[ih] NCP and TCP implementations
dhc at dcrocker.net
Tue Mar 10 13:48:08 PDT 2020
On 3/10/2020 11:53 AM, Bernie Cosell via Internet-history wrote:
>> Am I right in inferring that the key driver behind the design decision
>> was cost rather than elegance?
> no. cost wasn't the issue. in fact elegance was.
My subjective view, at the time, was the the existence of a single
integrated device for terminal access was extremely helpful in growing
the user population of the early Arpanet. Juggling two devices -- IMP
and a separate host -- for sites needing access but not really having a
machine or operator cycles to spare, would have been a significant
barrier to entry.
As part of my job doing user support at the UCLA CS site, I got tasked
with helping Einar Stefferud get started using access. He didn't access
through our system but had other arrangements; I just had to help.
One day he calls me up and says that he can't send email. He was using
Tenex. I don't remember whether we were yet into the RD/BananaRD/MSG
world yet, but in any case, sending was done with Sndmsg.
So I ask him to describe the problem and he says he types the
destination address and the system responded with "Bad".
I told him he needed to enter at-sign (@) twice. I felt quite proud of
realizing the TIP was intercepting the the at-sign. As I recall, the
TIP was the only system on the net that gave 'bad' as an error message...
More information about the Internet-history