[ih] .UK vs .GB
Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com
Mon Apr 16 12:40:47 PDT 2018
Yes, my memory was slightly off, but it was Steve who brought us EAN+PP which gave the
user an approximation to X.400 service through the EAN UI. (I say "brought us" because
he worked at CERN for a few months doing so.)
Regards
Brian Carpenter
On 16/04/2018 19:50, John Demco wrote:
> Steve Kille’s X.400 software was called PP, if I recall correctly. The EAN software came from a team led by Gerald Neufeld at the University of British Columbia.
>
> Regards,
> John Demco
> (formerly at UBC)
>
>> On Apr 15, 2018, at 22:30, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Yes. At CERN we were gatewaying email between DECNET, "ARPANET", Grey Book,
>> EUNET (aka USENET), RSCS (aka EARN aka BITNET), and of course a little
>> X.400 (using Steve Kille's EAN).
>>
>> Here's how we believed an "ARPA" user would send mail to a CERN user in 1987:
>> user%host%cernvax.bitnet at wiscvm.wisc.edu
>>
>> (Non-paywall preprint of the paper: http://cds.cern.ch/record/182913/files/ )
>>
>> Brian
>>
>>
>>> On 16/04/2018 08:44, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond wrote:
>>> Dear Vint,
>
>>>
>>> the dates are indeed similar.
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coloured_Book_protocols
>>>
>>> They were indeed contemporary. And when I used them on DEC VAX, the
>>> address was something of the like: CBS%UK.AC.KCL.CC.ELM::ZDEE699 --
>>> which would be ZDEE699 at UK.AC.KCL.CC.ELM
>>> (my then email address :-) )
>>> To send to an Internet address: (you for example)
>>> CBS%UK.AC.NSFNET-RELAY::us.va.reston.cnri::vcerf
>>>
>>> Sending to an X.400, one had to start with:
>>> CBS%UK.AC.MHS-RELAY::
>>> with the rest in quotes. Often the parser in the return made an absolute
>>> mess with X.400 sourced emails.
>>>
>>> Also, note that CBS also accepted bang! paths, but the difference
>>> between the % and @ delimiters in specifically routed emails for
>>> example, vcerf%cnri.reston.va.us at nsfnet-relay.ac.uk didn't exist, thus
>>> it was :: all the way.
>>>
>>> Kindest regards,
>>>
>>> Olivier
>
>>>
>>> ps. the "transition" came when one ran TCP-IP over X.25.
>>>
>>>> On 15/04/2018 21:03, Vint Cerf wrote:
>
>>>> does anyone on the list recall the rough dates for the "Colored Book
>>>> Protocol" ? Seems possible that these were at least contemporary with
>>>> DNS and UCL was confronted with the need to translate between those
>>>> and the ARPANET and/or Internet protocols of the time.
>>>>
>>>> v
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Eric Gade <eric.gade at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:eric.gade at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Also worth noting that in a May 1984 draft of RFC 920 (and a few
>>>> drafts prior to this going back to April), ISO-3166 was *not*
>>>> specified as a set for potential TLDs, but .UK *was* given as an
>>>> example. In fact, the inclusion of UK was used by many
>>>> participants discussing the draft to argue in favor of both a
>>>> country-based set of TLDs and a more generic set (note that these
>>>> early drafts used .PUB and .COR instead of .COM and .ORG). It was
>>>> sometime between May and July that the ISO list was proposed as
>>>> the ccTLD set.
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 11:02 AM, John Klensin <jklensin at gmail.com
>>>> <mailto:jklensin at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Yes, Nigel, I should (for several reasons) have remembered that
>>>> comment in RFC 920, but my recollection is still consistent
>>>> with that
>>>> document and your list. That timeline list is, IMO, extremely
>>>> useful
>>>> and far more accessible (and, IIR, comprehensive) that the Park
>>>> dissertation.
>>>>
>>>> john
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2018 at 10:20 AM, Nigel Roberts
>>>> <nigel at channelisles.net <mailto:nigel at channelisles.net>> wrote:
>>>>> Far be it from me to be seen to clarify John's first hand
>>>> knowledge of
>>>>> RFC 1591, but it's worth pointing out that the decision to use
>
>>>>> ISO-3166-1 was not first documented in RFC 1591, but already
>>>> in RFC 920
>>>>> (October 1984) as follows
>>>>>
>>>>>> Countries
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The English two letter code (alpha-2) identifying a country
>>>> according the the ISO Standard for "Codes for the
>>>> Representation of Names of Countries" [5].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As yet no country domains have been established. As they
>>>> are established information about the administrators and
>>>> agents will be made public, and will be listed in subsequent
>>>> editions of this memo."
>>>>>
>>>>> Stephen Deerhake and I put together an (as yet unfinished)
>>>> hyperlinked
>>>>> timeline of the DNS quite recently. Even though there are
>>>> some places
>>>>> where the editing is still a little rough, I think there is
>>>> some useful
>>>>> stuff which is not easily accessible otherwise.
>>>>>
>>>>> You can find it at http://timeline.as
>>>>>
>>>>> It does need a little work, and we need to move it from
>>>> using TikiWiki
>>>>> (which seemed like a good idea at the time) to something
>>>> faster, but
>
>>>>> there are some interesting things there...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 04/15/2018 02:13 PM, John Klensin wrote:
>>>>>>> The only explanation I got orally was that "GB stands for
>>>> Great Britain, while UK stands for United Kingdom of Great
>>>> Britain and the Northern Ireland".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That was enough for me. Don't even remember who explained
>>>> it, but it was around the famous entry of .CS into the root
>>>> zone that created the "interesting" situation with
>>>> CS.BERKELEY.EDU <http://CS.BERKELEY.EDU> (and others) and
>>>> massive weird extra hacking in sendmail.cf
>>>> <http://sendmail.cf> due to the Janet "reverse" order of
>>>> labels in a domain name.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let me try an even less complicated one, based on what I
>>>> was told when
>>>>>> we were evaluating what became the decision to use ISO 3166
>>>> alpha-2
>>>>>> codes: The country code system started because of a
>>>> request from the
>>>>>> UK to be able to manage their own DNS hierarchy rather than
>
>>>> depending
>>>>>> on a US-based organization to manage the TLD. The ccTLDs
>>>> are US and
>>>>>> UK were decided upon (and possibly delegated) before other
>>>>>> administrative decisions about ccTLDs were made and "UK"
>>>> was what they
>>>>>> asked for.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> FWIW: (1) While RFC 1591 was not published until 1994, it,
>>>> for the
>>>>>> most part, described thinking and procedures that had had
>>>> been in
>>>>>> place for years rather than anything of significant that
>>>> was novel.
>>>>>> (2) YJ Park, whom some of you may know, tried to sort
>>>> though all of
>>>>>> these issues and history while working on her
>>>> dissertation. The
>>>>>> search for answers to questions of this type might
>>>> reasonably start
>>>>>> with her and that dissertation. That should lead to some
>>>> context and
>>>>>> references even where she does not have exact answers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> john
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______
>>>>>> internet-history mailing list
>>>>>> internet-history at postel.org
>>>> <mailto:internet-history at postel.org>
>>>>>> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>>>> <http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>
>>>>>> Contact list-owner at postel.org
>>>> <mailto:list-owner at postel.org> for assistance.
>>>>> _______
>>>>> internet-history mailing list
>>>>> internet-history at postel.org <mailto:internet-history at postel.org>
>>>>> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>
>>>> <http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>
>>>>> Contact list-owner at postel.org <mailto:list-owner at postel.org>
>>>> for assistance.
>>>>
>>>> _______
>>>> internet-history mailing list
>>>> internet-history at postel.org <mailto:internet-history at postel.org>
>>>> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>>>> <http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>
>>>> Contact list-owner at postel.org <mailto:list-owner at postel.org>
>>>> for assistance.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Eric
>>>>
>>>> _______
>>>> internet-history mailing list
>>>> internet-history at postel.org <mailto:internet-history at postel.org>
>>>> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>>>> <http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>
>>>> Contact list-owner at postel.org <mailto:list-owner at postel.org> for
>>>> assistance.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> New postal address:
>>>> Google
>
>>>> 1875 Explorer Street, 10th Floor
>>>> Reston, VA 20190
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______
>>>> 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.
>
More information about the Internet-history
mailing list