouldn't send us the check until they got
the report.  So I know there's a lot of stuff in the government
archives which would now be of historical interest.  Presumably other
contractors - e.g., SRI, ISI, etc etc. had to submit similar reports -
but I can't recall ever seeing any QTRs but our own!

These reports were all categorized on the DD1473 as
"Unclassified/Unlimited" distribution.  But most of what they contain
was never really "published" in the classic sense.

Perhaps someone has the stamina to dive into the government paper
bureaucracy and do some archaeology.   Their garage is *much* bigger
than mine.....

/Jack


On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:20 PM, Noel Chiappa <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu> wrote:
> ? ?> I got distracted to work on an ARPANET maps page (almost done, hope to
> ? ?> have it out soon)
>
> OK, these are 'done':
>
> ?http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/arpageo.html
> ?http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/arpalog.html
> ?http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/milnet.html
>
> Those URLs are just for 'temporary' use, for anyone here to quickly see; I
> have an overall 'ARPANET technical info' page which is done, and another page
> for packet formats which is almost done, and the whole works will be linked
> together, so just going to the main page will give you links to these other
> ones. (It was originally all one page, but it got so huge it was unwieldy, so
> I split it up.)
>
>
> Now, for the important bit:
>
> Although these pages contain roughly 45 maps between them, BBN of course did
> many, many more maps that I don't have here. (These are mostly just what I
> happened to have lying around in my paper files.) I have found images of some
> online, but the quality was so poor (usually due to small images) that I
> decided not to include them.
>
> If anyone has any that I am missing, I would be happy to receive images of
> them (although of course there's no urgency). I have pretty good coverage up
> to about 1977, so after that would be the most appreciated. At least 1000
> pixels, please, and scanned, preferably.
>
> I found several inside the covers of ARPANET/DDN directories and ARPANET
> Protocol Handbooks (don't worry if they are in colour, some of these were
> too, before I converted them to B+W), so there's one place to look. Also, my
> copy of "A History of the ARPANET: The First Decade" (BBN #4799) lists, on
> pg. B-1, a long list of logical maps - not all of which my copy (photocopied)
> includes. If anyone would like to scan the ones I am missing (March '72,
> November '74, June '75, July '76, January '77) that would also be useful.
>
> ? ? ? ?Noel



From craig at aland.bbn.com  Wed May 16 14:43:46 2012
From: craig at aland.bbn.com (Craig Partridge)
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 17:43:46 -0400
Subject: [ih] ARPANET/MILNET maps
Message-ID: <20120516214346.37F0028E137@aland.bbn.com>


Unfortunate detail -- I can tell you BBN does NOT have any more.

We kept all the maps until about the spring of 1990.  When the ARPANET
shutdown announcement was made, I contacted the project admin to get
copies for a commemorative issue of SIGCOMM Computer Communication review
and was told that they'd just moved offices and she'd been told just to
"toss the old stuff."  An internal appeal caused folks to dig copies out
of their desks (as I recall, Alex McKenzie had the largest pile), and I
put together the issue of CCR (Oct '90, with a few annotations from Vint)
and shipped the maps I had off to the Computer Museum, which happily accepted
them.

Note that Jul '76 is in that set -- is on page 88 of SIGCOMM CCR.
Oddly, ACM has chosen not to scan that portion of the issue (just checked
the DL and put in a request they fix that).  I'll see if my scanner is up
to the task.

Thanks!

Craig

>     > I got distracted to work on an ARPANET maps page (almost done, hope to
>     > have it out soon)
> 
> OK, these are 'done':
> 
>   http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/arpageo.html
>   http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/arpalog.html
>   http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/milnet.html
> 
> Those URLs are just for 'temporary' use, for anyone here to quickly see; I
> have an overall 'ARPANET technical info' page which is done, and another page
> for packet formats which is almost done, and the whole works will be linked
> together, so just going to the main page will give you links to these other
> ones. (It was originally all one page, but it got so huge it was unwieldy, so
> I split it up.)
> 
> 
> Now, for the important bit:
> 
> Although these pages contain roughly 45 maps between them, BBN of course did
> many, many more maps that I don't have here. (These are mostly just what I
> happened to have lying around in my paper files.) I have found images of some
> online, but the quality was so poor (usually due to small images) that I
> decided not to include them.
> 
> If anyone has any that I am missing, I would be happy to receive images of
> them (although of course there's no urgency). I have pretty good coverage up
> to about 1977, so after that would be the most appreciated. At least 1000
> pixels, please, and scanned, preferably. 
> 
> I found several inside the covers of ARPANET/DDN directories and ARPANET
> Protocol Handbooks (don't worry if they are in colour, some of these were
> too, before I converted them to B+W), so there's one place to look. Also, my
> copy of "A History of the ARPANET: The First Decade" (BBN #4799) lists, on
> pg. B-1, a long list of logical maps - not all of which my copy (photocopied)
> includes. If anyone would like to scan the ones I am missing (March '72,
> November '74, June '75, July '76, January '77) that would also be useful.
> 
> 	Noel
********************
Craig Partridge
Chief Scientist, BBN Technologies
E-mail: craig at aland.bbn.com or craig at bbn.com
Phone: +1 517 324 3425


From jeanjour at comcast.net  Wed May 16 17:20:20 2012
From: jeanjour at comcast.net (John Day)
Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 20:20:20 -0400
Subject: [ih] ARPANET/MILNET maps
In-Reply-To: <20120516192004.D64E918C08F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120516192004.D64E918C08F@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <a0624083fcbd9f4621cc3@[10.0.1.3]>

These are way too fancy!  ;-)  Can someone find one of the maps NMC 
generated on a TTY page?

That is what we need!  Ari isn't on this list is he?


At 15:20 -0400 2012/05/16, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>     > I got distracted to work on an ARPANET maps page (almost done, hope to
>     > have it out soon)
>
>OK, these are 'done':
>
>   http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/arpageo.html
>   http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/arpalog.html
>   http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/milnet.html
>
>Those URLs are just for 'temporary' use, for anyone here to quickly see; I
>have an overall 'ARPANET technical info' page which is done, and another page
>for packet formats which is almost done, and the whole works will be linked
>together, so just going to the main page will give you links to these other
>ones. (It was originally all one page, but it got so huge it was unwieldy, so
>I split it up.)
>
>
>Now, for the important bit:
>
>Although these pages contain roughly 45 maps between them, BBN of course did
>many, many more maps that I don't have here. (These are mostly just what I
>happened to have lying around in my paper files.) I have found images of some
>online, but the quality was so poor (usually due to small images) that I
>decided not to include them.
>
>If anyone has any that I am missing, I would be happy to receive images of
>them (although of course there's no urgency). I have pretty good coverage up
>to about 1977, so after that would be the most appreciated. At least 1000
>pixels, please, and scanned, preferably.
>
>I found several inside the covers of ARPANET/DDN directories and ARPANET
>Protocol Handbooks (don't worry if they are in colour, some of these were
>too, before I converted them to B+W), so there's one place to look. Also, my
>copy of "A History of the ARPANET: The First Decade" (BBN #4799) lists, on
>pg. B-1, a long list of logical maps - not all of which my copy (photocopied)
>includes. If anyone would like to scan the ones I am missing (March '72,
>November '74, June '75, July '76, January '77) that would also be useful.
>
>	Noel



From paul at redbarn.org  Thu May 17 01:02:25 2012
From: paul at redbarn.org (paul vixie)
Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 08:02:25 +0000
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FB23CE1.5090206@dcrocker.net>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org> <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org> <4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org> <4FB1DAA2.3030203@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1DDED.4060508@redbarn.org> <4FB23CE1.5090206@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <4FB4B091.8040206@redbarn.org>

sorry for the delay in responding to this. greetings from coolangatta.

On 5/15/2012 11:24 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>
> On 5/14/2012 9:39 PM, paul vixie wrote:
>> in that case i'd
>> say, human to human messaging at scale remains an unsolved problem.
>
> wow.  some one or two billion regular users; massive numbers of
> independent administrations.  no central control. what remaining
> requirements for basic messaging are on the list?

my previously expressed list was:

> ... doing human messaging at scale in a way that
> secures the interests of the humans at the endpoints against unwanted
> traffic, undeserved rejection, eavesdropping, corruption of format or
> content, forgery or identity theft, or misdirection

since most people fight each of those dragons at least once a week and
some of us fight all of them every day, i call them 'basic' in the
context of your question.

paul

-- 
"I suspect I'm not known as a font of optimism." (VJS, 2012)



From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Thu May 17 05:38:08 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Thu, 17 May 2012 08:38:08 -0400
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FB4B091.8040206@redbarn.org>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org> <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org> <4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org> <4FB1DAA2.3030203@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1DDED.4060508@redbarn.org> <4FB23CE1.5090206@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB4B091.8040206@redbarn.org>
Message-ID: <4FB4F130.5030104@meetinghouse.net>

paul vixie wrote:
> On 5/15/2012 11:24 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>> On 5/14/2012 9:39 PM, paul vixie wrote:
>>> in that case i'd
>>> say, human to human messaging at scale remains an unsolved problem.
>> wow.  some one or two billion regular users; massive numbers of
>> independent administrations.  no central control. what remaining
>> requirements for basic messaging are on the list?
> my previously expressed list was:
>
>> ... doing human messaging at scale in a way that
>> secures the interests of the humans at the endpoints against unwanted
>> traffic, undeserved rejection, eavesdropping, corruption of format or
>> content, forgery or identity theft, or misdirection
> since most people fight each of those dragons at least once a week and
> some of us fight all of them every day, i call them 'basic' in the
> context of your question.

It occurs to me to wonder if these are unsolvable problems.  I mean, 
they've been with us
since the beginnings of language - be it verbal, chiseled on stone 
tablets, scribed on parchment,
printed on paper, or rendered as bits.  What's changed, and continues to 
change is the scale of
things - both the number of messages moving around the world, and the 
attack surface. Perhaps
we're doomed to a continual arms race between attacker and defender.  
(Not to say that we should
stop trying though.)

Miles Fidelman


-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From srh at umich.edu  Tue May 22 06:31:16 2012
From: srh at umich.edu (Susan Harris)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 09:31:16 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] Steve Crocker interview on Gizmodo
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1205220928540.433@punchout.gpcc.itd.umich.edu>

This is timely, considering our recent discussion:

http://gizmodo.com/5911382/meet-the-man-who-invented-the-instructions-for-the-internet


From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Tue May 22 07:17:58 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 10:17:58 -0400
Subject: [ih] propagation of early email?
Message-ID: <4FBBA016.8080905@meetinghouse.net>

Hi Folks,

So... harkening back to the recent discussions on the "invention of 
email".....

Ray Tomlinson dates his work on inter-machine sendmsg to 1971.  I seem 
to recall arriving at MIT in Sept. 1971 and using email on the AI lab's 
ITS system very shortly thereafter.  Which leads to a question:  anybody 
have a sense of how Ray's work propagated from BBN to the rest of the world?

The only datapoint I have is from Ray's online accounting 
(http://openmap.bbn.com/~tomlinso/ray/firstemailframe.html) that states:
"These first messages were sent in late 1971. The next release of TENEX 
went out in early 1972 and included the version of SNDMSG with network 
mail capabilities."

Miles Fidelman

-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From craig at aland.bbn.com  Tue May 22 07:48:30 2012
From: craig at aland.bbn.com (Craig Partridge)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 10:48:30 -0400
Subject: [ih] propagation of early email?
Message-ID: <20120522144830.CFED328E137@aland.bbn.com>


My understanding is that what propagated was SNDMSG -- and since half
the Internet was TENEX systems at the time, this meant about half the
machines (and more than 1/2 of the Internet membership) had access.
DARPA had adopted it internally by early 1972, which probably pushed
some other systems.

There was an April 1972 FTP meeting at which it was decided to enhance
FTP to enable email between all machines (not just SNDMSG enabled ones)
work -- that led to MLFL in August 1972.  I observe the FTP meeting was
held at MIT, and the story runs that MLFL was inspired by an MIT
grad student sticking his nose in Abhay Bhushan's office and saying a
better email solution was needed -- all of which strongly suggests MIT
was in the networked email game early and consistent with your notion that
ITS was somehow fit in.

Thanks!

Craig

> Hi Folks,
> 
> So... harkening back to the recent discussions on the "invention of 
> email".....
> 
> Ray Tomlinson dates his work on inter-machine sendmsg to 1971.  I seem 
> to recall arriving at MIT in Sept. 1971 and using email on the AI lab's 
> ITS system very shortly thereafter.  Which leads to a question:  anybody 
> have a sense of how Ray's work propagated from BBN to the rest of the world?
> 
> The only datapoint I have is from Ray's online accounting 
> (http://openmap.bbn.com/~tomlinso/ray/firstemailframe.html) that states:
> "These first messages were sent in late 1971. The next release of TENEX 
> went out in early 1972 and included the version of SNDMSG with network 
> mail capabilities."
> 
> Miles Fidelman
> 
> -- 
> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
> In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra
> 
********************
Craig Partridge
Chief Scientist, BBN Technologies
E-mail: craig at aland.bbn.com or craig at bbn.com
Phone: +1 517 324 3425


From tony.li at tony.li  Tue May 22 10:09:00 2012
From: tony.li at tony.li (Tony Li)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 10:09:00 -0700
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FB4F130.5030104@meetinghouse.net>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org> <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org> <4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org> <4FB1DAA2.3030203@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1DDED.4060508@redbarn.org> <4FB23CE1.5090206@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB4B091.8040206@redbarn.org> <4FB4F130.5030104@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <F8F6DCD5-DB3D-4425-A2AD-BEDBAA3137BA@tony.li>


On May 17, 2012, at 5:38 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:

> It occurs to me to wonder if these are unsolvable problems.  I mean, they've been with us
> since the beginnings of language - be it verbal, chiseled on stone tablets, scribed on parchment,
> printed on paper, or rendered as bits.  What's changed, and continues to change is the scale of
> things - both the number of messages moving around the world, and the attack surface. Perhaps
> we're doomed to a continual arms race between attacker and defender.  (Not to say that we should
> stop trying though.)


I didn't see a response to this, and I believe that it deserves one.

At this point, the entire notion of identity seems to have some very strong requirements for security.  And security has become pretty deeply rooted in cryptography, which is obviously an ongoing arms race. So I think you are correct that we are in fact doomed, but should try anyway.

The good news is that it seems equally likely we can make practical progress here and work towards mechanisms that leverage the best crypto capabilities of the day in a reasonably agile way.  At this point, I have to admit that I'm an engineer and thus this counts as a pragmatic solution.

We just need the right person to pick up the ball and run with it.

Regards,
Tony




From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Tue May 22 10:14:44 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 13:14:44 -0400
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <F8F6DCD5-DB3D-4425-A2AD-BEDBAA3137BA@tony.li>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org> <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org> <4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org> <4FB1DAA2.3030203@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1DDED.4060508@redbarn.org> <4FB23CE1.5090206@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB4B091.8040206@redbarn.org> <4FB4F130.5030104@meetinghouse.net>
	<F8F6DCD5-DB3D-4425-A2AD-BEDBAA3137BA@tony.li>
Message-ID: <4FBBC984.7090902@meetinghouse.net>

Tony Li wrote:
> On May 17, 2012, at 5:38 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>
>> It occurs to me to wonder if these are unsolvable problems.  I mean, they've been with us
>> since the beginnings of language - be it verbal, chiseled on stone tablets, scribed on parchment,
>> printed on paper, or rendered as bits.  What's changed, and continues to change is the scale of
>> things - both the number of messages moving around the world, and the attack surface. Perhaps
>> we're doomed to a continual arms race between attacker and defender.  (Not to say that we should
>> stop trying though.)
>
> I didn't see a response to this, and I believe that it deserves one.
>
> At this point, the entire notion of identity seems to have some very strong requirements for security.  And security has become pretty deeply rooted in cryptography, which is obviously an ongoing arms race. So I think you are correct that we are in fact doomed, but should try anyway.
>
> The good news is that it seems equally likely we can make practical progress here and work towards mechanisms that leverage the best crypto capabilities of the day in a reasonably agile way.  At this point, I have to admit that I'm an engineer and thus this counts as a pragmatic solution.
>
And arms races are great for those of us in the arms merchant business :-)

Can't wait until the spammers get their hands on quantum computers.


-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From leo at bind.org  Tue May 22 10:59:44 2012
From: leo at bind.org (Leo Vegoda)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 17:59:44 +0000
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <F8F6DCD5-DB3D-4425-A2AD-BEDBAA3137BA@tony.li>
References: <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net> <4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org>
	<4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net> <4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org>
	<4FB1DAA2.3030203@dcrocker.net> <4FB1DDED.4060508@redbarn.org>
	<4FB23CE1.5090206@dcrocker.net> <4FB4B091.8040206@redbarn.org>
	<4FB4F130.5030104@meetinghouse.net>
	<F8F6DCD5-DB3D-4425-A2AD-BEDBAA3137BA@tony.li>
Message-ID: <20120522175944.GB24037@vegoda.org>

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:09:00AM -0700, Tony Li wrote:

[...]

> At this point, the entire notion of identity seems to have some very strong requirements for security.  And security has become pretty deeply rooted in cryptography, which is obviously an ongoing arms race. So I think you are correct that we are in fact doomed, but should try anyway.

Assuring identity is not so difficult in controlled structures,
like a company or government department. It is more difficult to do
for the public at-large because there might well not be any official
identity service. In a country where there are government issued or
approved identity documents I can see how identity could be
bootstrapped. How would it be done in a country where no such
service exists and the majority of the population vote against the
creation of such a service?

Leo


From jack at 3kitty.org  Tue May 22 11:45:04 2012
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 11:45:04 -0700
Subject: [ih] propagation of early email?
In-Reply-To: <20120522144830.CFED328E137@aland.bbn.com>
References: <20120522144830.CFED328E137@aland.bbn.com>
Message-ID: <CAJLkZPk879Xt14+tRy7DmLzLJ=S9ckPijOtsd_7BPdUpGRfPOw@mail.gmail.com>

Wow, 40 years.  We're leaving History and entering Archaeology...

It's getting fuzzier every day, but my recollection is that the early
"email" was accomplished over FTP, by the simple expedient of logging
in to the recipient's machine with FTP as anonymous/guest and then
PUTting a file into some accessible directory - where the user might
or might not see it soon depending on how often s/he looked.  That may
have occurred before the term "email" was even attached to it.

That evolved into the FTP "MAIL" command, where you could connect and,
instead of PUTting a file you would transfer your message as part of
the FTP command stream for delivery directly into a user's directory
(if that's what the FTP server's author decided to do).   E.g., you
would type "MAIL JFH" after connecting to MIT-DM's FTP port, type
whatever you wanted, and signal the end of the "command" to the remote
FTP by typing a line with a single period.  Thus
<CR><LF><PERIOD><CR><LF> became the defacto end-of-message indicator.

It didn't take long (days, not months) for people to throw together
some simple programs to queue email and perform the interactions with
the remote FTP server.   There were many such programs at MIT and no
doubt elsewhere.  I wrote one to act as MIT-DM's "mail daemon", which
became quite elaborate over time.  I recall that Ken Pogran was
involved in the Multics email, struggling with the fact that Multics
really really didn't like programs that crossed boundaries by writing
into someone else's directory.   Someone else (Stallman?  Knight?) did
one for MIT-AI.   Ken Harrenstien was also in there, coding away.  Ray
Tomlinson tossed @ into the fray, which did two things - it made for a
good user interface, and it provided the beginning of structure in
messages by enabling addresses to be more-or-less parseable out of
what was becoming message "headers".

I was in Licklider's group at MIT (he was my thesis adviser).  Al
Vezza was the guy in charge as manager/administrator.  I recall lots
of email discussions (arguments) that both Al and I had with the rest
of the community about the need for a more structured email protocol.
 I had been complaining about the silliness of my program having to
scan every character of every message to make sure there was no
<CR><LF><PERIOD><CR><LF> in the text, which would have prematurely
terminated the message.   It was also worrisome what might happen if
someone sent a message with the following embedded in the text:
              .....<CR><LF><PERIOD><CR><LF>DELE *.*<CR><LF>Y<CR><LF>

I was at MIT in the MIT-DM group starting as a student in 1970/1/2 and
on staff until 1978.  In 1972, Abhay Bhushan's office was a few doors
down the hall from mine.  I can't remember, but it's quite possible
that that grad student who stuck his head into Abhay's office to gripe
about mail protocols was me....

/Jack


On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Craig Partridge <craig at aland.bbn.com> wrote:
>
> My understanding is that what propagated was SNDMSG -- and since half
> the Internet was TENEX systems at the time, this meant about half the
> machines (and more than 1/2 of the Internet membership) had access.
> DARPA had adopted it internally by early 1972, which probably pushed
> some other systems.
>
> There was an April 1972 FTP meeting at which it was decided to enhance
> FTP to enable email between all machines (not just SNDMSG enabled ones)
> work -- that led to MLFL in August 1972. ?I observe the FTP meeting was
> held at MIT, and the story runs that MLFL was inspired by an MIT
> grad student sticking his nose in Abhay Bhushan's office and saying a
> better email solution was needed -- all of which strongly suggests MIT
> was in the networked email game early and consistent with your notion that
> ITS was somehow fit in.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Craig
>
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> So... harkening back to the recent discussions on the "invention of
>> email".....
>>
>> Ray Tomlinson dates his work on inter-machine sendmsg to 1971. ?I seem
>> to recall arriving at MIT in Sept. 1971 and using email on the AI lab's
>> ITS system very shortly thereafter. ?Which leads to a question: ?anybody
>> have a sense of how Ray's work propagated from BBN to the rest of the world?
>>
>> The only datapoint I have is from Ray's online accounting
>> (http://openmap.bbn.com/~tomlinso/ray/firstemailframe.html) that states:
>> "These first messages were sent in late 1971. The next release of TENEX
>> went out in early 1972 and included the version of SNDMSG with network
>> mail capabilities."
>>
>> Miles Fidelman
>>
>> --
>> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>> In practice, there is. ? .... Yogi Berra
>>
> ********************
> Craig Partridge
> Chief Scientist, BBN Technologies
> E-mail: craig at aland.bbn.com or craig at bbn.com
> Phone: +1 517 324 3425



From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Tue May 22 11:47:53 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 14:47:53 -0400
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <20120522175944.GB24037@vegoda.org>
References: <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net> <4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org>
	<4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net> <4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org>
	<4FB1DAA2.3030203@dcrocker.net> <4FB1DDED.4060508@redbarn.org>
	<4FB23CE1.5090206@dcrocker.net> <4FB4B091.8040206@redbarn.org>
	<4FB4F130.5030104@meetinghouse.net>
	<F8F6DCD5-DB3D-4425-A2AD-BEDBAA3137BA@tony.li>
	<20120522175944.GB24037@vegoda.org>
Message-ID: <4FBBDF59.8030706@meetinghouse.net>

Leo Vegoda wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:09:00AM -0700, Tony Li wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> At this point, the entire notion of identity seems to have some very strong requirements for security.  And security has become pretty deeply rooted in cryptography, which is obviously an ongoing arms race. So I think you are correct that we are in fact doomed, but should try anyway.
> Assuring identity is not so difficult in controlled structures,
> like a company or government department. It is more difficult to do
> for the public at-large because there might well not be any official
> identity service. In a country where there are government issued or
> approved identity documents I can see how identity could be
> bootstrapped. How would it be done in a country where no such
> service exists and the majority of the population vote against the
> creation of such a service?

Pretty much any country that has some kind of economy has banks and 
notaries and such - otherwise, international contracts and business 
would be pretty much impossible.  That's a pretty good place to start.

For example, if you're a government contractor and need to get a PKI 
certificate for access to government systems - the place you start is a 
local notary.  You bring in the paperwork, along with solid id (e.g., a 
passport), and get notarized papers to forward to the keying authority.  
That works pretty well.

Or... start with credit cards.  You generally have to establish identity 
to get a bank account and/or credit card.  That's a pretty good start 
when obtaining a crypto cert.



-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From craig at aland.bbn.com  Tue May 22 11:54:12 2012
From: craig at aland.bbn.com (Craig Partridge)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 14:54:12 -0400
Subject: [ih] propagation of early email?
Message-ID: <20120522185412.79F3928E137@aland.bbn.com>

> Wow, 40 years.  We're leaving History and entering Archaeology...
> 
> It's getting fuzzier every day, but my recollection is that the early
> "email" was accomplished over FTP, by the simple expedient of logging
> in to the recipient's machine with FTP as anonymous/guest and then
> PUTting a file into some accessible directory - where the user might
> or might not see it soon depending on how often s/he looked.  That may
> have occurred before the term "email" was even attached to it.

The initial SNDMSG used a pre-FTP program called CPYNET -- don't know
if that was TENEX specific.  The FTP spec did not exist when Tomlinson
added remote system support to SNDMSG.

> I was at MIT in the MIT-DM group starting as a student in 1970/1/2 and
> on staff until 1978.  In 1972, Abhay Bhushan's office was a few doors
> down the hall from mine.  I can't remember, but it's quite possible
> that that grad student who stuck his head into Abhay's office to gripe
> about mail protocols was me....

It would make a lot of sense.

Craig

PS: I think most folks on this list know, but just in case not.
I joined the Internet in 1983 [I was recruited by BBN to learn TCP/IP
(BBN taught one or two people TCP/IP every year) and then get IP networking
working on Proteon 80 Mbps ring networks for Navy command centers].  The
information I'm reciting here came from doing a bunch of interviews and
scouring literature in 2007/2008 for an article on the technical
development of Internet email.


From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Tue May 22 12:44:56 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 12:44:56 -0700
Subject: [ih] propagation of early email?
In-Reply-To: <4FBBA016.8080905@meetinghouse.net>
References: <4FBBA016.8080905@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <4FBBECB8.9080904@dcrocker.net>

In line with most of the responses you've already gotten:

BBN's Tenex was the preferred computer science computing platform. 
Anything written on one was therefore readily available to the rest of 
the community.

Ray modified SNDMSG to use CPYNET, adding the @-based string to refer to 
the remote host.  I believe CPYNET was indeed Tenex-specific.  Mail 
reading was done with READMAIL that dumped out all 'recent' message, 
received since the last running of READMAIL.

Ray's work was in reaction to email protocol discussions that had 
already started for something more elaborate with rather less 
integration (targeting printing out rather than online reading.)

I had repeatedly heard the anecdote of Abhay's adding the MAIL and MLFL 
commands to FTP.  But some years ago, Abhay denied it, saying that email 
was "always" part of the FTP discussion.  Certainly the documentation 
suggests a long consideration of the capability.

On the other hand, Craig's recounting is specific to MLFL, rather than 
including MAIL, and I didn't ask Abhay anything that specific.

Anonymous FTP was quite separate from email, in a push vs. pull 
distinction.  I characterize anonymous FTP as the beginning of the web, 
since it was how public documents were published and made readily 
accessible.

For reference, there is now a web site for discussing the origins of 
email, to develop a consensus view of the details:

    emailhistory.org

Note that a timeline is under development, seeking feedback, corrections 
and additions.

Folks are encouraged to join in the discussions.

d/
On 5/22/2012 7:17 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> So... harkening back to the recent discussions on the "invention of
> email".....

-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Tue May 22 12:51:29 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 12:51:29 -0700
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <F8F6DCD5-DB3D-4425-A2AD-BEDBAA3137BA@tony.li>
References: <mailman.1808.1336828415.674.internet-history@postel.org>
	<4FAEB1FF.4020908@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggd0kcUswgqu9AYK=zmaX5Gm2xmr3KcW_u9UL_b6Y6JdLA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FAF2B50.9030503@isi.edu>
	<CAHxHggceuqNVQt_6mqPdOCdywhtHOKagY_okUEkAL2NUtK28Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPkQ2Dg9jL4WpKEM1a54GLigh32YeSfEWf+SEGv=QknwQw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHxHggdkYcukEFC6xLZ=iizY27yZU2E6fqDV1=8QOhmWmYL49A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJLkZPmryMvWxRC1WcGkaZvx5L-D5nrtBtaBLwU9yKLZ4omyJA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB06E9F.6010302@dcrocker.net>
	<CAJLkZP=LNZN1LXpLNVCYW8vMt34m1bd1HdxrM_Kj8FtoQMKCUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FB0B796.4090000@redbarn.org> <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org> <4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org> <4FB1DAA2.3030203@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB1DDED.4060508@redbarn.org> <4FB23CE1.5090206@dcrocker.net>
	<4FB4B091.8040206@redbarn.org> <4FB4F130.5030104@meetinghouse.net>
	<F8F6DCD5-DB3D-4425-A2AD-BEDBAA3137BA@tony.li>
Message-ID: <4FBBEE41.3000308@dcrocker.net>


> At this point, the entire notion of identity seems to have some very strong requirements for security.  And security has become pretty deeply rooted in cryptography, which is obviously an ongoing arms race. So I think you are correct that we are in fact doomed, but should try anyway.


Although the crypto arms race is a factor, I believe that reports of 
compromises rarely (if ever?) the result of crypt-breakins.

The dominant arms races are against heuristics -- for detecting malware 
-- and human factors of social engineering, insufficient UI design, and 
insufficient user diligence such as with passwords.

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Tue May 22 15:30:48 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 18:30:48 -0400
Subject: [ih] propagation of early email?
In-Reply-To: <4FBBECB8.9080904@dcrocker.net>
References: <4FBBA016.8080905@meetinghouse.net> <4FBBECB8.9080904@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <4FBC1398.4030109@meetinghouse.net>

Thanks to all who've provided some great history!  Now, just to add to 
the question... Unix was developing pretty much in parallel with the 
ARPANET.  Anybody happen to know when UUCP based file transfer and email 
started up?

Miles


Dave Crocker wrote:
> In line with most of the responses you've already gotten:
>
> BBN's Tenex was the preferred computer science computing platform. 
> Anything written on one was therefore readily available to the rest of 
> the community.
>
> Ray modified SNDMSG to use CPYNET, adding the @-based string to refer 
> to the remote host.  I believe CPYNET was indeed Tenex-specific.  Mail 
> reading was done with READMAIL that dumped out all 'recent' message, 
> received since the last running of READMAIL.
>
> Ray's work was in reaction to email protocol discussions that had 
> already started for something more elaborate with rather less 
> integration (targeting printing out rather than online reading.)
>
> I had repeatedly heard the anecdote of Abhay's adding the MAIL and 
> MLFL commands to FTP.  But some years ago, Abhay denied it, saying 
> that email was "always" part of the FTP discussion.  Certainly the 
> documentation suggests a long consideration of the capability.
>
> On the other hand, Craig's recounting is specific to MLFL, rather than 
> including MAIL, and I didn't ask Abhay anything that specific.
>
> Anonymous FTP was quite separate from email, in a push vs. pull 
> distinction.  I characterize anonymous FTP as the beginning of the 
> web, since it was how public documents were published and made readily 
> accessible.
>
> For reference, there is now a web site for discussing the origins of 
> email, to develop a consensus view of the details:
>
>    emailhistory.org
>
> Note that a timeline is under development, seeking feedback, 
> corrections and additions.
>
> Folks are encouraged to join in the discussions.
>
> d/
> On 5/22/2012 7:17 AM, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>> Hi Folks,
>>
>> So... harkening back to the recent discussions on the "invention of
>> email".....
>


-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From dave.walden.family at gmail.com  Wed May 23 06:21:28 2012
From: dave.walden.family at gmail.com (Dave Walden)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 09:21:28 -0400
Subject: [ih] as promised
Message-ID: <4fbce355.c22ce00a.0dd9.5c42@mx.google.com>

Hi,

A week or two ago, while we were discussing ARPANET source material 
the novelist asked about, I mentioned that I was having BBN's 
proposal to building the ARPANET IMP scanned.  I have now posted it 
to my website (although it may be moved to another website in the not 
too distant future), and below I list it and three other documents I 
see as being related to the question of the evolving IMP design.  I 
am not soliciting renewed discussion at this point -- just following 
through on my promise to post the proposal.  Note, there are two 
pages missing from my printed copy of this proposal and also from the 
printed copy that Noel Chiappa has (pages E-13 and H-2).  If anyone 
has a copy of the BBN proposal with these two pages in it, I would 
greatly appreciate being sent a scan or digital photo of the two pages.

ARPANET IMP Request for 
Proposal: 
<http://walden-family.com/bbn/arpanet-rfq.pdf>http://walden-family.com/bbn/arpanet-rfq.pdf 

    - what the government asked for
ARPANET IMP 
proposal: 
<http://walden-family.com/bbn/arpanet-prop-ocr.pdf>http://walden-family.com/bbn/arpanet-prop-ocr.pdf 

    - the design we proposed
ARPANET IMP original 
paper: 
<http://walden-family.com/public/1970-imp-afips.pdf>http://walden-family.com/public/1970-imp-afips.pdf 

    - the revised design we implemented
ARPANET Design 
Decisions: 
<http://walden-family.com/public/whole-paper.pdf>http://walden-family.com/public/whole-paper.pdf 

    - the evolved design from 8 years after the original 
implementation (but before the new routing implementation, I think)

Best wishes, Dave


--
home address: 12 Linden Rd., E. Sandwich, MA 02537
home ph=508-888-7655; cell ph = 503-757-3137
email address:  dave at walden-family.com; website: 
<http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/>http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/  



From johnl at iecc.com  Wed May 23 16:57:57 2012
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 23 May 2012 23:57:57 -0000
Subject: [ih] propagation of early email?
In-Reply-To: <4FBC1398.4030109@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <20120523235757.42803.qmail@joyce.lan>

In article <4FBC1398.4030109 at meetinghouse.net> you write:
>Thanks to all who've provided some great history!  Now, just to add to 
>the question... Unix was developing pretty much in parallel with the 
>ARPANET.  Anybody happen to know when UUCP based file transfer and email 
>started up?

I was certainly using it by 1981 when I connected to usenet.  uucp
escaped into the world in v7 Unix in 1979, mail usage was immediate,
usenet pretty soon after that.

R's,
John, cbosgd!ima!johnl

http://www.megalextoria.com/usenet-archive/news004f1/b9/net.general/00001091.html


From johnl at iecc.com  Wed May 23 17:00:56 2012
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 24 May 2012 00:00:56 -0000
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FBBDF59.8030706@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <20120524000056.42842.qmail@joyce.lan>

>Or... start with credit cards.  You generally have to establish identity 
>to get a bank account and/or credit card.  That's a pretty good start 
>when obtaining a crypto cert.

Do you have any idea how much stolen credit card information is in
circulation these days?  It's reported to be a double digit percentage
of all card info.

It's the usual tradeoff.  A system that requires appearing in person
at a notary to get your application stamped is indeed pretty secure,
but is also sufficiently inconvenient that it's unlikely to get much
use.  I mean, really, you can get a free S/MIME cert by visiting a web
site and clicking a link on an e-mail, and how many people even bother
to do that?

R's,
John


From johnl at iecc.com  Wed May 23 17:03:46 2012
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 24 May 2012 00:03:46 -0000
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
Message-ID: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan>

For reasons you can probably guess, I'm researching when people
started keeping address books in MUAs.  Any pointers?

R's,
John




From leo at bind.org  Wed May 23 17:34:55 2012
From: leo at bind.org (Leo Vegoda)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 17:34:55 -0700
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <4FBBDF59.8030706@meetinghouse.net>
References: <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net> <4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org>
	<4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net> <4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org>
	<4FB1DAA2.3030203@dcrocker.net> <4FB1DDED.4060508@redbarn.org>
	<4FB23CE1.5090206@dcrocker.net> <4FB4B091.8040206@redbarn.org>
	<4FB4F130.5030104@meetinghouse.net>
	<F8F6DCD5-DB3D-4425-A2AD-BEDBAA3137BA@tony.li>
	<20120522175944.GB24037@vegoda.org>
	<4FBBDF59.8030706@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <CAPfiqjYz=SdkXt6mEG39Edak4mgAPEXXu9H4rW6LiPXi9_J5=g@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Miles Fidelman
<mfidelman at meetinghouse.net> wrote:
>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:09:00AM -0700, Tony Li wrote:

[...]

> Pretty much any country that has some kind of economy has banks and notaries
> and such - otherwise, international contracts and business would be pretty
> much impossible. ?That's a pretty good place to start.

I think banks and notaries get you a fair way but don't come close
enough for anything that is truly inclusive. Even in developed
countries like Britain there are still millions of people who do not
have bank accounts but those people still have access to
telecommunications systems using pre-pay accounts. Anything that
relies on banks excludes a lot of people and while it's common to have
notaries in UPS stores and so on in the US their services are used
less in other countries, so there are fewer available. There are
barely 1,000 in England & Wales.

Leo



From bill.n1vux at gmail.com  Wed May 23 17:36:51 2012
From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 20:36:51 -0400
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan>
Message-ID: <CAAbKA3W1kggQGhjc-EWEFNttqEzPAnoj9EJMmwaK0ThyYCY3mQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 8:03 PM, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:

> For reasons you can probably guess, I'm researching when people
> started keeping address books in MUAs.  Any pointers?
>

Do you count CLI MUA's?
Either mail or Mail had an alias file on Unix is mid '80s. I can't be
certain but suspect RAND/MX MAIL did too.

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120523/bcb24be5/attachment.htm>

From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Wed May 23 17:37:42 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 17:37:42 -0700
Subject: [ih] propagation of early email?
In-Reply-To: <20120523235757.42803.qmail@joyce.lan>
References: <20120523235757.42803.qmail@joyce.lan>
Message-ID: <4FBD82D6.3070205@dcrocker.net>



On 5/23/2012 4:57 PM, John Levine wrote:
> Thanks to all who've provided some great history!  Now, just to add to
>>the question... Unix was developing pretty much in parallel with the
>>ARPANET.  Anybody happen to know when UUCP based file transfer and email
>>started up?


I don't remember it's being in use in 76'ish timeframe.  That doesn't 
mean it wasn't.  It was definitely operational before 1980.

Perhaps Steve Bellovin is on this list?

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Wed May 23 17:38:14 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 17:38:14 -0700
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan>
Message-ID: <4FBD82F6.105@dcrocker.net>



On 5/23/2012 5:03 PM, John Levine wrote:
> For reasons you can probably guess, I'm researching when people
> started keeping address books in MUAs.  Any pointers?


preliminary discussions on emailhistory.org are guessing eudora.

d/

-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Wed May 23 17:40:13 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 20:40:13 -0400
Subject: [ih] email at scale
In-Reply-To: <CAPfiqjYz=SdkXt6mEG39Edak4mgAPEXXu9H4rW6LiPXi9_J5=g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4FB107A7.4030906@dcrocker.net> <4FB18E54.4080004@redbarn.org>
	<4FB1CF4C.6040004@dcrocker.net> <4FB1D282.7010609@redbarn.org>
	<4FB1DAA2.3030203@dcrocker.net> <4FB1DDED.4060508@redbarn.org>
	<4FB23CE1.5090206@dcrocker.net> <4FB4B091.8040206@redbarn.org>
	<4FB4F130.5030104@meetinghouse.net>
	<F8F6DCD5-DB3D-4425-A2AD-BEDBAA3137BA@tony.li>
	<20120522175944.GB24037@vegoda.org>
	<4FBBDF59.8030706@meetinghouse.net>
	<CAPfiqjYz=SdkXt6mEG39Edak4mgAPEXXu9H4rW6LiPXi9_J5=g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FBD836D.4010104@meetinghouse.net>

Leo Vegoda wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Miles Fidelman
> <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net>  wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:09:00AM -0700, Tony Li wrote:
> [...]
>
>> Pretty much any country that has some kind of economy has banks and notaries
>> and such - otherwise, international contracts and business would be pretty
>> much impossible.  That's a pretty good place to start.
> I think banks and notaries get you a fair way but don't come close
> enough for anything that is truly inclusive. Even in developed
> countries like Britain there are still millions of people who do not
> have bank accounts but those people still have access to
> telecommunications systems using pre-pay accounts. Anything that
> relies on banks excludes a lot of people and while it's common to have
> notaries in UPS stores and so on in the US their services are used
> less in other countries, so there are fewer available. There are
> barely 1,000 in England&  Wales.

Just seems like we have ways to establish trusted identities for 
non-electronic purposes (like, say, obtaining a passport or drivers' 
license) - seems like that's a pretty good starting point.  Show up in 
person, somewhere, to validate your identity and take things from there.

Miles



-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From johnl at iecc.com  Wed May 23 19:36:56 2012
From: johnl at iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Date: 23 May 2012 22:36:56 -0400
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <CAAbKA3W1kggQGhjc-EWEFNttqEzPAnoj9EJMmwaK0ThyYCY3mQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan>
	<CAAbKA3W1kggQGhjc-EWEFNttqEzPAnoj9EJMmwaK0ThyYCY3mQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1205232235270.21178@joyce.lan>

>> For reasons you can probably guess, I'm researching when people
>> started keeping address books in MUAs.  Any pointers?
>>
>
> Do you count CLI MUA's?
> Either mail or Mail had an alias file on Unix is mid '80s. I can't be
> certain but suspect RAND/MX MAIL did too.

We Alpine users definitely count CLI MUAs.  I should go back and take a 
look.  The question I need to look at is how you picked an address out of 
the alias file, e.g., was there anything like partial match or 
autocomplete?

Regards,
John Levine, johnl at iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. http://jl.ly


From bill.n1vux at gmail.com  Wed May 23 19:53:43 2012
From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 22:53:43 -0400
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1205232235270.21178@joyce.lan>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan>
	<CAAbKA3W1kggQGhjc-EWEFNttqEzPAnoj9EJMmwaK0ThyYCY3mQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.1205232235270.21178@joyce.lan>
Message-ID: <CAAbKA3X5iz7m1BsAJ0DFGb+hF+6T4nsb+zUUsStr6XAkcX2p5A@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 10:36 PM, John R. Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:

> picked an address out of the alias file, e.g., was there anything like
> partial match or autocomplete?
>

Not as i recall with mail/Mail/RAND/MH.
I remember having (needing) a  shell alias to grep my alias file via :!
whom Th\?om escape to see what Tom's i knew while in compose mode.

I'd expect the emacs built-in MUA had alias/address completion pretty
early, but i didn't use that much as VI  used my $TERM's scroll and blank
modes more effectively at 4800bps, and MH/RAND were dept official choice.
(Emacs is usually the first quasi gui for almost everything?)

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120523/2cfa84c0/attachment.htm>

From lyndon at orthanc.ca  Wed May 23 20:26:00 2012
From: lyndon at orthanc.ca (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 20:26:00 -0700
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1205232235270.21178@joyce.lan>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan>
	<CAAbKA3W1kggQGhjc-EWEFNttqEzPAnoj9EJMmwaK0ThyYCY3mQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.BSF.2.00.1205232235270.21178@joyce.lan>
Message-ID: <2BD79C2E-A45A-4EF2-815C-1B890B94F4E5@orthanc.ca>


On 2012-05-23, at 7:36 PM, John R. Levine wrote:

>> Either mail or Mail had an alias file on Unix is mid '80s. I can't be
>> certain but suspect RAND/MX MAIL did too.

Certainly (BSD) Mail and (SysV) mailx had aliases in their respective .mailrc-ish files going back to the early 1980s.  I recall running early crude mailing lists circa 1983 using the SysV mailx local alias facility.

This was back when System V had UUCP, but no MTA with routing capabilities.  That's when I got involved with smail, and some early ports of sendmail to CTIX and other System V variants.  Fun days ;-)  (Anyone remember the IDA sendmail toolkit?)

--lyndon




From mfidelman at meetinghouse.net  Wed May 23 21:32:31 2012
From: mfidelman at meetinghouse.net (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 00:32:31 -0400
Subject: [ih] propagation of early email?
In-Reply-To: <CAJLkZPk879Xt14+tRy7DmLzLJ=S9ckPijOtsd_7BPdUpGRfPOw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20120522144830.CFED328E137@aland.bbn.com>
	<CAJLkZPk879Xt14+tRy7DmLzLJ=S9ckPijOtsd_7BPdUpGRfPOw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FBDB9DF.5060808@meetinghouse.net>

Jack Haverty wrote:
> It didn't take long (days, not months) for people to throw together
> some simple programs to queue email and perform the interactions with
> the remote FTP server.   There were many such programs at MIT and no
> doubt elsewhere.  I wrote one to act as MIT-DM's "mail daemon", which
> became quite elaborate over time.  I recall that Ken Pogran was
> involved in the Multics email, struggling with the fact that Multics
> really really didn't like programs that crossed boundaries by writing
> into someone else's directory.   Someone else (Stallman?  Knight?) did
> one for MIT-AI.   Ken Harrenstien was also in there, coding away.  Ray
> Tomlinson tossed @ into the fray, which did two things - it made for a
> good user interface, and it provided the beginning of structure in
> messages by enabling addresses to be more-or-less parseable out of
> what was becoming message "headers".
>
Well, I checked in with Ken Harrenstien who reports:

------ quote ---------

Yeah, more or less.  There were actually two similar systems developed
at almost the same time.  MIT-DM had something called COMSYS written
in MDL (Muddle) -- if memory serves me correctly, that was by Jack
Haverty (JFH).  The one I wrote was called COMSAT, was written in
MIDAS assembler, and ran on all the other ITS systems (AI, ML, MC, and
whatever else was later brought to life remotely or virtually).

The ITS systems originally had email limited to their own machine or
other local ITSes via the JOB device which acted as a sort of NFS;
this may be what you remember from the 1971 time frame.  True Arpanet
email using the FTP protocol was very kludgy and didn't really take
off until COMSAT/COMSYS were developed a couple years later and took
on the job of queueing messages and delivering them at whatever time
the destination host happened to be alive.  Both of those systems had
some unique features that didn't appear elsewhere for quite some time,
at least until sendmail/unix became popular; for example, they could
serve as mailing list expanders and one of the first such lists was
"Header-People".  The traffic was so heavy that I wrote a couple of
RFCs proposing FTP extensions to reduce the number of message copies
sent to each host (you can find them via search; those were adopted by
SMTP) and even implemented them for some non-ITS systems.

------ end quote ------



-- 
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra




From AMaitland at Commerco.Com  Wed May 23 22:03:00 2012
From: AMaitland at Commerco.Com (Alan Maitland)
Date: Wed, 23 May 2012 23:03:00 -0600
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <4FBD82F6.105@dcrocker.net>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan> <4FBD82F6.105@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <4FBDC104.8010509@Commerco.Com>

Not entirely sure about that.  If memory serves there were HP Office 
applications which ran on 8086 PCs (HP150) that interfaced to HP Desk (a 
proprietary email solution which ran on HP3000 systems since the early 
1980s), which may have contained a rudimentary address book, if my 
memory still serves.

Not sure if that counts for this discussion and I'm guessing there was 
probably some equivalent in the DEC and IBM environments, though I don't 
absolutely know that to be true.  If my memory is correct, these things 
were around in the circa 1986 timeframe, so perhaps they predated Eudora.

Alan

On 5/23/2012 6:38 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
>
>
> On 5/23/2012 5:03 PM, John Levine wrote:
>> For reasons you can probably guess, I'm researching when people
>> started keeping address books in MUAs. Any pointers?
>
>
> preliminary discussions on emailhistory.org are guessing eudora.
>
> d/
>



From paul at redbarn.org  Thu May 24 00:28:10 2012
From: paul at redbarn.org (paul vixie)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 07:28:10 +0000
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <4FBDC104.8010509@Commerco.Com>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan> <4FBD82F6.105@dcrocker.net>
	<4FBDC104.8010509@Commerco.Com>
Message-ID: <4FBDE30A.4030708@redbarn.org>

On 5/24/2012 5:03 AM, Alan Maitland wrote:
> Not entirely sure about that.  If memory serves there were HP Office
> applications which ran on 8086 PCs (HP150) that interfaced to HP Desk
> (a proprietary email solution which ran on HP3000 systems since the
> early 1980s), which may have contained a rudimentary address book, if
> my memory still serves.

if we're going there, then dec all-in-one may also qualify. (note, i'm
not talking about vaxmail.)

>
> Not sure if that counts for this discussion and I'm guessing there was
> probably some equivalent in the DEC and IBM environments, though I
> don't absolutely know that to be true.  If my memory is correct, these
> things were around in the circa 1986 timeframe, so perhaps they
> predated Eudora. 

i think the dec all-in-fun product predates eudora but it required major
weeping and wailing in that era to get it to gateway anything to/from
the internet. so it's not in my view part of "internet" history even
though it's part of "email" history.

paul


From marty at martylyons.com  Thu May 24 00:33:22 2012
From: marty at martylyons.com (Marty Lyons)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 00:33:22 -0700
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <4FBDC104.8010509@Commerco.Com>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan> <4FBD82F6.105@dcrocker.net>
	<4FBDC104.8010509@Commerco.Com>
Message-ID: <B2394ED1-3003-46A1-BB14-860B2A52C8EF@martylyons.com>


On May 23, 2012, at 10:03 PM, Alan Maitland wrote:
> 
> Not sure if that counts for this discussion and I'm guessing there was probably some equivalent in the DEC and IBM environments, though I don't absolutely know that to be true.  If my memory is correct, these things were around in the circa 1986 timeframe, so perhaps they predated Eudora.


Mail aliases existed through various hacks on Unix for a very long time; I remember using aliases in 1981.  I could probably dig up my old files if I looked hard enough.  There was a lot going on in the UUCP world around that time.  There was later a wide variety of user agents beyond just mail, mailx, and the emacs world; I think mh goes back maybe the earliest (1977) [1, p. 5, footnote 2], and support for aliases [1, p. 6].  In 1986 elm as an MUA on Unix also had good support for aliases. 

In those early days, actually getting mail to where it was intended to go in not on ARPAnet was a challenge; using a mail agent alias file was critical to keeping track of how to get a message to someone.

For sites connected by UUCP,  the UUCP Mapping project used site-prepared files which could be fed into pathalias to produce automated email path routing.  I maintained one of the early gateway maps showing how to transit from one net to another (e.g. from UUCP-land to BITNET, ARPA to IBM, CSNET to BITNET, and so on)... we had to keep track of all of this stuff manually, and the state of interconnections was changing all the time.   The big relay sites that were on multiple networks never "officially" gateway'ed mail, so we ended up with convoluted bang and % routing hack address, e.g.  hosta!hostb!user%decwrl.csnet at mit-multics.arpa.  Depending on whatever MTA picked up the file would parse the headers and hopefully do something intelligent for the next hop or final delivery.  RFC 976 (Mark Horton, Bell Labs, 1986) has some good notes on UUCP email header decoding for routing [2].  But once you figured out a way to reach someone, you made an alias, since most of the time it was trial and error and you didn't want to figure it all out again!

Unix sendmail configuration files around this time started to get even more bizarre than normal to handle the strange paths in mail headers.  There was eventually a way to deal with network gateways by using a separate file which was sent around UUCP... I can't recall what it was called or who maintained it.  Sometime around 1992, Zmailer emerged as a sendmail alternative to try to make email address routing easier at the transport level; recall even in the early '90s we were still in the post-NSFnet days and commercial networking was still in its infancy... some sites were still reachable only through UUCP using the % routing hack in addresses.
 
[I really should write all this up.  Looking back on what we did in the early days of interconnecting the disparate networks involved lots of hacks and heavy lifting all around.  For those of us not directly connected to ARPAnet, life was filled with work-arounds.]

In the BITNET world circa 1984, sites running IBM VM used the VM NOTE [3] command for mail, which stored aliases in a file called USERID NAMES.  The format for an entry was:

:nick.JOEUSER
               :userid.JOE
               :node.NODENAME.ARPA
               :name.Joe User
               :addr.Campus Drive;Big University;CA

"node" in the BITNET context had a particular meaning, but by inserting a properly configured address (with gateway), you had some hope of getting mail out of BITNET and on to another part of what was just starting to be called the "Internet" by routing mail out using "well-connected nodes".  In the BITNET universe that meant University of Wisconsin, Princeton, and the City University of New York.

Ultimately though on the BITNET side tools started being developed to conform to RFC822 -- Alan Crosswell (and others) at Columbia University wrote MAILER, which was a smart MTA for VM systems, allowing true routing over BITNET.  This was a *big deal* at the time, since nominally there was no way to send outside the BITNET domain.  MAILER was for BITNET nodes what sendmail was for Unix.  And on the user agent side, Richard Schafer at Rice University wrote the MAIL program, which did proper formatting, headers, and so on.  

IBM also sold a supported product called "PROFS" (Professional Office System) for VM which had it's own nickname file as well, that was edited from inside the application.  In the corporate world, PROFS was a big seller, but the university world on BITNET was running MAILER/MAIL.  I seem to recall coming up with some hack to actually gateway mail out of PROFS to the net, but I'm not sure I have those files any more. [Trivia: PROFS was originally written by ARCO in Dallas for their own in-house use.]

IBM systems finally became a first-class network citizen around 1988, when IBM started shipping the 8232 channel attached controller.  It was a $40,000 IBM microchannel PC with microcode to talk to a bus/tag interface on one side (that was, presumably, the $39,000 interface), and a Ethernet interface in another slot ($1).  The TCP/IP software product was IBM P/N 5798-FAL (I seem to remember the first generation had a different P/N, but everyone remembers the -FAL version).  With the introduction of the hardware and software, you could directly connect a VM host to an IP network directly. Almost immediately, Bus-Tech Inc., shipped a competitive device at much lower cost and higher performance, it used the IBM FAL code on the host.  Several years later, IBM added TCP/IP to the main lineup of communications controllers such as the 3745.

/Marty

P.S.  I just realized I'm retelling some old history, I wrote about this a few years ago:

http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/internet-history/2010-January/001200.html

[1] http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/notes/2009/N3017.pdf
[2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc976
[3] http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/zvm/v6r1/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.zvm.v610.dmsb4/hcsd8c0175.htm





From nigel at channelisles.net  Thu May 24 01:29:48 2012
From: nigel at channelisles.net (Nigel Roberts)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 09:29:48 +0100
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <4FBDE30A.4030708@redbarn.org>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan> <4FBD82F6.105@dcrocker.net>
	<4FBDC104.8010509@Commerco.Com> <4FBDE30A.4030708@redbarn.org>
Message-ID: <4FBDF17C.5020306@channelisles.net>

I worked for the ALL-IN-1 development team in the mid-80s.

DEC (sorry.. DIGITAL) were /very/ particular about spelling and 
capitalisation. I think I still have a poster somewhere showing all the 
'incorrect' versions, the 'correct' one, and the slogan "ALL-IN-1 --- 
it's number one!"

And sending email to and from the wider Internet was actually easier 
than Paul remembers.

There were various gateways between Message Router (the email backend of 
ALL-IN-1) and the outside one. The one I worked on was MRX-400 which did 
exactly what you might imagine from the name.

But what I uses was am ALL-IN-1 feature that sent VAXmail from inside 
ALL-IN-1 (my memory is failing as to exactly how, but I remember hacking 
something in the DCL code that actually implemented it. I seem to recall 
that it may have been prefixing the address with '_'

So to email the Internet from ALL-IN-1 was as "simple" as sending it to

_RHEA::DECWRL::"user at host.tld"

You can see what the return address would have looked like to the 
Internet user at

http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/8.4.html#subj1.1

This shows a reply address that would translated to an internal Easynet 
address in the form UNTADH::ROBERTS which typically would be 
automatically forwarded into Message Router/ALL-IN-1 by the ALL-IN-1 
user having done a $MAIL SET FORWARD.


:-)


Nigel (nigel at roberts.gg)

> weeping and wailing in that era to get it to gateway anything to/from
> the internet.


From paul at redbarn.org  Thu May 24 03:21:54 2012
From: paul at redbarn.org (paul vixie)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 10:21:54 +0000
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <4FBDF17C.5020306@channelisles.net>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan> <4FBD82F6.105@dcrocker.net>
	<4FBDC104.8010509@Commerco.Com> <4FBDE30A.4030708@redbarn.org>
	<4FBDF17C.5020306@channelisles.net>
Message-ID: <4FBE0BC2.3020206@redbarn.org>

On 5/24/2012 8:29 AM, Nigel Roberts wrote:
> I worked for the ALL-IN-1 development team in the mid-80s.
> ...
> And sending email to and from the wider Internet was actually easier
> than Paul remembers.
> ...
> There were various gateways between Message Router (the email backend
> of ALL-IN-1) ...
>
> But what I uses was am ALL-IN-1 feature that sent VAXmail from inside
> ALL-IN-1 (my memory is failing as to exactly how, but I remember
> hacking something in the DCL code that actually implemented it. I seem
> to recall that it may have been prefixing the address with '_'
>
> So to email the Internet from ALL-IN-1 was as "simple" as sending it to
>
> _RHEA::DECWRL::"user at host.tld"
>
> You can see what the return address would have looked like to the
> Internet user at
>
> http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/8.4.html#subj1.1

that's:

Nigel <roberts%untadh.DEC at decwrl.dec.com>

/Wed, 11 Jan 89 03:02:40 PST

/
> This shows a reply address that would translated to an internal
> Easynet address in the form UNTADH::ROBERTS which typically would be
> automatically forwarded into Message Router/ALL-IN-1 by the ALL-IN-1
> user having done a $MAIL SET FORWARD.
>
> :-)

so, from 1988 to 1993 i ran DECWRL:: (as the rest of the company knew
our DECnet Phase IV node name) and i was using a public-domain version
of the mail11 gateway code (originally written by keith moore, then at
UTK) which i'd hacked to do "block mode" since the decnet-savvy people
in the company were really pissy about "line mode" which apparently did
one "line" per round trip (no pipelining). i'd by this time thrown away
the Ultrix version of sendmail, restarted from berkeley sendmail, which
i ended up publishing as "King James Sendmail" because eric was at that
time still at britton-lee software, and sendmail was in its walkabout
phase (before Sendmail, Inc. was started). KJS included lennart
lovstrand's most wonderous "IDA Sendmail" hacks, which allowed for
arbitrary "db" lookups from within rulesets, so that i could do UUCP
routing based on a pathalias database rather than having "rmail" do it.

i also ended up throwing away all the m4-based sendmail.cf generation
logic from both berkeley and ultrix, and starting from my own private
.cf file.

all of this got written up by fred avolio and i in the immortal classic,
"Sendmail: Theory and Practice", amazingly still in print at:

http://www.amazon.com/Sendmail-Second-Edition-Theory-Practice/dp/155558229X

in 1992 or so i convinced my various bosses (mostly this was brian reid,
since i think dave crocker was gone by then) to let me buy a VAX 5400
running vax/vms so that i could run a proper "DIGITAL ALL-IN-1" mail
gateway instead of relying on the underbar hack you're describing here.
that was node name WRLMTS:: and you knew us as @WRL. this effort failed
miserably because i wasn't as able to hack the software on VMS as i had
been on Ultrix (which was really just a sad old cut of BSD).

so, you're welcome, DECWRL was happy as heck to carry all your e-mail to
and from the internet. but from talking to ALL-IN-1 customers outside
the company, who had to use DEC's own products to do this kind of thing,
they couldn't make it work any better than i could. thus my comment,
"weeping and wailing".

:-)

paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120524/0eb837a0/attachment.htm>

From nigel at channelisles.net  Thu May 24 04:16:57 2012
From: nigel at channelisles.net (Nigel Roberts)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 12:16:57 +0100
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <4FBE0BC2.3020206@redbarn.org>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan> <4FBD82F6.105@dcrocker.net>
	<4FBDC104.8010509@Commerco.Com> <4FBDE30A.4030708@redbarn.org>
	<4FBDF17C.5020306@channelisles.net> <4FBE0BC2.3020206@redbarn.org>
Message-ID: <4FBE18A9.7090807@channelisles.net>

Thanks for the perspective from the WRL side. And we (the Easynet 
community) were REALLY grateful for the service to and from the outside 
world.

People today just won't appreciate exactly what a benefit that was back 
then.

So thanks once again.



On 05/24/2012 11:21 AM, paul vixie wrote:
> On 5/24/2012 8:29 AM, Nigel Roberts wrote:
>> I worked for the ALL-IN-1 development team in the mid-80s.
>> ...
>> And sending email to and from the wider Internet was actually easier
>> than Paul remembers.
>> ...
>> There were various gateways between Message Router (the email backend
>> of ALL-IN-1) ...
>>
>> But what I uses was am ALL-IN-1 feature that sent VAXmail from inside
>> ALL-IN-1 (my memory is failing as to exactly how, but I remember
>> hacking something in the DCL code that actually implemented it. I seem
>> to recall that it may have been prefixing the address with '_'
>>
>> So to email the Internet from ALL-IN-1 was as "simple" as sending it to
>>
>> _RHEA::DECWRL::"user at host.tld"
>>
>> You can see what the return address would have looked like to the
>> Internet user at
>>
>> http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks/8.4.html#subj1.1
>
> that's:
>
> Nigel <roberts%untadh.DEC at decwrl.dec.com>
>
> /Wed, 11 Jan 89 03:02:40 PST
>
> /
>> This shows a reply address that would translated to an internal
>> Easynet address in the form UNTADH::ROBERTS which typically would be
>> automatically forwarded into Message Router/ALL-IN-1 by the ALL-IN-1
>> user having done a $MAIL SET FORWARD.
>>
>> :-)
>
> so, from 1988 to 1993 i ran DECWRL:: (as the rest of the company knew
> our DECnet Phase IV node name) and i was using a public-domain version
> of the mail11 gateway code (originally written by keith moore, then at
> UTK) which i'd hacked to do "block mode" since the decnet-savvy people
> in the company were really pissy about "line mode" which apparently did
> one "line" per round trip (no pipelining). i'd by this time thrown away
> the Ultrix version of sendmail, restarted from berkeley sendmail, which
> i ended up publishing as "King James Sendmail" because eric was at that
> time still at britton-lee software, and sendmail was in its walkabout
> phase (before Sendmail, Inc. was started). KJS included lennart
> lovstrand's most wonderous "IDA Sendmail" hacks, which allowed for
> arbitrary "db" lookups from within rulesets, so that i could do UUCP
> routing based on a pathalias database rather than having "rmail" do it.
>
> i also ended up throwing away all the m4-based sendmail.cf generation
> logic from both berkeley and ultrix, and starting from my own private
> .cf file.
>
> all of this got written up by fred avolio and i in the immortal classic,
> "Sendmail: Theory and Practice", amazingly still in print at:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/Sendmail-Second-Edition-Theory-Practice/dp/155558229X
>
> in 1992 or so i convinced my various bosses (mostly this was brian reid,
> since i think dave crocker was gone by then) to let me buy a VAX 5400
> running vax/vms so that i could run a proper "DIGITAL ALL-IN-1" mail
> gateway instead of relying on the underbar hack you're describing here.
> that was node name WRLMTS:: and you knew us as @WRL. this effort failed
> miserably because i wasn't as able to hack the software on VMS as i had
> been on Ultrix (which was really just a sad old cut of BSD).
>
> so, you're welcome, DECWRL was happy as heck to carry all your e-mail to
> and from the internet. but from talking to ALL-IN-1 customers outside
> the company, who had to use DEC's own products to do this kind of thing,
> they couldn't make it work any better than i could. thus my comment,
> "weeping and wailing".
>
> :-)
>
> paul


From dot at dotat.at  Thu May 24 06:10:45 2012
From: dot at dotat.at (Tony Finch)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 14:10:45 +0100
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <4FBDF17C.5020306@channelisles.net>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan> <4FBD82F6.105@dcrocker.net>
	<4FBDC104.8010509@Commerco.Com> <4FBDE30A.4030708@redbarn.org>
	<4FBDF17C.5020306@channelisles.net>
Message-ID: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1205241409000.5807@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>

Nigel Roberts <nigel at channelisles.net> wrote:
>
> So to email the Internet from ALL-IN-1 was as "simple" as sending it to
>
> _RHEA::DECWRL::"user at host.tld"

For much more along these lines, I like these "hints for getting mail
through various gateways to and from JANET" dating from 1990.

http://stuff.mit.edu/afs/athena/reference/net-directory/documents/JANET-Mail-Gateways.ps

Tony.
-- 
f.anthony.n.finch  <dot at dotat.at>  http://dotat.at/
Bailey: South 5 or 6, backing southeast 4 or 5. Rough, becoming moderate.
Occasional rain. Moderate or good, occasionally poor.


From dhc2 at dcrocker.net  Thu May 24 06:17:25 2012
From: dhc2 at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 06:17:25 -0700
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <CAAbKA3W1kggQGhjc-EWEFNttqEzPAnoj9EJMmwaK0ThyYCY3mQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan>
	<CAAbKA3W1kggQGhjc-EWEFNttqEzPAnoj9EJMmwaK0ThyYCY3mQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FBE34E5.6010801@dcrocker.net>



On 5/23/2012 5:36 PM, Bill Ricker wrote:
> Do you count CLI MUA's?

"CLI"?  command line interface?


> Either mail or Mail had an alias file on Unix is mid '80s. I can't be certain but suspect RAND/MX MAIL did too.

Typically, an alias file is part of the underlying mail infrastructure, 
rather than being a personal address book.

I suppose one can count them as a kind of system address book, but we 
ought to be explicit about whether they are inside or outside the 
definition.

d/

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net


From jaap at NLnetLabs.nl  Thu May 24 07:02:38 2012
From: jaap at NLnetLabs.nl (Jaap Akkerhuis)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 16:02:38 +0200
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1205241409000.5807@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>
References: <20120524000346.42868.qmail@joyce.lan> <4FBD82F6.105@dcrocker.net>
	<4FBDC104.8010509@Commerco.Com> <4FBDE30A.4030708@redbarn.org>
	<4FBDF17C.5020306@channelisles.net>
	<alpine.LSU.2.00.1205241409000.5807@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <201205241402.q4OE2cqL024842@bela.nlnetlabs.nl>

    
    For much more along these lines, I like these "hints for getting mail
    through various gateways to and from JANET" dating from 1990.
    
Similarly, there is of course "!%@:: A Directory of Electronic Mail
Addressing & Networks" by Adams & Frey (First edition appeared in 1987
I think).

	jaap


From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Thu May 24 09:42:23 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 12:42:23 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
Message-ID: <20120524164223.ECCAD18C0FE@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: Dave Crocker <dhc2 at dcrocker.net>

    >> Either mail or Mail had an alias file on Unix is mid '80s.

    > Typically, an alias file is part of the underlying mail infrastructure,
    > rather than being a personal address book.

I think he's talking about something like the 'alias' lines in ~/.mailrc
(which applies only to one's own outgoing email), not the system alias
file (which applies to incoming mail).

	Noel


From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Thu May 24 10:28:06 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 13:28:06 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] propagation of early email?
Message-ID: <20120524172806.1A51518C0FE@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net>

    > Unix was developing pretty much in parallel with the ARPANET.

I wasn't sure that was absolutely accurate (my memory was that Unix was
somewhat later), but having reviewed some things, I think you're basically
correct.

According to "The Evolution of the Unix Time-sharing System", by Dennis M.
Ritchie, the earliest thinking was in the 1969 timeframe, with the first code
(for the PDP-7) written around the end of that year. The first PDP-11/20
(without memory protection/relocation) version was up at the end of 1970; the
PDP-11/45 (with MP/R) arrived somewhat later, but I was unable to discover a
definite date. (PDP-11/20 versions were still being installed in 1973, per
"Quarter Century of Unix", Salus, pg. 47.) Pipes didn't appear until 1972,
and the kernel was only re-written in C in 1973. The first non-Bell Unix site
appears to have been sometime around December, 1973, after the first Unix
presentation (at SOSP, in October, 1973).

Meanwhile, the ARPANET sent its first packet (the infamous UCLA login
attempt) in October, 1969, and a review of the list of early RFC's shows that
the Host-Host protocol, although first proposed at the end of 1969, didn't
fully settle down until early 1971. As to the applications, the first draft
RFC for TELNET was in February, 1971, with FTP shortly thereafter, in April.

So I think the ARPANET was a tiny bit in advance of Unix, maybe a year or so,
but not very much.

	Noel


From bill.n1vux at gmail.com  Thu May 24 20:05:35 2012
From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 23:05:35 -0400
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <20120524164223.ECCAD18C0FE@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120524164223.ECCAD18C0FE@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <CAAbKA3XkGWLTzuhTW7aJkGJqvpWtjd1f4q1SFVHanAFc77asXg@mail.gmail.com>

>
> "CLI"?  command line interface?
>

Yes. Opposite of GUI,


> I think he's talking about something like the 'alias' lines in ~/.mailrc
> (which applies only to one's own outgoing email), not the system alias
> file (which applies to incoming mail).
>

Correct.

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120524/a245f26f/attachment.htm>

From bill.n1vux at gmail.com  Thu May 24 20:20:40 2012
From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 23:20:40 -0400
Subject: [ih] propagation of early email?
In-Reply-To: <20120524172806.1A51518C0FE@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
References: <20120524172806.1A51518C0FE@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
Message-ID: <CAAbKA3W7HwCdEUsSkqVtojArTyTTuTNitCqAUWix8KHDuBmY_w@mail.gmail.com>

> > Unix was developing pretty much in parallel with the ARPANET.
>
So I think the ARPANET was a tiny bit in advance of Unix, maybe a year or
> so,
> but not very much.
>

Depending which toddler first steps one considers comparable, that seems
fair; but that is consistent with '"both were in development in mid-70's
and were really useful by the '80s and ubiquitous in the '90's"
reading of "pretty
much in parallel".

Probably everyone here knows Dennis Ritchie was at Project MAC MULTICS at
MIT as a Bell Labs person (and MAP's office-mate) until Bell Labs pulled
out of MULTICS leaving MIT, Honeywell to go it alone. He would have been
exposed to the incipient ARPAnet developments in the air there as well as
the structure of Multics, which latter is rather more obvious in
Unix's metaphorical DNA.

-- 
Bill
@n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120524/ff55e489/attachment.htm>

From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Thu May 24 20:30:50 2012
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 23:30:50 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] propagation of early email?
Message-ID: <20120525033050.B419218C0F6@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: Bill Ricker <bill.n1vux at gmail.com>

    > both were in development in mid-70's and were really useful by the '80s

I'd advance that by several years. Both had graduated from "in development" to
"really useful" by the mid-70's. Unix by '74 or so; for the ARPANET, I'm not
quite sure (I didn't start using it until '77, and it was definitely
functional at that point) - I'll leave that to others to judge.

	Noel


From cs at zip.com.au  Thu May 24 20:46:36 2012
From: cs at zip.com.au (Cameron Simpson)
Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 13:46:36 +1000
Subject: [ih] Email and address books
In-Reply-To: <4FBE34E5.6010801@dcrocker.net>
References: <4FBE34E5.6010801@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <20120525034636.GA6016@cskk.homeip.net>

On 24May2012 06:17, Dave Crocker <dhc2 at dcrocker.net> wrote:
| On 5/23/2012 5:36 PM, Bill Ricker wrote:
| > Do you count CLI MUA's?
| "CLI"?  command line interface?
| 
| > Either mail or Mail had an alias file on Unix is mid '80s. I can't
| > be certain but suspect RAND/MX MAIL did too.
| 
| Typically, an alias file is part of the underlying mail infrastructure, 
| rather than being a personal address book.

I'm fairly sure I had personal aliases i.e. as things called "aliases" in a
text file consulted my command line mail reader in the 80s. It was
pretty normal to have personal aliases.
-- 
Cameron Simpson <cs at zip.com.au> DoD#743
http://www.cskk.ezoshosting.com/cs/

Learn from others' mistakes, you won't live long enough to make them all
yourself.       - a saying they tell to all new skydivers


From landreu at gmail.com  Fri May 25 07:31:34 2012
From: landreu at gmail.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Andreu_Ve=E0_i_Bar=F3?=)
Date: Fri, 25 May 2012 16:31:34 +0200
Subject: [ih] CURIOSITY...
Message-ID: <000301cd3a83$1696a2b0$43c3e810$@gmail.com>

After a nice interview with Jake Feinler, few years ago a name got in the
air


And today I realized that maybe someone here might know the answer of who
protagonized this anecdotal situation,

 

               &reu

 

 

Jon Postel at ISI was responsible for coordinating the testing of the TCP/IP
protocols. Periodically all implementers checked in to report their progress
or lack thereof and to discuss problems encountered. Jon called these
"bake-offs" after the Pillsbury baking contests that give awards for the
best recipes. It was getting close to the TCP/IP cutover time and the
implementations were running behind schedule, so Jon was putting pressure on
everyone to get their work done - no excuses. During one bake-off very close
to the cutover Jon polled everyone and got responses from everybody but one
person. He sent out a couple of terse messages on the delivery date, but
received no answer. The next day the delinquent fellow wrote in to say that
he hadn't sent in his input because his house burned down. Needless to say
that gave new meaning to the term "bake-off" and there were lots of
hilarious emails going back and forth about that. Unfortunately, I have
forgotten who was the hapless implementer. Someone at ISI probably can fill
in the name. 

 

 

 

Andreu Ve?, Ph.D.

WiWiW.org Founder & Director

Who is Who in the Internet World

?A perpetual archive devoted to internet pioneers worldwide?

andreu at vea.cat 

+34 656 99 00 58 (now in Spain @ UTC+2)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20120525/bee84154/attachment.htm>

From jack at 3kitty.org  Sun May 27 14:27:22 2012
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Sun, 27 May 2012 14:27:22 -0700
Subject: [ih] propagation of early email?
In-Reply-To: <4FBDB9DF.5060808@meetinghouse.net>
References: <20120522144830.CFED328E137@aland.bbn.com>
	<CAJLkZPk879Xt14+tRy7DmLzLJ=S9ckPijOtsd_7BPdUpGRfPOw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4FBDB9DF.5060808@meetinghouse.net>
Message-ID: <CAJLkZPkoeUZW6Lvt_ejBS12zpGz8zq8ndhMa+vL-GUEyMdi8YA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Miles - glad to see Ken is still around!  His recollections align
with mine.  I remember COMSYS (my mail daemon) and COMSAT (Ken's)
having many interesting "discussions" while handling email, and we
also tortured Ken Pogran's mail on Multics.

You got me thinking and remembering ... I offer the following for
historians to ponder, before I forget it.

IIRC, at some point in the early 70s there was a Committee, I think
formed by ARPA, called CAHCOM - Computer-Assisted Human
Communications.  I was on this Committee, and recall going to a
meeting at BBN.  The goal was to foster thinking about how computers
could be used, in conjunction with the new Arpanet, to help humans
communicate.  Arpa wanted new ideas.   Although there was lots of
discussion, the only concrete notion that emerged was email - but in
the very very broad sense encompassing everything associated with
postal style mail and paper communications.  That could include, for
example, mechanisms such as registered mail, notary publics, escrow
agents, postal money orders, overnight couriers, etc.  Multimedia was
for the future when networks and computers could begin to handle such
onerous tasks.

So, back in the Lab at MIT, I did what every programmer seemed to do
when they didn't know quite what the end product should do for the
human users - I built a platform, upon which Somebody Else could build
whatever specific functionality they could imagine.  That was
"COMSYS".  It was a "mail daemon" that looked more like a general
purpose operating system than anything else, and was built in the
Muddle environment, which meant it could utilize all the neat things
that were in the Muddle and ITS runtime environments.

"Messages" were handled as elements of structured data.  As messages
passed through the system, they could be "processed" by various
functions to do interesting stuff.  Processing could be triggered on
occurrence of events or passage of time, and did not require the
particular user to be even logged in.  Users could even extend the
system by writing their own processing code.

After building the obvious basic functions - queueing and sending
email to remote hosts, placing incoming mail in the addressee's
mailbox, etc., COMSYS was installed as a "system daemon" and served as
the MIT-DM email server as well as a playground for experimentation.
Users could, with just a few lines of Muddle code, write their own
processing routines, and arrange for them to be run on incoming and
outgoing messages, or at a scheduled time.  That made it trivial to do
things like mailing lists, "vacation messages", automatic printing of
mail, etc.

I remember that I wrote a function that interfaced with the CCA
Datacomputer (which happened to be next door, but it was on the
Arpanet so it didn't matter).   The idea was that messages that were
deemed "important" could be automatically submitted to the
Datacomputer for archiving and/or public access.  That worked, but
didn't get used a lot.  The Arpanet link was simply too slow - not
well matched to the unimaginably large capacity of the Datacomputer -
one Terabit!  Probably the biggest obstacle was that SQL hadn't been
developed yet, and getting what you wanted out of the Datacomputer
wasn't easy.

COMSYS acted as a testbed for experimentation with "assisting humans"
in some very innovative ways.  For example... Messages weren't
restricted to human mailboxes.  Processes could have mailboxes
too....and necessity is the mother of invention...

So, one of us (Mike Broos as I recall) wrote a few lines of code, and
created a mailbox for the Muddle compiler.  You (more accurately He,
since he didn't publicize this) could send a message, with his Muddle
code as the body, to that mailbox.  When that message arrived, Comsys
would then run the compiler (no one ever said user-provided processing
functions had to be small or quick).  Compiler runs could take minutes
or even hours.  When it finished, COMSYS would reply to that original
message, sending the output of the compiler, including the object
code, back to Mike.

This was significant "assistance".   At the time, computers were
pretty slow, so running compilations, especially during the busy part
of the day, was somewhat antisocial.  Other people could tell that you
were compiling.  Flames would fly if you were doing it too much.  But
no one knew what COMSYS was doing....but some messages took a very,
very long time to be delivered.    It was even better if you could
email your code to the compiler on a different machine from the one
you were using...which happened too.

Such experiments occasionally blew up.  Labs are dangerous places.
One day I was accosted, as the "COMSYS guy", by people complaining
that they were getting email that wasn't addressed to them, and email
that they sent had gotten lost.  COMSYS had been running for months
with no problems or changes, but suddenly seemed to have gone berserk.
 Wore yet, it was very intermittent.  Most messages were getting
through just fine, but occasionally a few would get misdelivered.  Of
course the hardware was always suspect - memory failures could cause
weird things to happen.  But only COMSYS was misbehaving.

Several hours of electronic autopsy revealed the problem.  One of the
students had read the COMSYS Manual, and learned how to tweak the
system to customize his mail.  So, whenever he sent or received a
message, COMSYS was now applying his code to each message.  So far so
good.

However, his programming project had something to do with complex
arithmetic, and he had personalized his Muddle environment by
redefining basic primitives (like +-*/) to handle complex numbers.
But his code was still buggy.  2+2 didn't equal 4.

When COMSYS ran his message-handling code, it also automatically
loaded his Muddle environment, so his code could be comfortable and
homey.  Unfortunately, COMSYS didn't protect itself.  So, after
processing one of his messages, COMSYS itself subsequently couldn't
add 2 and 2 anymore.   But it still ran - and apparently somehow
managed to deliver subsequent messages, but not to the right person.
After the current queue was emptied it exited, and of course on its
next run it had a fresh brain that could do proper arithmetic.  So
only a few messages got mishandled - every time the student sent or
received mail.  It took a few days to build a "sandbox" inside COMSYS
to confine users' code so they could only blow up themselves.

It didn't occur to me until today that I may have the dubious
distinction of being the first victim ever of an email virus......and
built the first "firewall" for email.

This thread started as a discussion of "propagation of early email".
COMSYS ran only on the MIT-DM machine at MIT in Licklider's group, so
the code itself didn't go very far.   But there were quite a few
students over those years doing projects in that environment, so they
were exposed to the concepts and many of them did experiment using
that email daemon environment.  So who knows what they learned and
where that knowledge went.  Please don't blame me for inventing email
viruses......

I don't recall that there were any RFCs about COMSYS or COMSAT.  Email
historians might want to look up the internal Lab reports for more
artifacts.  I wrote two internal MIT lab reports.  MIT Project MAC,
Programming Technology Division Document SYS.16.00 "MIT-DMS
Communications System Overview" May 15, 1975 and SYS.16.01
"Communications System Daemon Manual".  These were the documents that
provided students and other staff with the details needed to write
experimental "email" code like the few I mentioned above.  It was
interesting to read my old musty copies and see how much of what was
done then has endured to today.  It was a little sad to see how many
of those old ideas never got any further too.

IIRC, no one in that "CAHCOM" group ever suggested that, four decades
later, the most popular computer assisted human interaction would
involve millions of people sending one-liner messages by typing with
only their thumbs.

Very interesting and fun times....

/Jack Haverty
(JFH at 70 - before hosts had names...)
(JFH at MIT-DM - Arpanet days...)
(jack.haverty at alum.mit.edu - now)


On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 9:32 PM, Miles Fidelman
<mfidelman at meetinghouse.net> wrote:
> Jack Haverty wrote:
>>
>> It didn't take long (days, not months) for people to throw together
>> some simple programs to queue email and perform the interactions with
>> the remote FTP server. ? There were many such programs at MIT and no
>> doubt elsewhere. ?I wrote one to act as MIT-DM's "mail daemon", which
>> became quite elaborate over time. ?I recall that Ken Pogran was
>> involved in the Multics email, struggling with the fact that Multics
>> really really didn't like programs that crossed boundaries by writing
>> into someone else's directory. ? Someone else (Stallman? ?Knight?) did
>> one for MIT-AI. ? Ken Harrenstien was also in there, coding away. ?Ray
>> Tomlinson tossed @ into the fray, which did two things - it made for a
>> good user interface, and it provided the beginning of structure in
>> messages by enabling addresses to be more-or-less parseable out of
>> what was becoming message "headers".
>>
> Well, I checked in with Ken Harrenstien who reports:
>
> ------ quote ---------
>
> Yeah, more or less. ?There were actually two similar systems developed
> at almost the same time. ?MIT-DM had something called COMSYS written
> in MDL (Muddle) -- if memory serves me correctly, that was by Jack
> Haverty (JFH). ?The one I wrote was called COMSAT, was written in
> MIDAS assembler, and ran on all the other ITS systems (AI, ML, MC, and
> whatever else was later brought to life remotely or virtually).
>
> The ITS systems originally had email limited to their own machine or
> other local ITSes via the JOB device which acted as a sort of NFS;
> this may be what you remember from the 1971 time frame. ?True Arpanet
> email using the FTP protocol was very kludgy and didn't really take
> off until COMSAT/COMSYS were developed a couple years later and took
> on the job of queueing messages and delivering them at whatever time
> the destination host happened to be alive. ?Both of those systems had
> some unique features that didn't appear elsewhere for quite some time,
> at least until sendmail/unix became popular; for example, they could
> serve as mailing list expanders and one of the first such lists was
> "Header-People". ?The traffic was so heavy that I wrote a couple of
> RFCs proposing FTP extensions to reduce the number of message copies
> sent to each host (you can find them via search; those were adopted by
> SMTP) and even implemented them for some non-ITS systems.
>
> ------ end quote ------
>
>
>
>
> --
> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
> In practice, there is. ? .... Yogi Berra
>
>