[ih] Hesitating to disagree with one of the fathers of the Internet..

[Larry Sheldon]

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)