[ih] 13 the unlucky number

[Barbara Denny]

 Fort Bragg did have a packet radio testbed in that time frame. I remember having to help them out when they had problems. I don't remember what path I took from BBN to get whatever information I could to try to debug the issue.  I also don't remember if anyone on the net could ping them. 
barbara 
    On Tuesday, August 11, 2020, 11:43:58 AM PDT, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:  
 
 A related question, if you're exploring Internet History, might be
"Which of the early networks were ever actually operational nets on The
Internet, i.e., nets that you could ping and get a response?"

I was involved in the 77-80s timeframe, and as I recall, many of those
low numbered networks were assigned numbers, but didn't actually ever
get connected to the operational Internet. 

/Jack Haverty

On 8/11/20 10:53 AM, Alejandro Acosta via Internet-history wrote:
> Hello All,
>
>   First, really thanks for your comments.
>
>   I read a little bit more about the network 13. I supposed I should
> have done this before sending the email.
>
>   As I said, it does not appear in RFC 790 (Sep 81), and it does not
> appear until RFC 990 (Nov 1986 assigned to XEROX)
>
>   However, I just realized that actually network 13 was first seen in
> RFC 739 assigned to National Physical Laboratory and last seen in RFC
> 776.
>
>
> Thanks again & sorry for the noise.
>
>
> Alejandro,
>
>
> On 8/11/20 12:45 PM, Alex McKenzie via Internet-history wrote:
>>   Alejandro,
>> I don't think any of us can speak for Jon Postel, who assigned the
>> numbers, and sadly he is no longer with us to speak for himself.  I
>> knew Jon pretty well and he showed no evidence of being a
>> superstitious person.  I think Steve Crocker's explanation that the
>> number was assigned to an entity that could not yet be made public on
>> the date RFC 790 was released is the most likely answer.
>> For what its worth,Alex McKenzie
>>
>>      On Tuesday, August 11, 2020, 9:08:58 AM EDT, Alejandro Acosta
>> via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>     Hello list,
>>
>>     I have a question and one more time I believe this a good place
>> to ask.
>>
>>     During the weekend I read the old RFC 790 (ASSIGNED NUMBERS). When
>> reading it I noticed the following:
>>
>> {...}
>>
>>         009.rrr.rrr.rrr   BRAGG-PR      Ft. Bragg Packet Radio Net [JEM]
>>         010.rrr.rrr.rrr   ARPANET       ARPANET [17,1,VGC]
>>         011.rrr.rrr.rrr   UCLNET        University College London    
>> [PK]
>>         012.rrr.rrr.rrr   CYCLADES      CYCLADES [VGC]
>>         013.rrr.rrr.rrr                 Unassigned [JBP]
>>         014.rrr.rrr.rrr   TELENET       TELENET [VGC]
>>         015.rrr.rrr.rrr   EPSS          British Post Office EPSS     
>> [PK]
>>         016.rrr.rrr.rrr   DATAPAC       DATAPAC [VGC]
>>         017.rrr.rrr.rrr   TRANSPAC      TRANSPAC [VGC]
>>         018.rrr.rrr.rrr   LCSNET        MIT LCS Network [43,10,DDC2]
>>
>> {...}
>>
>>
>>     As you can see the 013.rrr.rrr.rrr was unassigned but some
>> subsequent
>> prefix were (014, 015 ..... ). Is there any reason for it?. I know 013
>> was later assigned to XEROX-NET.
>>
>>     I wonder if 013 was skipped because some sort of superstitions?.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>> Alejandro,
>>
>>
>>

-- 
Internet-history mailing list
Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history