[ih] Any suggestions for first uses of "e-mail" or "email"?

[Brian E Carpenter]

X.75 was a given in Europe, for those who didn't use private
international leased lines. I think we just considered it to be normal
and not worth mentioning separately.

Regards
   Brian

On 09/08/2015 03:19, Vint Cerf wrote:
> the US-based Telenet and Tymnet both offered X.25 service and implemented
> X.75 I believe.
> 
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 11:04 AM, John Day <jeanjour at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
>> X.75 was widely used within PTT packet-offerings.  As you would imagine
>> mostly outside North America.
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 8, 2015, at 10:18, Miles Fidelman <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Which raises an obvious question:  Did X.75 ever get much traction?  In
>>> my days at BBN (1985-1992), and for a few years earlier, when I was
>>> selling time sharing services, and using TELENET, I can't really recall
>>> ever encountering it in real use.
>>>
>>> Miles
>>>
>>> Vint Cerf wrote:
>>>> Larry Roberts asked me what he should use for protocol in Telenet and
>>>> I said TCP but he said he could not sell datagrams and went on to
>>>> develop X.25's virtual circuits with French, Canadian and UK
>>>> assistance at CCITT (now ITU-T). That was standardized in 1976 while
>>>> TCP was evolving. I told him we would run TCP (eventually TCP/IP) over
>>>> X.25 and by 1981 or so that is what we did in CSNET. 1822 was never a
>>>> contender for a global standard. X.25 begot X.75 which was the CCITT
>>>> response to the Internet's TCP/IP.
>>>>
>>>> OSI was yet another effort to craft a non-TCP/IP Internet and that got
>>>> started in 1978, using X.25 as the underlying virtual circuit basis.
>>>> Eventually an OSI connectionless mode was developed CLNP but never
>>>> gained much popularity.
>>>>
>>>> The TCP/IP vs OSI battle lasted from 1978 to 1993. X.25 was around
>>>> from 1976 to 2003 or so as I recall. I shut down the last MCI X.25
>>>> offering about 2003 or so if memory serves.
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 3:42 AM, Miles Fidelman
>>>> <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net <mailto:mfidelman at meetinghouse.net>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On 08/08/2015 08:12, Jack Haverty wrote:
>>>>> ...
>>>>>> But I don't think there's much written
>>>>>> material about that battle between TCP/IP and X.25 in the
>>>>    ARPANET arena.
>>>>
>>>>    Jack,
>>>>
>>>>    Granted that the TCP/IP cutover happened 2 years before I got to
>>>>    BBN, so my exposure wasn't quite firsthand -
>>>>    but weren't the battles really between 1822 and X.25, and then
>>>>    TCP/IP vs. the ISO stack?  After all, 1822 and X.25 were both
>>>>    single subnet protocols, with no support for internetworking (and
>>>>    that IP runs over both of them, just fine).
>>>>
>>>>    Miles
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    --
>>>>    In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>>>>    In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra
>>>>
>>>>    _______
>>>>    internet-history mailing list
>>>>    internet-history at postel.org <mailto:internet-history at postel.org>
>>>>    http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>>>>    Contact list-owner at postel.org <mailto:list-owner at postel.org> for
>>>>    assistance.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>>> In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra
>>>
>>> _______
>>> internet-history mailing list
>>> internet-history at postel.org
>>> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>>> Contact list-owner at postel.org for assistance.
>>
>>
>> _______
>> internet-history mailing list
>> internet-history at postel.org
>> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>> Contact list-owner at postel.org for assistance.
>>
> 
> 
> 
> _______
> internet-history mailing list
> internet-history at postel.org
> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
> Contact list-owner at postel.org for assistance.
>