From lars at nocrew.org Sat Jun 1 03:55:54 2019 From: lars at nocrew.org (Lars Brinkhoff) Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2019 10:55:54 +0000 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" Message-ID: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> How about Gary Thuerk's claim to be the "father of e-marketing", does that stand up to scrutiny? He's referring, of course, to the spam sent in May 1978. From vint at google.com Sat Jun 1 06:58:03 2019 From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 09:58:03 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: i think the spam wasn't quite e-marketing as much as it was just abuse of a mailinglist.... v On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 7:16 AM Lars Brinkhoff wrote: > How about Gary Thuerk's claim to be the "father of e-marketing", does > that stand up to scrutiny? He's referring, of course, to the spam sent > in May 1978. > _______ > 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. > -- New postal address: Google 1875 Explorer Street, 10th Floor Reston, VA 20190 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnl at iecc.com Sat Jun 1 07:19:47 2019 From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine) Date: 1 Jun 2019 10:19:47 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: <20190601141947.DF2E22014E5E53@ary.qy> In article <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf at junk.nocrew.org> you write: >How about Gary Thuerk's claim to be the "father of e-marketing", does >that stand up to scrutiny? He's referring, of course, to the spam sent >in May 1978. Probably not. I gather there was telegraph spam in the late 1800s during an era of ill-considered flat rate tariffs. From clemc at ccc.com Sat Jun 1 09:42:54 2019 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 12:42:54 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: Mumble -- Like most marketing, I think it depends on how you define it/when you start counting. Certainly, people used the telegraph, telex, faxes, phones, and the like to "cold call" / "get the message out" to possible clients/customers before the original DEC spam was sent in the 'modern era.' On the other hand, I've always thought of this action as the first recorded use email for marketing with the Arpanet/Internet (it was not yet called spam). BTW; I'm not sure where the term "spam" originated (other than the reference to Monty Python's skit to describe the issue). I think it was somewhere in one of the netnews groups on the UUCP network actually (that was certainly where I first saw it and it was a bigger issue there since the links were dial-up). Somebody like Mary Ann Horton might be a good person to ask about that. Clem ? On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 7:16 AM Lars Brinkhoff wrote: > How about Gary Thuerk's claim to be the "father of e-marketing", does > that stand up to scrutiny? He's referring, of course, to the spam sent > in May 1978. > _______ > 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. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bill.n1vux at gmail.com Sat Jun 1 10:16:15 2019 From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 13:16:15 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:02 PM Clem Cole wrote: > Mumble -- Like most marketing, I think it depends on how you define > it/when you start counting. > :-D > BTW; I'm not sure where the term "spam" originated (other than the > reference to Monty Python's skit to describe the issue). I think it was > somewhere in one of the netnews groups on the UUCP network actually (that > was certainly where I first saw it and it was a bigger issue there since > the links were dial-up). Somebody like Mary Ann Horton might be a good > person to ask about that. > IIRC the first use of the term Spam wrto e-Marketing was the Usenet repeated posting by a Greencard Lottery lawyer in the early 1980s, and explicitly was an allusion to the repetitive lyrics of the Pythons' spam spam spammity spam song. -- Bill Ricker bill.n1vux at gmail.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dhc at dcrocker.net Sat Jun 1 11:07:30 2019 From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 20:07:30 +0200 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: On 6/1/2019 3:58 PM, Vint Cerf wrote: > i think the spam wasn't quite e-marketing as much as it was just abuse > of a mailinglist.... 1. Abuse of mail, certainly -- and especially for the rules and mores in force at the time -- but it was a hand-generated addressee list into the message, not part of a list processor redistribution mechanism. 2. He didn't know how to use bcc and put all the addresses into the To field, which broke the (sndmsg?) handler so that when the maximum number of addresses filled the To: field, the rest were stuffed into the beginning of the body of the message, one address per line. And there were a lot of addresses. The actual content was quite short -- many, many lines fewer than the address overflow in the body. 3. I recently heard that in spite of the community outrage, the campaign was actually successful. It generated a goodly number of purchases for what it was promoting. By this measure, it will might qualify as e-marketing. alas... d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From bill.n1vux at gmail.com Sat Jun 1 11:47:14 2019 From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 14:47:14 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

Message-ID: On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 2:11 PM Dave Crocker wrote: > On 6/1/2019 3:58 PM, Vint Cerf wrote: > > i think the spam wasn't quite e-marketing as much as it was just abuse > > of a mailinglist.... > It could both be the latter and also be if not the former at least a fore-runner of the former? 1. Abuse of mail, certainly -- and especially for the rules and mores in > force at the time -- but it was a hand-generated addressee list into the > message, not part of a list processor redistribution mechanism. > To be fair, we usually do something once manually before automating it, to see how it works and set the specifications. So while automation is required for full-blown e-marketing, i wouldn't require it of the patient 0. > 3. I recently heard that in spite of the community outrage, the campaign > was actually successful. It generated a goodly number of purchases for > what it was promoting. > Not at all surprising. DEC had good product in the day, and the target list was reasonably well targetted. And IIRC the outrage stuck to the particular sender, not to the company. Q. Was not boycotting DEC because of spam because the company disavowed his trespass quickly or because it was just assumed he was a loose cannon, that executives wouldn't understand sufficiently to condone and be complicit? > By this measure, it will might qualify as e-marketing. alas... > Nothing appears initially in fully evolved form. The DEC spam is at least proto-Spam, proto-e-marketing; as would be unsolicited offers on TELEX and Fax. ( It's not "spam" in the narrowest allusive sense of spam spam spamitty spam repetition ... though it should have been sent repeatedly to a different 20 at a time instead of all at once ! but blasting to too many recipients unrequested is also classed under the rubric of Spam today.) Q. Was up-thread reference to Telegraphic spam via flat rate a reference to TELEX or to prior art? I would be interested in references to any pre-TELEX telegraphic (as in dots and dashes, not Baudot) spam. Although using a PDP-[:digit:] or hardcoded controller to robodial a programmed TELEX spam list (or list of numbers on second papertape reader, with message on a loop) would be very interesting too. -- Bill Ricker bill.n1vux at gmail.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com Sat Jun 1 14:35:15 2019 From: brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter) Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 09:35:15 +1200 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

Message-ID: <198fff1d-b4c9-22a3-8a4d-1775afeaf76d@gmail.com> On 02-Jun-19 06:47, Bill Ricker wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 2:11 PM Dave Crocker > wrote: > > On 6/1/2019 3:58 PM, Vint Cerf wrote: > > i think the spam wasn't quite e-marketing as much as it was just abuse > > of a mailinglist.... > > > It could both be the latter and also be if not the former at least a fore-runner of the former? > > 1. Abuse of mail, certainly -- and especially for the rules and mores in > force at the time -- but it was a hand-generated addressee list into the > message, not part of a list processor redistribution mechanism. > > > To be fair, we usually do something once manually before automating it, to see how it works and set the specifications. So while automation is required for full-blown e-marketing, i wouldn't require it of the patient 0. > > 3. I recently heard that in spite of the community outrage, the campaign > was actually successful.? It generated a goodly number of purchases for > what it was promoting. > > > Not at all surprising. > DEC had good product in the day, and the target list was reasonably well targetted. > And IIRC the outrage stuck to the particular sender, not to the company. > > Q. Was not boycotting DEC because of spam because the company disavowed his trespass quickly or because it was just assumed he was a loose cannon, that executives wouldn't understand sufficiently to condone and be complicit? > > By this measure, it will might qualify as e-marketing.? alas... > > > Nothing appears initially in fully evolved form. > The DEC spam is at least proto-Spam, proto-e-marketing; as would be unsolicited offers on TELEX and Fax. > > ( It's not "spam" in the narrowest allusive sense of spam spam spamitty spam repetition ... though it should have been sent repeatedly to a different 20 at a time instead of all at once ! but blasting to too many recipients unrequested is also classed under the rubric of Spam today.) > > Q. Was up-thread reference to Telegraphic spam via flat rate a reference to TELEX or to prior art? I would be interested in references to any pre-TELEX telegraphic (as in dots and dashes, not Baudot) spam. Although using a PDP-[:digit:] or hardcoded controller to robodial a programmed TELEX spam list (or list of numbers on second papertape reader, with message on a loop) would be very interesting too. I have nothing concrete about telegraphic spam, but there wasn't really enough automation until 1914 or so to allow anything except manually generated advertising telegrams, which I don't think would count: it's automation that enables spam, surely? For a contemporary look at the state of telegraph automation in 1914, see https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~brian/MurrayTTY.pdf . It includes performance data. If you find Donald Murray intriguing, see the https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/historydisplays/FifthFloor/Murray/MurrayMain.php , which was created by my late friend Bob Doran. Regards Brian Carpenter From joly at punkcast.com Sat Jun 1 14:42:27 2019 From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 17:42:27 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: I had thought SPAM was an acronym for Send Promo to All Mail or something similar. Am I mistaken? Myself I was a latecomer, but around 87 with the advent of MCI Mail and Easylink I used email to promote a music tv show called SNUB on Nightflight. The great thing was the Easylink interface to telex, which was how the music business communicated. I am sure many were less than impressed when my screeds ate up their office supplies. joly On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:16 PM Bill Ricker wrote: > > > On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:02 PM Clem Cole wrote: > >> Mumble -- Like most marketing, I think it depends on how you define >> it/when you start counting. >> > > :-D > >> BTW; I'm not sure where the term "spam" originated (other than the >> reference to Monty Python's skit to describe the issue). I think it was >> somewhere in one of the netnews groups on the UUCP network actually (that >> was certainly where I first saw it and it was a bigger issue there since >> the links were dial-up). Somebody like Mary Ann Horton might be a good >> person to ask about that. >> > > IIRC the first use of the term Spam wrto e-Marketing was the Usenet > repeated posting by a Greencard Lottery lawyer in the early 1980s, and > explicitly was an allusion to the repetitive lyrics of the Pythons' spam > spam spammity spam song. > > > -- > Bill Ricker > bill.n1vux at gmail.com > https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux > _______ > 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. > -- --------------------------------------------------------------- Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast -------------------------------------------------------------- - -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From clemc at ccc.com Sat Jun 1 15:20:11 2019 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem cole) Date: Sat, 1 Jun 2019 18:20:11 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

Message-ID: <20B8644A-D51D-4FC3-B53D-6A95EAB95FC7@ccc.com> The term definitely came from the Monty Python skit were the spammers (singing in the background) eventually drown out the primary message. Sent from my PDP-7 Running UNIX V0 expect things to be almost but not quite. > On Jun 1, 2019, at 5:42 PM, Joly MacFie wrote: > > I had thought SPAM was an acronym for Send Promo to All Mail or something similar. Am I mistaken? > > Myself I was a latecomer, but around 87 with the advent of MCI Mail and Easylink I used email to promote a music tv show called SNUB on Nightflight. The great thing was the Easylink interface to telex, which was how the music business communicated. I am sure many were less than impressed when my screeds ate up their office supplies. > > joly > > >> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:16 PM Bill Ricker wrote: >> >> >>> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:02 PM Clem Cole wrote: >>> Mumble -- Like most marketing, I think it depends on how you define it/when you start counting. >> >> :-D >>> BTW; I'm not sure where the term "spam" originated (other than the reference to Monty Python's skit to describe the issue). I think it was somewhere in one of the netnews groups on the UUCP network actually (that was certainly where I first saw it and it was a bigger issue there since the links were dial-up). Somebody like Mary Ann Horton might be a good person to ask about that. >> >> IIRC the first use of the term Spam wrto e-Marketing was the Usenet repeated posting by a Greencard Lottery lawyer in the early 1980s, and explicitly was an allusion to the repetitive lyrics of the Pythons' spam spam spammity spam song. >> >> >> -- >> Bill Ricker >> bill.n1vux at gmail.com >> https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux >> _______ >> 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. > > > -- > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast > -------------------------------------------------------------- > - -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com Sat Jun 1 18:55:05 2019 From: brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter) Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 13:55:05 +1200 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: <20B8644A-D51D-4FC3-B53D-6A95EAB95FC7@ccc.com> References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

<20B8644A-D51D-4FC3-B53D-6A95EAB95FC7@ccc.com> Message-ID: On 02-Jun-19 10:20, Clem cole wrote: > The term definitely came from the Monty Python skit were the spammers (singing in the background) eventually drown out the primary message. It's all over YouTube, e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bW4vEo1F4E which also serves as a language lesson. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsgroup_spam dates the origin myth to 18 January 1994 ("Global Alert for All: Jesus is Coming Soon") but there's also a link to a page that claims that the term "spam" was first used in MUDs in the late 1980s, or even earlier on the BITNET Relay service from 1985. (So valdis.kletnieks at vt.edu might remember, if anybody knows him well enough to ask.) Also see http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/09/how-the-word-spam-came-to-mean-junk-message/ Brian > > Sent from my PDP-7 Running UNIX V0 expect things to be almost but not quite.? > > On Jun 1, 2019, at 5:42 PM, Joly MacFie > wrote: > >> I had thought SPAM was an acronym for Send Promo to All Mail or something similar. Am I mistaken? >> >> Myself I was a latecomer, but around 87 with the advent of MCI Mail and Easylink I used email to promote a music tv show called SNUB on Nightflight. The great thing was the Easylink interface to telex, which was how the music business communicated. I am sure many were less than impressed when my screeds ate up their office supplies. >> >> joly >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:16 PM Bill Ricker > wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:02 PM Clem Cole > wrote: >> >> Mumble -- Like most marketing, I think it depends on how you define it/when you start counting.?? >> >> >> :-D >> >> BTW;? I'm not sure where the term "spam" originated (other than the reference to Monty Python's skit to describe the issue).? ?I think it was somewhere in one of the netnews groups on the UUCP network actually (that was certainly where I first saw it and it was a bigger issue there since the links were dial-up).? Somebody like Mary Ann Horton might be a good person to ask about that. >> >> >> IIRC the first use of the term Spam wrto e-Marketing? was the Usenet repeated posting by a Greencard Lottery lawyer in the early 1980s, and explicitly was an allusion to the repetitive lyrics of the Pythons' spam spam spammity spam song. >> >> >> -- >> Bill Ricker >> bill.n1vux at gmail.com >> https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux? >> _______ >> 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. >> >> >> >> -- >> --------------------------------------------------------------- >> Joly MacFie? 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast >> -------------------------------------------------------------- >> - > > _______ > 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. > From sob at sobco.com Sun Jun 2 04:22:32 2019 From: sob at sobco.com (Scott Bradner) Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 07:22:32 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

<20B8644A-D51D-4FC3-B53D-6A95EAB95FC7@ccc.com> Message-ID: the first I exp[erioenced was a DEC salesdroid on the ARPANET - a very long time ago Scott > On Jun 1, 2019, at 9:55 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > On 02-Jun-19 10:20, Clem cole wrote: >> The term definitely came from the Monty Python skit were the spammers (singing in the background) eventually drown out the primary message. > > It's all over YouTube, e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bW4vEo1F4E which also serves as a language lesson. > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newsgroup_spam dates the origin myth to 18 January 1994 ("Global Alert for All: Jesus is Coming Soon") but there's also a link to a page that claims that the term "spam" was first used in MUDs in the late 1980s, or even earlier on the BITNET Relay service from 1985. (So valdis.kletnieks at vt.edu might remember, if anybody knows him well enough to ask.) > > Also see http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/09/how-the-word-spam-came-to-mean-junk-message/ > > Brian > >> >> Sent from my PDP-7 Running UNIX V0 expect things to be almost but not quite. >> >> On Jun 1, 2019, at 5:42 PM, Joly MacFie > wrote: >> >>> I had thought SPAM was an acronym for Send Promo to All Mail or something similar. Am I mistaken? >>> >>> Myself I was a latecomer, but around 87 with the advent of MCI Mail and Easylink I used email to promote a music tv show called SNUB on Nightflight. The great thing was the Easylink interface to telex, which was how the music business communicated. I am sure many were less than impressed when my screeds ate up their office supplies. >>> >>> joly >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:16 PM Bill Ricker > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 1:02 PM Clem Cole > wrote: >>> >>> Mumble -- Like most marketing, I think it depends on how you define it/when you start counting. >>> >>> >>> :-D >>> >>> BTW; I'm not sure where the term "spam" originated (other than the reference to Monty Python's skit to describe the issue). I think it was somewhere in one of the netnews groups on the UUCP network actually (that was certainly where I first saw it and it was a bigger issue there since the links were dial-up). Somebody like Mary Ann Horton might be a good person to ask about that. >>> >>> >>> IIRC the first use of the term Spam wrto e-Marketing was the Usenet repeated posting by a Greencard Lottery lawyer in the early 1980s, and explicitly was an allusion to the repetitive lyrics of the Pythons' spam spam spammity spam song. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Bill Ricker >>> bill.n1vux at gmail.com >>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux >>> _______ >>> 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. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> --------------------------------------------------------------- >>> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast >>> -------------------------------------------------------------- >>> - >> >> _______ >> 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. From richard at bennett.com Sun Jun 2 15:16:54 2019 From: richard at bennett.com (Richard Bennett) Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 16:16:54 -0600 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: Ironically, Gmail flagged this message as spam. RB > On Jun 1, 2019, at 7:58 AM, Vint Cerf wrote: > > i think the spam wasn't quite e-marketing as much as it was just abuse of a mailinglist.... > > v > > > On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 7:16 AM Lars Brinkhoff > wrote: > How about Gary Thuerk's claim to be the "father of e-marketing", does > that stand up to scrutiny? He's referring, of course, to the spam sent > in May 1978. > _______ > 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. > > > -- > 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. ? Richard Bennett High Tech Forum Founder Ethernet & Wi-Fi standards co-creator Internet Policy Consultant -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crossd at gmail.com Sun Jun 2 17:25:42 2019 From: crossd at gmail.com (Dan Cross) Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 20:25:42 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:15 AM Vint Cerf wrote: > i think the spam wasn't quite e-marketing as much as it was just abuse of > a mailinglist.... > I feel morally compelled to mention that GMail marked this email (from Vint Cerf, no less) as spam. The irony, on so many levels, is absolutely blinding. - Dan C. On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 7:16 AM Lars Brinkhoff wrote: > >> How about Gary Thuerk's claim to be the "father of e-marketing", does >> that stand up to scrutiny? He's referring, of course, to the spam sent >> in May 1978. >> _______ >> 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. >> > > > -- > 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. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vint at google.com Sun Jun 2 19:54:13 2019 From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf) Date: Sun, 2 Jun 2019 22:54:13 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: pretty hilarious! v On Sun, Jun 2, 2019 at 8:26 PM Dan Cross wrote: > On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:15 AM Vint Cerf wrote: > >> i think the spam wasn't quite e-marketing as much as it was just abuse of >> a mailinglist.... >> > > I feel morally compelled to mention that GMail marked this email (from > Vint Cerf, no less) as spam. > The irony, on so many levels, is absolutely blinding. > > - Dan C. > > On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 7:16 AM Lars Brinkhoff wrote: >> >>> How about Gary Thuerk's claim to be the "father of e-marketing", does >>> that stand up to scrutiny? He's referring, of course, to the spam sent >>> in May 1978. >>> _______ >>> 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. >>> >> >> >> -- >> 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. >> > -- New postal address: Google 1875 Explorer Street, 10th Floor Reston, VA 20190 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnl at iecc.com Mon Jun 3 02:30:01 2019 From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine) Date: 3 Jun 2019 11:30:01 +0200 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20190603093002.0F4BC2014EE05E@ary.local> In article you write: >I had thought SPAM was an acronym for Send Promo to All Mail or something >similar. Am I mistaken? You are mistaken. It was definitely an allusion to the Monty Python skit. From johnl at iecc.com Mon Jun 3 02:33:40 2019 From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine) Date: 3 Jun 2019 11:33:40 +0200 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20190603093340.D823E2014EE0F8@ary.local> In article you write: >Q. Was up-thread reference to Telegraphic spam via flat rate a reference to >TELEX or to prior art? I sald late 1800s. Telex wasn't developed until the 1930s. I am at a conference several thousand miles away from my library but it might have been in the book Victorian Internet, which is about the community of 19th century Morse telegraphers. From clemc at ccc.com Mon Jun 3 05:07:32 2019 From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 08:07:32 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: Same here - FWIW: all of Vint's messages are marked as SPAM by Gmail. I admit I have not explored why the antispam stuff is doing it. Also, This is also true of a couple of other folks on this list. If history is a predictor, I suspect its something in the forwarding technology used int he IH mailing system that is not handling the all messages quite the same/right. I make this observation, from having to help Warren debug a similar issue in the TUHS mailing list a year or so ago and it took Warren a bit to unwind it). Clem ? On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 7:50 AM Dan Cross wrote: > On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:15 AM Vint Cerf wrote: > >> i think the spam wasn't quite e-marketing as much as it was just abuse of >> a mailinglist.... >> > > I feel morally compelled to mention that GMail marked this email (from > Vint Cerf, no less) as spam. > The irony, on so many levels, is absolutely blinding. > > - Dan C. > > On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 7:16 AM Lars Brinkhoff wrote: >> >>> How about Gary Thuerk's claim to be the "father of e-marketing", does >>> that stand up to scrutiny? He's referring, of course, to the spam sent >>> in May 1978. >>> _______ >>> 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. >>> >> >> >> -- >> 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. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From agmalis at gmail.com Mon Jun 3 05:34:08 2019 From: agmalis at gmail.com (Andrew G. Malis) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 08:34:08 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org> Message-ID: The email Vint just sent from google.com that says "pretty hilarious!" fails both DKIM and DMARC checking, according to Gmail. I suspect that's why his email is being marked as spam. Cheers, Andy On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 8:22 AM Clem Cole wrote: > Same here - FWIW: all of Vint's messages are marked as SPAM by Gmail. I > admit I have not explored why the antispam stuff is doing it. Also, This > is also true of a couple of other folks on this list. > > If history is a predictor, I suspect its something in the forwarding > technology used int he IH mailing system that is not handling the all > messages quite the same/right. I make this observation, from having to > help Warren debug a similar issue in the TUHS mailing list a year or so ago > and it took Warren a bit to unwind it). > > Clem > ? > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 7:50 AM Dan Cross wrote: > >> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:15 AM Vint Cerf wrote: >> >>> i think the spam wasn't quite e-marketing as much as it was just abuse >>> of a mailinglist.... >>> >> >> I feel morally compelled to mention that GMail marked this email (from >> Vint Cerf, no less) as spam. >> The irony, on so many levels, is absolutely blinding. >> >> - Dan C. >> >> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 7:16 AM Lars Brinkhoff wrote: >>> >>>> How about Gary Thuerk's claim to be the "father of e-marketing", does >>>> that stand up to scrutiny? He's referring, of course, to the spam sent >>>> in May 1978. >>>> _______ >>>> 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. >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vint at google.com Mon Jun 3 05:55:48 2019 From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 08:55:48 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

Message-ID: Almost certainly a side effect of list processing. V On Mon, Jun 3, 2019, 08:54 Andrew G. Malis wrote: > The email Vint just sent from google.com that says "pretty hilarious!" > fails both DKIM and DMARC checking, according to Gmail. I suspect that's > why his email is being marked as spam. > > Cheers, > Andy > > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 8:22 AM Clem Cole wrote: > >> Same here - FWIW: all of Vint's messages are marked as SPAM by Gmail. I >> admit I have not explored why the antispam stuff is doing it. Also, This >> is also true of a couple of other folks on this list. >> >> If history is a predictor, I suspect its something in the forwarding >> technology used int he IH mailing system that is not handling the all >> messages quite the same/right. I make this observation, from having to >> help Warren debug a similar issue in the TUHS mailing list a year or so ago >> and it took Warren a bit to unwind it). >> >> Clem >> ? >> >> On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 7:50 AM Dan Cross wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 10:15 AM Vint Cerf wrote: >>> >>>> i think the spam wasn't quite e-marketing as much as it was just abuse >>>> of a mailinglist.... >>>> >>> >>> I feel morally compelled to mention that GMail marked this email (from >>> Vint Cerf, no less) as spam. >>> The irony, on so many levels, is absolutely blinding. >>> >>> - Dan C. >>> >>> On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 7:16 AM Lars Brinkhoff wrote: >>>> >>>>> How about Gary Thuerk's claim to be the "father of e-marketing", does >>>>> that stand up to scrutiny? He's referring, of course, to the spam sent >>>>> in May 1978. >>>>> _______ >>>>> 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. >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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. >> > _______ > 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. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dhc at dcrocker.net Mon Jun 3 06:34:58 2019 From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 15:34:58 +0200 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

Message-ID: <3292fb69-e502-6ed2-cb6a-14bba76988c4@dcrocker.net> On 6/3/2019 2:55 PM, Vint Cerf wrote: > Almost certainly a side effect of list processing. Exactly. Hence the recent, snap-on tool enhancement, called ARC, that is starting to get deployed. (And it will be interesting to see whether it helps...) d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From bill.n1vux at gmail.com Mon Jun 3 12:32:51 2019 From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 15:32:51 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: <20190603093002.0F4BC2014EE05E@ary.local> References: <20190603093002.0F4BC2014EE05E@ary.local> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 7:30 AM John Levine replied to Joly McFie mrn13w at mail.gmail.com> : > >I had thought SPAM was an acronym for Send Promo to All Mail or something > >similar. Am I mistaken? > > You are mistaken. It was definitely an allusion to the Monty Python skit. > It is however a delightful retronym to explain Spam as SPAM to a PHB that wouldn't appreciate reality, so thank you Joly for sharing that ! -- Bill Ricker bill.n1vux at gmail.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bill.n1vux at gmail.com Mon Jun 3 12:56:09 2019 From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 15:56:09 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: <198fff1d-b4c9-22a3-8a4d-1775afeaf76d@gmail.com> References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

<198fff1d-b4c9-22a3-8a4d-1775afeaf76d@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 5:35 PM Brian E Carpenter wrote: > I have nothing concrete about telegraphic spam, but there wasn't really enough automation until 1914 or so to allow anything except manually generated advertising telegrams, which I don't think would count: it's automation that enables spam, surely? Jacquard punch programming has been rediscovered for text and non-graphic programming repeatedly! Wikipedia reports << In 1846, Alexander Bain used punched tape to send telegrams. This technology was adopted by Charles Wheatstone in 1857 for the preparation, storage and transmission of data in telegraphy.[1] [1] Maxfield, Clive (13 October 2011). "How it was: Paper tapes and punched cards". EE Times. >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_tape https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Bain_(inventor) He invented the electric clock, facsimile transmission, and "chemical telegraph" , which is a precursor of heat-sensitive cash-register receipts, and could mark received messages so fast he had to invent off-line composition and automated fast sending. It doesn't say anything about repeating the same offline message to multiple addressees; was in only point-to-point use in a few cities, but spamming Paris from Lille with a commercial directory for addresses would have been potentially profitable if it happened. Ok, time to make use of the Google-fu that I developed before Google was a thing. (I don't mind GOOG using our start-up's business model sucessfully; we weren't using it.) Google reports <> << Pre-Internet In the late 19th century, Western Union allowed telegraphic messages on its network to be sent to multiple destinations. The first recorded instance of a mass unsolicited commercial telegram is from May 1864, when some British politicians received an unsolicited telegram advertising a dentist.[13] [13] "Getting the message, at last". The Economist. 2007-12-14. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spamming#Pre-Internet >> In 1864, that could well have been Wheatstone telegraphy using Bain's sender as opposed to Morse telegraphy ... or the dentist may simply have paid his local Telegraph office to deliver paper copies locally by foot w/o any electric transmission at all. (Equivalent of paying urchins to deliver handbills but with value-add of a uniform and official telegraph office form, so likely to get read. That is much of the deceptive techniques of eMarketing fully formed!) -- Bill Ricker bill.n1vux at gmail.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/n1vux From brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com Mon Jun 3 13:10:45 2019 From: brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 08:10:45 +1200 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

<198fff1d-b4c9-22a3-8a4d-1775afeaf76d@gmail.com> Message-ID: > In May of 1864, a group > of British politicians received a knock on the door with a telegram > waiting on the other side. But those were individual messages delivered by hand, typically by a telegraph boy. To my mind it needs to be an automatic process to count as spam rather than junk mail. Regards Brian On 04-Jun-19 07:56, Bill Ricker wrote: > On Sat, Jun 1, 2019 at 5:35 PM Brian E Carpenter > wrote: > >> I have nothing concrete about telegraphic spam, but there wasn't really enough automation until 1914 or so to allow anything except manually generated advertising telegrams, which I don't think would count: it's automation that enables spam, surely? > > Jacquard punch programming has been rediscovered for text and > non-graphic programming repeatedly! > > Wikipedia reports > << In 1846, Alexander Bain used punched tape to send telegrams. > This technology was adopted by Charles Wheatstone in 1857 for the > preparation, > storage and transmission of data in telegraphy.[1] > [1] Maxfield, Clive (13 October 2011). "How it was: Paper tapes and > punched cards". EE Times. > >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punched_tape > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Bain_(inventor) > > He invented the electric clock, facsimile transmission, and "chemical > telegraph" , which is a precursor of heat-sensitive cash-register > receipts, and could mark received messages so fast he had to invent > off-line composition and automated fast sending. > > It doesn't say anything about repeating the same offline message to > multiple addressees; was in only point-to-point use in a few cities, > but spamming Paris from Lille with a commercial directory for > addresses would have been potentially profitable if it happened. > > Ok, time to make use of the Google-fu that I developed before Google > was a thing. (I don't mind GOOG using our start-up's business model > sucessfully; we weren't using it.) > > Google reports > > <

But what was likely the world's first spam message was delivered via > telegraph wires to very confused recipients. In May of 1864, a group > of British politicians received a knock on the door with a telegram > waiting on the other side. Expecting a note of critical national > importance, they were surprised to see an ad inside the envelope. The > telegram communicated that a local dental practice, run by "Messrs > Gabriel," would be open from 10am to 5pm until October. Some of the > recipients were outraged by this unsolicited advertisement, and even > wrote a complaint to the Times: "I have never had any dealings with > Messrs Gabriel and beg to know by what right do they disturb me by a > telegram which is simply the medium of advertisement?" This event > shows how new communication technologies are always met with > surprising new ways of using them > https://curiosity.com/topics/a-1864-telegram-was-the-worlds-first-spam-message-curiosity/ >>> > > << Pre-Internet > In the late 19th century, Western Union allowed telegraphic messages > on its network to be sent to multiple destinations. The first recorded > instance of a mass unsolicited commercial telegram is from May 1864, > when some British politicians received an unsolicited telegram > advertising a dentist.[13] > [13] "Getting the message, at last". The Economist. 2007-12-14. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spamming#Pre-Internet >>> > > In 1864, that could well have been Wheatstone telegraphy using Bain's > sender as opposed to Morse telegraphy ... or the dentist may simply > have paid his local Telegraph office to deliver paper copies locally > by foot w/o any electric transmission at all. (Equivalent of paying > urchins to deliver handbills but with value-add of a uniform and > official telegraph office form, so likely to get read. That is much of > the deceptive techniques of eMarketing fully formed!) > From brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com Mon Jun 3 13:23:16 2019 From: brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter) Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 08:23:16 +1200 Subject: [ih] DMARC [was "Father of e-Marketing"] In-Reply-To: <3292fb69-e502-6ed2-cb6a-14bba76988c4@dcrocker.net> References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

<3292fb69-e502-6ed2-cb6a-14bba76988c4@dcrocker.net> Message-ID: <9200e1e6-767b-0319-9a57-8aace4034503@gmail.com> Vint's mail via this list is classified as spam due to failing DMARC. Failing DKIM doesn't seem to be so much of a problem. I've already seen traffic via an alias classified as spam by ARC, too. However, at the moment the IETF's work-around seems to be successfully working around DMARC. Maybe we can talk here about the history of anti-spam techniques. When was the kill file invented? Regards Brian On 04-Jun-19 01:34, Dave Crocker wrote: > On 6/3/2019 2:55 PM, Vint Cerf wrote: >> Almost certainly a side effect of list processing. > > > Exactly. > > Hence the recent, snap-on tool enhancement, called ARC, that is starting > to get deployed. (And it will be interesting to see whether it helps...) > > d/ > From bill.n1vux at gmail.com Mon Jun 3 13:26:55 2019 From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 16:26:55 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Father of e-Marketing" In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

<198fff1d-b4c9-22a3-8a4d-1775afeaf76d@gmail.com>

Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:10 PM Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > > In May of 1864, a group > > of British politicians received a knock on the door with a telegram > > waiting on the other side. > > But those were individual messages delivered by hand, typically by a > telegraph boy. To my mind it needs to be an automatic process to count > as spam rather than junk mail. Yes, much swings on whether it was transmitted by Bain auto-sender from a prepared tape and received by a Wheatstone receiver, or merely bulk mail with faux-imprimatur of the form and uniform of the telegraph's sweat-and-blood last mile. But as a social-engineering of the trusted new electrical comms technology for marketing purposes, it's certainly a pre-figurement or harbinger of the tragedy of the digital commons to come From jack at 3kitty.org Mon Jun 3 14:54:14 2019 From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 14:54:14 -0700 Subject: [ih] DMARC [was "Father of e-Marketing"] In-Reply-To: <9200e1e6-767b-0319-9a57-8aace4034503@gmail.com> References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

<3292fb69-e502-6ed2-cb6a-14bba76988c4@dcrocker.net> <9200e1e6-767b-0319-9a57-8aace4034503@gmail.com> Message-ID: <56e9e125-a870-2a19-3da6-386edd14b16e@3kitty.org> IMHO, the simplest effective anti-spam technique is an economic one.? If it cost even a tiny fraction of a cent per addressee to send an email, I'd expect there to be a lot less spam.? There are a variety of such economic techniques to exert backpressure on senders, e.g., perhaps a 500 email per day limit on a typical "home user" account for free, with high-volume users paying (a lot) more. Way back in 1975 or so, I argued unsuccessfully for at least putting mechanisms into the email protocols to implement tracking the usage of email (accounting), which could be used for functions such as economic backpressure (billing).??? But I lost to the "everything should be free" mantra of the era. Back in my EE courses, I remember the principle of negative feedback - without it, your circuit would oscillate wildly and might even self-destruct.? Negative feedback ("backpressure") made circuits stable. IMHO, the Internet is oscillating wildly, and techniques such as DMARC et al are, as you say, just "workarounds", not true negative feedback. /Jack On 6/3/19 1:23 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Vint's mail via this list is classified as spam due to failing DMARC. > Failing DKIM doesn't seem to be so much of a problem. I've already > seen traffic via an alias classified as spam by ARC, too. However, > at the moment the IETF's work-around seems to be successfully > working around DMARC. > > Maybe we can talk here about the history of anti-spam techniques. > When was the kill file invented? > > Regards > Brian > > On 04-Jun-19 01:34, Dave Crocker wrote: >> On 6/3/2019 2:55 PM, Vint Cerf wrote: >>> Almost certainly a side effect of list processing. >> >> Exactly. >> >> Hence the recent, snap-on tool enhancement, called ARC, that is starting >> to get deployed. (And it will be interesting to see whether it helps...) >> >> d/ >> > _______ > 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. From bill.n1vux at gmail.com Mon Jun 3 16:06:16 2019 From: bill.n1vux at gmail.com (Bill Ricker) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 19:06:16 -0400 Subject: [ih] Kill-file/Cancel-Index/Spam arms race Re: DMARC [was "Father of e-Marketing"] In-Reply-To: <9200e1e6-767b-0319-9a57-8aace4034503@gmail.com> References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

<3292fb69-e502-6ed2-cb6a-14bba76988c4@dcrocker.net> <9200e1e6-767b-0319-9a57-8aace4034503@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Jun 3, 2019 at 4:54 PM Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Maybe we can talk here about the history of anti-spam techniques. > When was the kill file invented? Wikipedia says the Killfile was first in Larry Wall's 'rn', but doesn't say which rev it was added to; implies that Jerry Pournelle was the feature request in 1986, so likely about then? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kill_file#cite_note-pournelle198603-1 A little closer to Spam control, the Usenet Cancel Index dates to c. 1994-09-30 per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breidbart_Index which has footnote [1] that links https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/news.admin.misc/EZYlshMcULU/GRCnSMAVf24J (Anyone wishing to dig further into that, the eponymous Seth still has same email address via Panix. Saw him just this last Saturday at a Scotch event. MAP would approve.) The Killfile.org archived Usenet FAQ doesn't appear to have history going back far enough to answer anything, but likely has useful reminders. http://wiki.killfile.org/projects/usenet/faqs/ // Bill From jack at 3kitty.org Mon Jun 3 17:09:42 2019 From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty) Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2019 17:09:42 -0700 Subject: [ih] DMARC [was "Father of e-Marketing"] In-Reply-To: <9200e1e6-767b-0319-9a57-8aace4034503@gmail.com> References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

<3292fb69-e502-6ed2-cb6a-14bba76988c4@dcrocker.net> <9200e1e6-767b-0319-9a57-8aace4034503@gmail.com> Message-ID: <7dd9ef0d-e977-f620-3a75-3a53332a508b@3kitty.org> On 6/3/19 1:23 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Maybe we can talk here about the history of anti-spam techniques. The mail system I wrote at MIT-DM in the mid 70s allowed each user to create a file of instructions that the mail daemon would execute whenever an incoming mail arrived for that user.? Those instructions were simply a program fragment that would be loaded and run by the daemon with the incoming mail available to it for whatever kind of processing the user might want. So it was easy to do things by rules something like "if FROM = or SUBJECT contains "SALE" then discard", and the user would never be bothered by such a message. ? One common use of the feature was to automatically categorize incoming mail into folders based on things like addressees, source, words in the subject or body, etc.?? One of the destination categories could of course be the recycle bin.?? Users wrote interesting fragments of code to do such stuff and shared them with others; each fragment was typically just a line or two of code. Users also used the feature to do things like automatically re-distribute incoming messages matching some rule to other users, e.g., to other members of a particular project team.?? One clever use somebody coded was in response to the chronic shortage of PDP-10 memory and cycles.? It was considered anti-social to run a compile job while someone else was running one, so someone gave the compiler a mailbox and to compile your program you'd simply mail it to the compiler which would handle it when it could, and email you when complete - a form of "batch processing" by email. Licklider was very keen on this kind of "Man Computer Symbiosis" where the computer would do things for the human on its own initiative. Sometimes that led to trouble..... One specific case I remember was a rule that looked to see if an incoming mail matched the subject/from/body of any recent previously received message.? If it found a match, the incoming message was deleted.?? This was a technique to deal with "routing loops" that could occur if anyone created a loop in their various distribution lists - a phenomenon related to what was later known as "cross-posting".? That rule was quickly coded after the second or third time our disk filled up with looping messages and I figured out what was happening. All of this happen in the mid-70s, certainly before 1977 when I left MIT. /Jack Haverty (MIT-DM 1970-1977) From johnl at iecc.com Wed Jun 5 03:54:07 2019 From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine) Date: 5 Jun 2019 12:54:07 +0200 Subject: [ih] DMARC [was "Father of e-Marketing"] In-Reply-To: <56e9e125-a870-2a19-3da6-386edd14b16e@3kitty.org> Message-ID: <20190605105407.70C412014FAA5D@ary.local> In article <56e9e125-a870-2a19-3da6-386edd14b16e at 3kitty.org> you write: >IMHO, the simplest effective anti-spam technique is an economic one.? If >it cost even a tiny fraction of a cent per addressee to send an email, >I'd expect there to be a lot less spam.?... Here is a white paper I wrote 16 years ago about why e-postage is a bad idea. It's still a bad idea. https://www.taugh.com/epostage.pdf -- Regards, John Levine, johnl at iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly From dot at dotat.at Wed Jun 5 04:48:17 2019 From: dot at dotat.at (Tony Finch) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 12:48:17 +0100 Subject: [ih] DMARC [was "Father of e-Marketing"] In-Reply-To: <20190605105407.70C412014FAA5D@ary.local> References: <20190605105407.70C412014FAA5D@ary.local> Message-ID: John Levine wrote: > > >IMHO, the simplest effective anti-spam technique is an economic one.? If > >it cost even a tiny fraction of a cent per addressee to send an email, > >I'd expect there to be a lot less spam.?... > > Here is a white paper I wrote 16 years ago about why e-postage is a bad > idea. It's still a bad idea. > > https://www.taugh.com/epostage.pdf Also relevant is ["proof-of-work" proves not to work] (from 2004) which includes economic arguments amongst others: https://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rnc1/proofwork2.pdf Tony. -- f.anthony.n.finch http://dotat.at/ Cromarty, Forth, Tyne: Cyclonic 3 to 5, becoming variable 3 or less. Slight or moderate. Thundery showers later. Good, occasionally poor. From dhc at dcrocker.net Wed Jun 5 05:34:15 2019 From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 14:34:15 +0200 Subject: [ih] DMARC [was "Father of e-Marketing"] In-Reply-To: <56e9e125-a870-2a19-3da6-386edd14b16e@3kitty.org> References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

<3292fb69-e502-6ed2-cb6a-14bba76988c4@dcrocker.net> <9200e1e6-767b-0319-9a57-8aace4034503@gmail.com> <56e9e125-a870-2a19-3da6-386edd14b16e@3kitty.org> Message-ID: <4717598e-d50e-9ded-3946-70b47fa4f5d1@dcrocker.net> On 6/3/2019 11:54 PM, Jack Haverty wrote: > IMHO, the simplest effective anti-spam technique is an economic one. There are a number of models that would likely have far less abuse that is true for Internet mail. As with most deficiencies in any operational system, the problem is that it is already operational. So making changes has to overcome the massive rigidity of the installed base. With respect to Internet mail abuse, there have been many different efforts, over the year, trying to impose pre-hoc controls, such as a submission cost. As ideas, they are reasonable. As practice, they've proved to be non-starters. Consequently, any proposal in this space needs to include a compelling analysis of how it will accrue support from existing email users. Alas, so far, no proposal has come close. d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net From steffen at sdaoden.eu Wed Jun 5 06:00:31 2019 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2019 15:00:31 +0200 Subject: [ih] DMARC [was "Father of e-Marketing"] In-Reply-To: <7dd9ef0d-e977-f620-3a75-3a53332a508b@3kitty.org> References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

<3292fb69-e502-6ed2-cb6a-14bba76988c4@dcrocker.net> <9200e1e6-767b-0319-9a57-8aace4034503@gmail.com> <7dd9ef0d-e977-f620-3a75-3a53332a508b@3kitty.org> Message-ID: <20190605130031.eAeFn%steffen@sdaoden.eu> Jack Haverty wrote in <7dd9ef0d-e977-f620-3a75-3a53332a508b at 3kitty.org>: |On 6/3/19 1:23 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: |> Maybe we can talk here about the history of anti-spam techniques. | |The mail system I wrote at MIT-DM in the mid 70s allowed each user to |create a file of instructions that the mail daemon would execute |whenever an incoming mail arrived for that user.? Those instructions |were simply a program fragment that would be loaded and run by the |daemon with the incoming mail available to it for whatever kind of |processing the user might want. | |So it was easy to do things by rules something like "if FROM = |or SUBJECT contains "SALE" then discard", and the user would never be |bothered by such a message. ? One common use of the feature was to |automatically categorize incoming mail into folders based on things like |addressees, source, words in the subject or body, etc.?? One of the |destination categories could of course be the recycle bin.?? That is certainly great, i have never heard of anything such before. It sounds as if it has been the grandfather or the inspiration of the now standardized Sieve language, which came up in 1999 (Wikipedia). |Users wrote interesting fragments of code to do such stuff and shared |them with others; each fragment was typically just a line or two of code. | |Users also used the feature to do things like automatically |re-distribute incoming messages matching some rule to other users, e.g., |to other members of a particular project team.?? One clever use somebody |coded was in response to the chronic shortage of PDP-10 memory and |cycles.? It was considered anti-social to run a compile job while |someone else was running one, so someone gave the compiler a mailbox and |to compile your program you'd simply mail it to the compiler which would |handle it when it could, and email you when complete - a form of "batch |processing" by email. I like this very much, really. There are so many job queue implementations out there, some of them even really heavyweight. Just using a mail account with some plain text control messages is a minimal beauty, or dainty minimal, however you turn it. (Though sequential only here, i would presume.) |Licklider was very keen on this kind of "Man Computer Symbiosis" where |the computer would do things for the human on its own initiative. | |Sometimes that led to trouble..... | |One specific case I remember was a rule that looked to see if an |incoming mail matched the subject/from/body of any recent previously |received message.? If it found a match, the incoming message was |deleted.?? This was a technique to deal with "routing loops" that could |occur if anyone created a loop in their various distribution lists - a |phenomenon related to what was later known as "cross-posting".? That |rule was quickly coded after the second or third time our disk filled up |with looping messages and I figured out what was happening. | |All of this happen in the mid-70s, certainly before 1977 when I left MIT. | |/Jack Haverty | |(MIT-DM 1970-1977) --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt) From steffen at sdaoden.eu Wed Jun 5 06:17:54 2019 From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso) Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2019 15:17:54 +0200 Subject: [ih] DMARC [was "Father of e-Marketing"] In-Reply-To: <20190605105407.70C412014FAA5D@ary.local> References: <20190605105407.70C412014FAA5D@ary.local> Message-ID: <20190605131754.P0FMZ%steffen@sdaoden.eu> John Levine wrote in <20190605105407.70C412014FAA5D at ary.local>: |In article <56e9e125-a870-2a19-3da6-386edd14b16e at 3kitty.org> you write: |>IMHO, the simplest effective anti-spam technique is an economic one.? If |>it cost even a tiny fraction of a cent per addressee to send an email, |>I'd expect there to be a lot less spam.?... | |Here is a white paper I wrote 16 years ago about why e-postage is a bad |idea. It's still a bad idea. | |https://www.taugh.com/epostage.pdf I learn a lot this day. "Hashcash" seems to have been part of the foundation of Bitcoin, but i never heard of it before (consciously). --steffen | |Der Kragenbaer, The moon bear, |der holt sich munter he cheerfully and one by one |einen nach dem anderen runter wa.ks himself off |(By Robert Gernhardt) From gregskinner0 at icloud.com Wed Jun 5 13:26:38 2019 From: gregskinner0 at icloud.com (Greg Skinner) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 13:26:38 -0700 Subject: [ih] Kill-file/Cancel-Index/Spam arms race Re: DMARC [was "Father of e-Marketing"] In-Reply-To: References: <7wwoi5zi9x.fsf@junk.nocrew.org>

Message-ID: <687DADC4-D410-483A-A2DD-88009193329F@bennett.com> The fact that ARCnet was essentially a plug-and-play system for converting 3270 terminal clusters - wire and all - into PC clusters was a huge selling point for departmental computing in the mid ?80s and beyond. With a Novell file & print server, 3270 emulation and file transfer on your PCs, a shared laser printer and a 3270 LAN gateway you were good to go. Classic Ethernet?s biggest flaw was its lack of the star topology used for office power, phones, and 3270s. Multi-port transceivers for Cheapernet remedied this, but they were very pricey before 10BASE-T. Metcalfe & crew believed active hubs would be bottlenecks, but that idea never made much sense; the active hub just needs to be as fast as each individual node. RB > On Jun 14, 2019, at 2:30 PM, Gordon Peterson wrote: > > > On 6/14/2019 3:02 PM, Clem Cole wrote: >> >> >> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 3:52 PM Richard Bennett > wrote: >> The PARC Ethernet that immediately preceded Blue Book was 2.94 Mbps, not 3. The difference is greater than the bandwidth of ARPANET at the time. I think an even earlier prototype was 1 Mbps. >> Right... in both cases. One of the guys (Roger Bates IIRC), even calculated the number of bit of storage in the PARC network >>wires<< at one point. > Bob Metcalfe's original "Ether"net was a wired version of the University of Hawaii's "Project Aloha", which was a radio-broadcast network... >> >> These were both thin coax systems as thick net was a Blue Book designed-by-committee monstrosity with poor noise modeling. >> Amen.... > Bob Metcalfe told me he was a big fan of the linear bus, even with the problems and vulnerabilities I pointed out (including ringing back from the taps, need to terminate ends, ability to take the whole bus down with a pin or paperclip, etc etc). I told him that an "interconnected stars" topology was a lot better, but he persisted.... sigh... > > I think it's worth noting that basically nobody still runs thick-wire linear bus Ethernet, and Ethernet didn't really get very successful until they finally adopted the ARCnet-style "interconnected stars" cabling topology based on hubs. > >> A question for you: Was the ARCnet you are describing from Datapoint, the same technology as the 75 ohm coax ARCnet that was popular with Novell networks in the mid to late 1980s? > Actually it was 93 ohm, RG-62U, BNC connectors, but yes, their "RX-NET" was actually the exact same thing as Datapoint's ARCnet. They (Datapoint ARC System and Novell RX-NET systems) coexisted nicely on the same ARCnet cable system, too. ;-) The wires and cabling and connectors were the same as IBM had used for their 2260 (and 3270 and following) terminals... so most big companies with such networks in place already were cabled for ARCnet. ;-) ARCnet is actually very tolerant, I'm told it will even run happily over coat-hanger wire. ;-) >> I remember it was originally less costly than the 'Blue Book' ethernet per port until NS and group came up with 'CheaperNet' (running it across 50 ohm wire thin wire and using BNC connectors). > The bigger advantages of ARCnet over Ethernet have to do with low-level protocols, fault tolerance, error recovery, electrical robustness, and a lot more. >> >> >> RB >> >>> On Jun 14, 2019, at 6:43 AM, Noel Chiappa > wrote: >>> >>>> From: Jorge Amodio >>> >>>> Thank you so much for your detailed response >>> >>> Indeed, it was a fantastic and fascinating glimpse into a too-little-known >>> corner of computing history. >>> >>> For those who would like to know more, in addition to online sources, I can >>> recommend "Datapoint: The Lost Story of the Texans Who Invented the Personal >>> Computer Revolution", by Lamont Wood. (I'm not sure if those who were there, >>> like Mr. Peterson, would consider it accurate, but it seemed to be to be quite >>> good.) >>> >>> Typical nugget: the Intel 8008 was not a descendant of the Intel 4004 >>> (although the production chips did use technology developed for the 4004), as >>> commonly thought at one point; rather, it was developed for Datapoint >>> (although they wound up building their own CPU out of discrete components). >>> The 8008 developed into the 8080, and then the 8086... and I expect many of us >>> are reading this on its descendants. >>> >>>> I'll follow up on a private message so I don't get the rest of the list >>>> bored with details. >>> >>> Bored? Never! :-) >>> >>> >>>>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 6:18 PM Gordon Peterson > wrote: >>> >>>>> (...and, at the time, Ethernet.... which wasn't a released product yet... >>>>> was running at just 2 megabits >>> >>> Minor nit - 3. >>> >>>>> "Oh, Gordon," my colleagues told me. "It's a good system, but you're >>>>> crazy... big businesses will never give up their mainframes and run their >>>>> processing on networks of little computers." >>>>> I grinned at them and replied, "You just WATCH!" :-) >>> >>> I suspect many people on this list have had similar experiences! (In my case, >>> circa mid-80s, telling my now-wife that one day everyone would have >>> email... :-) >>> >>> It would be interesting to collect stories about when we got glimpses of the >>> future. I am particularly thinking of Craig's story about Swedish train >>> timetables; my equivalent was going home to Bermuda at one point and seeing >>> URL's painted on commercial vehicles. >>> >>> Noel >>> _______ >>> 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. >> >> ? >> Richard Bennett >> High Tech Forum Founder >> Ethernet & Wi-Fi standards co-creator >> >> Internet Policy Consultant >> >> _______ >> 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. >> ? > > Virus-free. www.avast.com

? Richard Bennett High Tech Forum Founder Ethernet & Wi-Fi standards co-creator Internet Policy Consultant -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From karl at cavebear.com Fri Jun 14 15:04:52 2019 From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 15:04:52 -0700 Subject: [ih] "Catnet"? - Was Re: Early use of the "Internet" term (1977) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <79193cd7-6e6f-fb40-48d0-ff7fa775b3c0@cavebear.com> While you are tracking down early usage, I remember Jon (I think) using the word "Catnet" (Concatenated Networks) before I heard the word "Internet". Is my memory playing tricks on me? (If so, it would not be the first time.) I have not been able to find anything written but I vaguely remember a document or drawing titled something like "Catnet Model". ??? --karl-- From ocl at gih.com Fri Jun 14 15:43:44 2019 From: ocl at gih.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Olivier_MJ_Cr=c3=a9pin-Leblond?=) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2019 00:43:44 +0200 Subject: [ih] "Catnet"? - Was Re: Early use of the "Internet" term (1977) In-Reply-To: <79193cd7-6e6f-fb40-48d0-ff7fa775b3c0@cavebear.com> References: <79193cd7-6e6f-fb40-48d0-ff7fa775b3c0@cavebear.com> Message-ID: <2e83dcf4-c082-3700-4abd-096dab90dd3f@gih.com> Dear Karl, I think you're remembering "Catenet" - https://ftp.ripe.net/rfc/ien/ien48.html Kindest regards, Olivier On 15/06/2019 00:04, Karl Auerbach wrote: > While you are tracking down early usage, I remember Jon (I think) using > the word "Catnet" (Concatenated Networks) before I heard the word > "Internet". > > Is my memory playing tricks on me? (If so, it would not be the first time.) > > I have not been able to find anything written but I vaguely remember a > document or drawing titled something like "Catnet Model". > > ??? > > --karl-- > _______ > 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. > -- Olivier MJ Cr?pin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com Fri Jun 14 15:47:35 2019 From: brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2019 10:47:35 +1200 Subject: [ih] "Catnet"? - Was Re: Early use of the "Internet" term (1977) In-Reply-To: <79193cd7-6e6f-fb40-48d0-ff7fa775b3c0@cavebear.com> References: <79193cd7-6e6f-fb40-48d0-ff7fa775b3c0@cavebear.com> Message-ID: Catenet (concatenated networks) was coined by Pouzin. I suspect there was an INWG note, and he had a couple of publications in 1974. Regards Brian Carpenter On 15-Jun-19 10:04, Karl Auerbach wrote: > > While you are tracking down early usage, I remember Jon (I think) using > the word "Catnet" (Concatenated Networks) before I heard the word > "Internet". > > Is my memory playing tricks on me? (If so, it would not be the first time.) > > I have not been able to find anything written but I vaguely remember a > document or drawing titled something like "Catnet Model". > > ??? > > --karl-- > _______ > 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. > From agmalis at gmail.com Fri Jun 14 15:57:10 2019 From: agmalis at gmail.com (Andrew G. Malis) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 18:57:10 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Catnet"? - Was Re: Early use of the "Internet" term (1977) In-Reply-To: <79193cd7-6e6f-fb40-48d0-ff7fa775b3c0@cavebear.com> References: <79193cd7-6e6f-fb40-48d0-ff7fa775b3c0@cavebear.com> Message-ID: Karl, You remember well, although it was "Catenet". See IEN 48, https://www.rfc-editor.org/ien/ien48.txt . Cheers, Andy On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 6:30 PM Karl Auerbach wrote: > > While you are tracking down early usage, I remember Jon (I think) using > the word "Catnet" (Concatenated Networks) before I heard the word > "Internet". > > Is my memory playing tricks on me? (If so, it would not be the first > time.) > > I have not been able to find anything written but I vaguely remember a > document or drawing titled something like "Catnet Model". > > ??? > > --karl-- > _______ > 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. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From richard at bennett.com Fri Jun 14 16:12:40 2019 From: richard at bennett.com (Richard Bennett) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 17:12:40 -0600 Subject: [ih] Early use of the "Internet" term (1977) In-Reply-To: References: <20190614124314.6B0C518C0E4@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <8EE22D76-F715-40A3-B7C4-E619E3DD5BC1@bennett.com>

<687DADC4-D410-483A-A2DD-88009193329F@bennett.com> Message-ID: <793A4A57-0497-42DB-8A29-AB8B9356E153@bennett.com> In principle, Ethernet collisions only occurred at during the first few bytes of the frame - the collision window - so it didn?t take long to backoff and recover. But the advent of full duplex in 10BASE-T eliminated collisions. We put positive acknowledgment in Wi-Fi because we predicted one undetected collision per 100 frames or so, owing to the lack of a reliable collision indicator. That appears to have been the right choice. > On Jun 14, 2019, at 5:04 PM, Gordon Peterson wrote: > > > > On 6/14/2019 4:53 PM, Richard Bennett wrote: >> The fact that ARCnet was essentially a plug-and-play system for converting 3270 terminal clusters - wire and all - into PC clusters was a huge selling point for departmental computing in the mid ?80s and beyond. With a Novell file & print server, 3270 emulation and file transfer on your PCs, a shared laser printer and a 3270 LAN gateway you were good to go. > Sure! And that you could just add a hub in your department, and the wire that used to carry the traffic from your (big/expensive) 3270 cluster controller to just ONE terminal could now support a BUNCH of departmental computers! As many as you needed! All able to talk together. >> Classic Ethernet?s biggest flaw was its lack of the star topology used for office power, phones, and 3270s. > Basically, ALL classical distribution systems use "interconnected stars" topologies. Water, electricity, storm sewers, food and product distribution, (yes) telephones, just about everything. And with linear-bus Ethernet, adding a new drop ANYWHERE on the bus disrupted messages and electrical signals for the ENTIRE bus, until everything re-stabilized. A map tack or paperclip could short out the whole linear bus, and it could take a LONG time to figure out where the problem was, and get it going again. >> Multi-port transceivers for Cheapernet remedied this, but they were very pricey before 10BASE-T. >> >> Metcalfe & crew believed active hubs would be bottlenecks, but that idea never made much sense; the active hub just needs to be as fast as each individual node. > It just needs to be as fast as the cable, the total bit rate at the active hub is the same. And in ARCnet, any given cable is only carrying a single signal in one direction at any given time, and therefore you don't really have electrical signal collisions, and don't have any problems with reflections from taps or the ends of a cable. > > More important, with ARCnet the originating RIM knows within about 5-10 microseconds of the end of a transmission whether the transmission was received (fully, correctly and completely) by the destination RIM... before the next packet is prepared and sent. With Ethernet, you have to wait (maybe a LONG time) until higher-level protocols don't receive an expected result (if any). Packet collisions (if any) can occur elsewhere in an Ethernet network, and may not be seen by the sender (since the collision elsewhere might occur after the sender has stopped sending). > > ARCnet has the receiving node acknowledging (IMMEDIATELY) whether the received packet was received, fully buffered at the receiving end, with correct parity for each byte received, the correct CRC for the entire packet, and the correct number of bytes expected. And the originating RIM gets this "positive ACK" before it sends another queued packet, or passes the "invitation to transmit" token on to the next node in the polling list. So if your higher-level protocol is set so that ANY packet can be safely and simply re-transmitted (as The ARC System's protocols allowed) in case of ANY doubt, it makes it really easy to make a VERY robust and error-tolerant network architecture. > >> RB >> >>> On Jun 14, 2019, at 2:30 PM, Gordon Peterson > wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 6/14/2019 3:02 PM, Clem Cole wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 3:52 PM Richard Bennett > wrote: >>>> The PARC Ethernet that immediately preceded Blue Book was 2.94 Mbps, not 3. The difference is greater than the bandwidth of ARPANET at the time. I think an even earlier prototype was 1 Mbps. >>>> Right... in both cases. One of the guys (Roger Bates IIRC), even calculated the number of bit of storage in the PARC network >>wires<< at one point. >>> Bob Metcalfe's original "Ether"net was a wired version of the University of Hawaii's "Project Aloha", which was a radio-broadcast network... >>>> >>>> These were both thin coax systems as thick net was a Blue Book designed-by-committee monstrosity with poor noise modeling. >>>> Amen.... >>> Bob Metcalfe told me he was a big fan of the linear bus, even with the problems and vulnerabilities I pointed out (including ringing back from the taps, need to terminate ends, ability to take the whole bus down with a pin or paperclip, etc etc). I told him that an "interconnected stars" topology was a lot better, but he persisted.... sigh... >>> >>> I think it's worth noting that basically nobody still runs thick-wire linear bus Ethernet, and Ethernet didn't really get very successful until they finally adopted the ARCnet-style "interconnected stars" cabling topology based on hubs. >>> >>>> A question for you: Was the ARCnet you are describing from Datapoint, the same technology as the 75 ohm coax ARCnet that was popular with Novell networks in the mid to late 1980s? >>> Actually it was 93 ohm, RG-62U, BNC connectors, but yes, their "RX-NET" was actually the exact same thing as Datapoint's ARCnet. They (Datapoint ARC System and Novell RX-NET systems) coexisted nicely on the same ARCnet cable system, too. ;-) The wires and cabling and connectors were the same as IBM had used for their 2260 (and 3270 and following) terminals... so most big companies with such networks in place already were cabled for ARCnet. ;-) ARCnet is actually very tolerant, I'm told it will even run happily over coat-hanger wire. ;-) >>>> I remember it was originally less costly than the 'Blue Book' ethernet per port until NS and group came up with 'CheaperNet' (running it across 50 ohm wire thin wire and using BNC connectors). >>> The bigger advantages of ARCnet over Ethernet have to do with low-level protocols, fault tolerance, error recovery, electrical robustness, and a lot more. >>>> >>>> >>>> RB >>>> >>>>> On Jun 14, 2019, at 6:43 AM, Noel Chiappa > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> From: Jorge Amodio >>>>> >>>>>> Thank you so much for your detailed response >>>>> >>>>> Indeed, it was a fantastic and fascinating glimpse into a too-little-known >>>>> corner of computing history. >>>>> >>>>> For those who would like to know more, in addition to online sources, I can >>>>> recommend "Datapoint: The Lost Story of the Texans Who Invented the Personal >>>>> Computer Revolution", by Lamont Wood. (I'm not sure if those who were there, >>>>> like Mr. Peterson, would consider it accurate, but it seemed to be to be quite >>>>> good.) >>>>> >>>>> Typical nugget: the Intel 8008 was not a descendant of the Intel 4004 >>>>> (although the production chips did use technology developed for the 4004), as >>>>> commonly thought at one point; rather, it was developed for Datapoint >>>>> (although they wound up building their own CPU out of discrete components). >>>>> The 8008 developed into the 8080, and then the 8086... and I expect many of us >>>>> are reading this on its descendants. >>>>> >>>>>> I'll follow up on a private message so I don't get the rest of the list >>>>>> bored with details. >>>>> >>>>> Bored? Never! :-) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 6:18 PM Gordon Peterson > wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> (...and, at the time, Ethernet.... which wasn't a released product yet... >>>>>>> was running at just 2 megabits >>>>> >>>>> Minor nit - 3. >>>>> >>>>>>> "Oh, Gordon," my colleagues told me. "It's a good system, but you're >>>>>>> crazy... big businesses will never give up their mainframes and run their >>>>>>> processing on networks of little computers." >>>>>>> I grinned at them and replied, "You just WATCH!" :-) >>>>> >>>>> I suspect many people on this list have had similar experiences! (In my case, >>>>> circa mid-80s, telling my now-wife that one day everyone would have >>>>> email... :-) >>>>> >>>>> It would be interesting to collect stories about when we got glimpses of the >>>>> future. I am particularly thinking of Craig's story about Swedish train >>>>> timetables; my equivalent was going home to Bermuda at one point and seeing >>>>> URL's painted on commercial vehicles. >>>>> >>>>> Noel >>>>> _______ >>>>> 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. >>>> >>>> ? >>>> Richard Bennett >>>> High Tech Forum Founder >>>> Ethernet & Wi-Fi standards co-creator >>>> >>>> Internet Policy Consultant >>>> >>>> _______ >>>> 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. >>>> ? >>> >>> Virus-free. www.avast.com >> ? >> Richard Bennett >> High Tech Forum Founder >> Ethernet & Wi-Fi standards co-creator >> >> Internet Policy Consultant >> ? Richard Bennett High Tech Forum Founder Ethernet & Wi-Fi standards co-creator Internet Policy Consultant -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vint at google.com Fri Jun 14 18:08:03 2019 From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 21:08:03 -0400 Subject: [ih] "Catnet"? - Was Re: Early use of the "Internet" term (1977) In-Reply-To: <79193cd7-6e6f-fb40-48d0-ff7fa775b3c0@cavebear.com> References: <79193cd7-6e6f-fb40-48d0-ff7fa775b3c0@cavebear.com> Message-ID: "catenet" a term introduced by Louis Pouzin and which I used in IEN #48 as I recall. for "concatenated network" v On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 6:30 PM Karl Auerbach wrote: > > While you are tracking down early usage, I remember Jon (I think) using > the word "Catnet" (Concatenated Networks) before I heard the word > "Internet". > > Is my memory playing tricks on me? (If so, it would not be the first > time.) > > I have not been able to find anything written but I vaguely remember a > document or drawing titled something like "Catnet Model". > > ??? > > --karl-- > _______ > 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. > -- New postal address: Google 1875 Explorer Street, 10th Floor Reston, VA 20190 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From richard at bennett.com Sat Jun 15 12:59:59 2019 From: richard at bennett.com (Richard Bennett) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2019 13:59:59 -0600 Subject: [ih] Early use of the "Internet" term (1977) In-Reply-To: <90fa6424-4f8e-a967-8fca-133946e066be@terabites.com> References: <20190614124314.6B0C518C0E4@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <8EE22D76-F715-40A3-B7C4-E619E3DD5BC1@bennett.com>

<687DADC4-D410-483A-A2DD-88009193329F@bennett.com> <793A4A57-0497-42DB-8A29-AB8B9356E153@bennett.com> <90fa6424-4f8e-a967-8fca-133946e066be@terabites.com> Message-ID: 802.3 coax Ethernet has limits on the lengths of the cables, the delay through repeaters, and the number of repeaters that ensure overall network latency can?t exceed 232 bits. When collisions occur, colliding nodes switch from sending data to sending a jam signal that fills the slot - 512 bit times - and then do collision recovery. Late collisions (after the 232 bit time latency) can occur, but did so rarely. They?re treated as errors and left to higher level protocols to sort out. Collisions are detected by a voltage drop on the cable that everyone sees, but if somebody misses it they should see the jam signal. It?s a pretty reliable system, but collision-free full duplex is better. Full duplex switches permit multiple packets to traverse the switch at the same time as long as they have different destinations, and buffer those with the same destination that overlap. And switches allow operators to assign priorities so that more important bits have a fast lane, just as they did on the IBM Token Ring. > On Jun 14, 2019, at 10:15 PM, Gordon Peterson wrote: > > > > On 6/14/2019 6:12 PM, Richard Bennett wrote: >> In principle, Ethernet collisions only occurred at during the first few bytes of the frame - the collision window - so it didn?t take long to backoff and recover. But the advent of full duplex in 10BASE-T eliminated collisions. > It depends on how long the message is, and how it's routed. The end of the message can be seen earlier in some places than in others, depending on propagation delays and different routings. And some collisions may be seen by some network nodes, and not by others. >> We put positive acknowledgment in Wi-Fi because we predicted one undetected collision per 100 frames or so, owing to the lack of a reliable collision indicator. That appears to have been the right choice. > In the case of ARCnet, any given cable is only driven from one end at any given time. So you never get a "collision" of two data packets colliding on the same cable coming from different ends. >> >>> On Jun 14, 2019, at 5:04 PM, Gordon Peterson > wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On 6/14/2019 4:53 PM, Richard Bennett wrote: >>>> The fact that ARCnet was essentially a plug-and-play system for converting 3270 terminal clusters - wire and all - into PC clusters was a huge selling point for departmental computing in the mid ?80s and beyond. With a Novell file & print server, 3270 emulation and file transfer on your PCs, a shared laser printer and a 3270 LAN gateway you were good to go. >>> Sure! And that you could just add a hub in your department, and the wire that used to carry the traffic from your (big/expensive) 3270 cluster controller to just ONE terminal could now support a BUNCH of departmental computers! As many as you needed! All able to talk together. >>>> Classic Ethernet?s biggest flaw was its lack of the star topology used for office power, phones, and 3270s. >>> Basically, ALL classical distribution systems use "interconnected stars" topologies. Water, electricity, storm sewers, food and product distribution, (yes) telephones, just about everything. And with linear-bus Ethernet, adding a new drop ANYWHERE on the bus disrupted messages and electrical signals for the ENTIRE bus, until everything re-stabilized. A map tack or paperclip could short out the whole linear bus, and it could take a LONG time to figure out where the problem was, and get it going again. >>>> Multi-port transceivers for Cheapernet remedied this, but they were very pricey before 10BASE-T. >>>> >>>> Metcalfe & crew believed active hubs would be bottlenecks, but that idea never made much sense; the active hub just needs to be as fast as each individual node. >>> It just needs to be as fast as the cable, the total bit rate at the active hub is the same. And in ARCnet, any given cable is only carrying a single signal in one direction at any given time, and therefore you don't really have electrical signal collisions, and don't have any problems with reflections from taps or the ends of a cable. >>> >>> More important, with ARCnet the originating RIM knows within about 5-10 microseconds of the end of a transmission whether the transmission was received (fully, correctly and completely) by the destination RIM... before the next packet is prepared and sent. With Ethernet, you have to wait (maybe a LONG time) until higher-level protocols don't receive an expected result (if any). Packet collisions (if any) can occur elsewhere in an Ethernet network, and may not be seen by the sender (since the collision elsewhere might occur after the sender has stopped sending). >>> >>> ARCnet has the receiving node acknowledging (IMMEDIATELY) whether the received packet was received, fully buffered at the receiving end, with correct parity for each byte received, the correct CRC for the entire packet, and the correct number of bytes expected. And the originating RIM gets this "positive ACK" before it sends another queued packet, or passes the "invitation to transmit" token on to the next node in the polling list. So if your higher-level protocol is set so that ANY packet can be safely and simply re-transmitted (as The ARC System's protocols allowed) in case of ANY doubt, it makes it really easy to make a VERY robust and error-tolerant network architecture. >>> >>>> RB >>>> >>>>> On Jun 14, 2019, at 2:30 PM, Gordon Peterson > wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 6/14/2019 3:02 PM, Clem Cole wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 3:52 PM Richard Bennett > wrote: >>>>>> The PARC Ethernet that immediately preceded Blue Book was 2.94 Mbps, not 3. The difference is greater than the bandwidth of ARPANET at the time. I think an even earlier prototype was 1 Mbps. >>>>>> Right... in both cases. One of the guys (Roger Bates IIRC), even calculated the number of bit of storage in the PARC network >>wires<< at one point. >>>>> Bob Metcalfe's original "Ether"net was a wired version of the University of Hawaii's "Project Aloha", which was a radio-broadcast network... >>>>>> >>>>>> These were both thin coax systems as thick net was a Blue Book designed-by-committee monstrosity with poor noise modeling. >>>>>> Amen.... >>>>> Bob Metcalfe told me he was a big fan of the linear bus, even with the problems and vulnerabilities I pointed out (including ringing back from the taps, need to terminate ends, ability to take the whole bus down with a pin or paperclip, etc etc). I told him that an "interconnected stars" topology was a lot better, but he persisted.... sigh... >>>>> >>>>> I think it's worth noting that basically nobody still runs thick-wire linear bus Ethernet, and Ethernet didn't really get very successful until they finally adopted the ARCnet-style "interconnected stars" cabling topology based on hubs. >>>>> >>>>>> A question for you: Was the ARCnet you are describing from Datapoint, the same technology as the 75 ohm coax ARCnet that was popular with Novell networks in the mid to late 1980s? >>>>> Actually it was 93 ohm, RG-62U, BNC connectors, but yes, their "RX-NET" was actually the exact same thing as Datapoint's ARCnet. They (Datapoint ARC System and Novell RX-NET systems) coexisted nicely on the same ARCnet cable system, too. ;-) The wires and cabling and connectors were the same as IBM had used for their 2260 (and 3270 and following) terminals... so most big companies with such networks in place already were cabled for ARCnet. ;-) ARCnet is actually very tolerant, I'm told it will even run happily over coat-hanger wire. ;-) >>>>>> I remember it was originally less costly than the 'Blue Book' ethernet per port until NS and group came up with 'CheaperNet' (running it across 50 ohm wire thin wire and using BNC connectors). >>>>> The bigger advantages of ARCnet over Ethernet have to do with low-level protocols, fault tolerance, error recovery, electrical robustness, and a lot more. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> RB >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Jun 14, 2019, at 6:43 AM, Noel Chiappa > wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From: Jorge Amodio >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thank you so much for your detailed response >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Indeed, it was a fantastic and fascinating glimpse into a too-little-known >>>>>>> corner of computing history. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For those who would like to know more, in addition to online sources, I can >>>>>>> recommend "Datapoint: The Lost Story of the Texans Who Invented the Personal >>>>>>> Computer Revolution", by Lamont Wood. (I'm not sure if those who were there, >>>>>>> like Mr. Peterson, would consider it accurate, but it seemed to be to be quite >>>>>>> good.) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Typical nugget: the Intel 8008 was not a descendant of the Intel 4004 >>>>>>> (although the production chips did use technology developed for the 4004), as >>>>>>> commonly thought at one point; rather, it was developed for Datapoint >>>>>>> (although they wound up building their own CPU out of discrete components). >>>>>>> The 8008 developed into the 8080, and then the 8086... and I expect many of us >>>>>>> are reading this on its descendants. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'll follow up on a private message so I don't get the rest of the list >>>>>>>> bored with details. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Bored? Never! :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 6:18 PM Gordon Peterson > wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> (...and, at the time, Ethernet.... which wasn't a released product yet... >>>>>>>>> was running at just 2 megabits >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Minor nit - 3. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Oh, Gordon," my colleagues told me. "It's a good system, but you're >>>>>>>>> crazy... big businesses will never give up their mainframes and run their >>>>>>>>> processing on networks of little computers." >>>>>>>>> I grinned at them and replied, "You just WATCH!" :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I suspect many people on this list have had similar experiences! (In my case, >>>>>>> circa mid-80s, telling my now-wife that one day everyone would have >>>>>>> email... :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It would be interesting to collect stories about when we got glimpses of the >>>>>>> future. I am particularly thinking of Craig's story about Swedish train >>>>>>> timetables; my equivalent was going home to Bermuda at one point and seeing >>>>>>> URL's painted on commercial vehicles. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Noel >>>>>>> _______ >>>>>>> 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. >>>>>> >>>>>> ? >>>>>> Richard Bennett >>>>>> High Tech Forum Founder >>>>>> Ethernet & Wi-Fi standards co-creator >>>>>> >>>>>> Internet Policy Consultant >>>>>> >>>>>> _______ >>>>>> 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. >>>>>> ? >>>>> >>>>> Virus-free. www.avast.com >>>> ? >>>> Richard Bennett >>>> High Tech Forum Founder >>>> Ethernet & Wi-Fi standards co-creator >>>> >>>> Internet Policy Consultant >>>> >> >> ? >> Richard Bennett >> High Tech Forum Founder >> Ethernet & Wi-Fi standards co-creator >> >> Internet Policy Consultant >> ? Richard Bennett High Tech Forum Founder Ethernet & Wi-Fi standards co-creator Internet Policy Consultant -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lpress at csudh.edu Mon Jun 17 20:53:47 2019 From: lpress at csudh.edu (Larry Press) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 03:53:47 +0000 Subject: [ih] Early use of the "Internet" term (1977) In-Reply-To: References: <84100996-15FF-44A5-B9DD-ACBAB0DEE28B@comcast.net> <1560530940122.31724@csudh.edu>, Message-ID: <1560830028606.37916@csudh.edu> > That was QUIKTRAN. I WAS THE SYSTEM ENGINEER IN LOS ANGELES 1965-1967 ! I played with QUIKTRAN back at the T. J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights around that time. It was written by John Morrisey and was mind-blowing -- a whole different way to program and debug. I also played around with JOSS at RAND, but actually did a lot of work using the interactive JOVIAL interpreter, TINT, at SDC. You could code and debug subroutines using TINT, then compile them using the JOVIAL compiler -- way more productive than batch processing programming. Larry -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From vint at google.com Mon Jun 17 22:00:16 2019 From: vint at google.com (Vint Cerf) Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 01:00:16 -0400 Subject: [ih] Early use of the "Internet" term (1977) In-Reply-To: <1560830028606.37916@csudh.edu> References: <84100996-15FF-44A5-B9DD-ACBAB0DEE28B@comcast.net> <1560530940122.31724@csudh.edu> <1560830028606.37916@csudh.edu> Message-ID: i learned so much about time-sharing from Morrisey's work - eventually went to Chicago to go over repairs for some bugs I had found. Everything in assembly language and reams of 132 column print-outs. 1965-1967. v On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 11:53 PM Larry Press wrote: > > That was QUIKTRAN. I WAS THE SYSTEM ENGINEER IN LOS ANGELES 1965-1967 ! > > I played with QUIKTRAN back at the T. J. Watson Research Center in > Yorktown Heights around that time. It was written by John Morrisey > and was mind-blowing -- a whole different way to program and debug. I also > played around with JOSS at RAND, but actually did a lot of work using the > interactive JOVIAL interpreter, TINT, at SDC. You could code and debug > subroutines using TINT, then compile them using the JOVIAL compiler -- way > more productive than batch processing programming. > > Larry > -- New postal address: Google 1875 Explorer Street, 10th Floor Reston, VA 20190 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnl at iecc.com Tue Jun 18 14:10:29 2019 From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine) Date: 18 Jun 2019 17:10:29 -0400 Subject: [ih] IEEE Annals issue sort of about the 50th anniversary of the Arpanet In-Reply-To: <1560830028606.37916@csudh.edu> Message-ID: <20190618211029.F2FA22015FDCB2@ary.qy> The cover of the current April-June 2019 issue of Annals says ARPANET's 50th Anniversary. But inside, there isn't all that much stuff: a short piece by Steve Crocker on "Learning to Network", a piece by two historians on the origins of the DNS, and a trip report on an AAAS event to mark the 50th. On the other hand, if you want to know about the history of text processing software in Poland in the 1990s, there's a really detailed article about it.