From b_a_denny at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  1 08:28:29 2021
From: b_a_denny at yahoo.com (Barbara Denny)
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2021 15:28:29 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [ih] More topology
In-Reply-To: <663455324.1587123.1630447181557@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20210831212800.D4B8218C096@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
 <663455324.1587123.1630447181557@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <885046656.1831124.1630510109535@mail.yahoo.com>

 There is a chance that Holly's married name is Knight in case anyone might want to find more information. I woke up this morning thinking of this name.??
?barbara
    On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, 02:59:52 PM PDT, Barbara Denny via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:  
 
  The PE code (some or all?) could also have been written by Holly Nelson, or perhaps James Lieb since he is listed on the technical report besides Jim and Holly.? Holly left SRI shortly before I arrived (When I interviewed at SRI I thought I might end up working with her on my first project there).? I don't remember meeting James Lieb.? BTW, SRI technical reports usually included everyone who worked on an effort so I don't think the PE could have been written by a person not listed on the report.
barbara
? ? On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, 02:28:12 PM PDT, Noel Chiappa via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:? 
 
 ? ? > From: Jack Haverty

? ? > Any host might try to get up to 8 " in-flight" messages. If more than
? ? > one such host is sending to the same destination, each expecting to be
? ? > able to keep 8 messages in flight, the IMP would block the PE as it
? ? > sent the 9th message. 

The person who wrote the PE code (Jim Mathis?) either foresaw the
possibility, or experienced it, as the PE has code to handle exactly this:

? ; IF THE NUMBER OF MESSAGES
? ; OUTSTANDING ON THE CONNECTION IS LESS THAN 8, PUT THE PORT NUMBER
? ; INDICATOR INTO SUB-LINK FIELD OF THE MESSAGE AND OUTPUT THE MESSAGE TO
? ; THE IMP.? IF THE NUMBER OF MESSAGES OUTSTANDING IS GREATER THAN OR EQUAL
? ; TO 8, ENQUEUE THE IORB ONTO THE "BLOCKED" LINKED LIST.? IT WILL BE SENT
? ; WHEN A RFNM IS RECEIVED AND THE OUTSTANDING COUNT IS LESS THAN 8.? THE
? ; HOST PORT WILL BE BLOCKED UNTIL THE MESSAGE IS SENT.

May I suggest that rather than idly speculate about what the PE _might_
have done, people inspect the actual code (sort of - see below), which I
have put online here:

? http://ana-3.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/gw/pe/

It's not the _original_ PE code, this is the version that I hacked on to turn
it (effectively) into a gateway to the MIT LAN. Still, I didn't chop out lots
of existing functionality, just hung a bag on the side to turn it into a LAN
gateway, so the original PE stuff is all there.

Why didn't we just use the BBN gateway code (which we clearly had access to),
instead of hack the PE? I don't recall for sure, but I suspect our thinking
went something like this: we were already familiar with MOS, and had it (and
had it, the PE and the TIU) building on the local TOPS-20 (and knew it was
clean and easy to work with); but didn't have ELF, or the gateway. It was
probably easier to do the PE hack than get the ELF-based gateway running.


? ? > From: Steve Crocker

? ? > Minor point: RFNM = Ready (not Request) for Next Message.

Ironically, the 'improved' ARPANET (post ~'72) actually did kind of act that
way ('Request'). From J.M. McQuillan, W.R. Crowther, B.P. Cosell, D.C. Walden,
and F.E. Heart, "Improvements in the Design and Performance of the ARPA
Network":

? When the message itself arrives at the destination, and the destination IMP
? is about to return the Ready-For-Next-Message (RFNM), the destination IMP
? waits until it has room for an additional multipacket message. It then
? piggybacks a storage allocation on the RFNM. If the source Host is prompt in
? answering the RFNM with its next message, an allocation is ready and the
? message can be transmitted at once.

Easily available not behind one of those irritatig, annoying paywalls, here:

? https://walden-family.com/impcode/1972-improvements-paper.pdf

so you all won't have to find your old hardcopy!

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

From b_a_denny at yahoo.com  Wed Sep  1 09:05:03 2021
From: b_a_denny at yahoo.com (Barbara Denny)
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2021 16:05:03 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [ih] More Topology, Packet Radio
In-Reply-To: <CAAFtm_XMUDBSaJzFcdykM1pHxsNn+s9Yx-YP49KWCWZf9fUYiQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.915.1630366974.2981.internet-history@elists.isoc.org>
 <4C467B3F-2803-4F68-823C-8A141D9D6803@serissa.com>
 <1002464625.1436263.1630425715360@mail.yahoo.com>
 <859772975.1507758.1630436858010@mail.yahoo.com>
 <CAAFtm_XMUDBSaJzFcdykM1pHxsNn+s9Yx-YP49KWCWZf9fUYiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1971660832.1860481.1630512303453@mail.yahoo.com>

 As far as I remember,? Barry was running the PRNET/SURAN programs for most of the time I was at SRI and BBN.? ?I didn't work much? on SURAN but I seem to remember someone else might have eventually taken over from Barry on the SURAN contract. I am trying to verify this and get a name but the person I am asking is out of town and no response to my email yet.? Barry wasn't in Germany when I did the demo with the LPRs at the Warrior Prep center.? There was a different DARPA guy in Germany but I have this memory he was only involved for this particular demonstration.? ?I also don't think this is the same DARPA guy whose name I am trying to remember.
barbara

    On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, 12:38:09 PM PDT, vinton cerf <vgcerf at gmail.com> wrote:  
 
 that must have been when Barry Leiner was running the PRNET/SURAN programs?
v

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 3:07 PM Barbara Denny via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

?Upon reflection I want to mention I think 6.2 supported multiple stations in a Packet Radio network.? I believe an earlier release supported a single station. I just don't remember if that version was something like Cap5 versus Cap6.?
barbara
? ? On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, 09:01:55 AM PDT, Barbara Denny <b_a_denny at yahoo.com> wrote:? 

? Eventually under the SURAN contract we/SRI got a version of the radio code.? What we received was probably BCPL because at this point I am thinking I got asked to do a modification because I was probably the only one around with BCPL experience from the Packet Radio station software.? There is a chance it was in C.? The big thing I remember was the code reminded me of more like something that might have been written by people used to a lower level language, like assembler.?
My memory might be wrong but I seem to remember Packet Radio had 256 byte packets.??
The different CAP version numbers indicated functionality in the Packet Radio network so if I remember correctly CAP6.2 included the Packet Radio Station while CAP7 was stationless.
barbara
? ? On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, 05:56:47 AM PDT, Lawrence Stewart via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:? 

?I can contribute a few bits of information about the Packet Radio Network.

In 1978 I designed the 1822 interface for the Xerox Alto.? It was used to connect to the Bay Area Packet Radio Network and for connecting PARC-MAXC2 to the Arpanet.

The Radios used an entirely different low level protocol than the IMPs.? It was called CAP, for Channel Access Protocol.? CAP was notable for a very small MTU - it had an 11 (16-bit) word header and up to 116 words of data.

PARC used the PRNet for a while to encapsulate PUP traffic between the PARC building and the Xerox Advanced Systems Devision (Ben Wegbreit and Charles Simonyi) building.

I wrote the CAP driver in Mesa, for connection to Hal Murray?s Mesa Gateway code.? It may still be around, in the files Paul McJones put up on the CHM servers at http://xeroxalto.computerhistory.org/Indigo/Alto-1822/.index.html <http://xeroxalto.computerhistory.org/Indigo/Alto-1822/.index.html>
The BCPL test software for the 1822 is definitely there. 

I don?t know what language the radio code used. It was written by Collins Radio and they had (from SRI accounts) a truly stone age attitude about it.? The master version was kept in a box of cards in the manager?s office.

I found the writeup of the Xerox work in IEN-78 at http://www.watersprings.org/pub/rfc/ien/ien78.pdf <http://www.watersprings.org/pub/rfc/ien/ien78.pdf>

-Larry

I guess I am surprised by the comments here about the subleties of the 1822 distant host signaling.? I don?t think the Alto board had optoisolaters and it did work in both local and distant host modes, but was never tried with very long cables or ground problems.

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

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

  

From jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu  Thu Sep  2 11:58:14 2021
From: jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Thu,  2 Sep 2021 14:58:14 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ih] More Topology, Packet Radio
Message-ID: <20210902185814.7FCD518C0B2@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>

    > From: Barbara Denny

    > The PE code (some or all?) could also have been written by Holly Nelson,

Ah, I knew Holly slightly; she came to some TCP/IP-related meeting at MIT-LCS
(maybe she'd be listed in the attendee sections of the early TCP/IP meeting
minutes IENs). Couldn't remember her name, though!

My fairly strong recollection is that she worked on the PE at a later stage in
its life - after the version that MIT got and tweaked. (Later: yes, see
below).) I don't recall the origin of that impression; maybe it was
conversations I had with her during her visit.

I'm pretty sure Jim Mathis wrote the version I had; it uses his Macro-11
'structure definition' macro technique (pretty impressive, to have structure
definitions in an assembler program :-).

    > SRI technical reports usually included everyone who worked on an effort
    > so I don't think the PE could have been written by a person not listed
    > on the report.

I recall seeing an SRI TR on the PE. I looked online, and found it;
TR-1080-140-1; there are two copies: DTIC has a scan of an original:

  https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA156186.pdf

and there's a cleaned-up, reformatted version here:

  https://www.warthman.com/images/SRI%20ARPANET-IMP.book.pdf

Two interesting things I see in it. It describes it as using an ACC 1822
interface; the one we had used an SRI interface (a manual for which is also
available throught DTIC). Also, it says it's written in BLISS-11; the one I
have is entirely in MACRO-11. I think that version must be the one that Holly
worked on; I think the MACRO-11 one must be Jim's.


    > From: Lawrence Stewart

    >> The problem was that the DH interface _also_ had ground ("the cable
    >> shields should be very solidly connected to the host's signal ground")

I really need to learn to turn my brain on before posting. It is, of course,
not true that tying the shields to ground at the host provides a ground from
the IMP; but I'm kind of right, anyway, in the case where a 'host' 1822
interface is used to emulate an IMP.

That's because in a 'host' 1822 interface, the cable shield is connected to
the host's ground - so if there's a 'host' 1822 interface on both ends, the
cable shields will be connected to the host's ground at each end, tying the
two hosts' grounds together.

    > I found both the 1975 and the 1978 versions of the BBN-1822 report and
    > both say "Ground Isolation is provided by the IMP" but the circuits in
    > Appendix D do not have this.

Yeah, I'd noticed that.

    > The 1975 version says the signals are transformer coupled and the 1978
    > version says optically isolated.

Yeah; either way the ground is isolated, though.

	Noel


From b_a_denny at yahoo.com  Thu Sep  2 13:10:08 2021
From: b_a_denny at yahoo.com (Barbara Denny)
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 20:10:08 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [ih] More Topology, Packet Radio
In-Reply-To: <1971660832.1860481.1630512303453@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.915.1630366974.2981.internet-history@elists.isoc.org>
 <4C467B3F-2803-4F68-823C-8A141D9D6803@serissa.com>
 <1002464625.1436263.1630425715360@mail.yahoo.com>
 <859772975.1507758.1630436858010@mail.yahoo.com>
 <CAAFtm_XMUDBSaJzFcdykM1pHxsNn+s9Yx-YP49KWCWZf9fUYiQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1971660832.1860481.1630512303453@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <180282603.2384077.1630613408862@mail.yahoo.com>

 Dave Beyer let me know that Brian Boesch?was the DARPA pm at the end of SURAN. He doesn't remember right now if there was anyone between Barry and Brian.
barbara
    On Wednesday, September 1, 2021, 09:05:03 AM PDT, Barbara Denny <b_a_denny at yahoo.com> wrote:  
 
  As far as I remember,? Barry was running the PRNET/SURAN programs for most of the time I was at SRI and BBN.? ?I didn't work much? on SURAN but I seem to remember someone else might have eventually taken over from Barry on the SURAN contract. I am trying to verify this and get a name but the person I am asking is out of town and no response to my email yet.? Barry wasn't in Germany when I did the demo with the LPRs at the Warrior Prep center.? There was a different DARPA guy in Germany but I have this memory he was only involved for this particular demonstration.? ?I also don't think this is the same DARPA guy whose name I am trying to remember.
barbara

    On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, 12:38:09 PM PDT, vinton cerf <vgcerf at gmail.com> wrote:  
 
 that must have been when Barry Leiner was running the PRNET/SURAN programs?
v

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 3:07 PM Barbara Denny via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

?Upon reflection I want to mention I think 6.2 supported multiple stations in a Packet Radio network.? I believe an earlier release supported a single station. I just don't remember if that version was something like Cap5 versus Cap6.?
barbara
? ? On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, 09:01:55 AM PDT, Barbara Denny <b_a_denny at yahoo.com> wrote:? 

? Eventually under the SURAN contract we/SRI got a version of the radio code.? What we received was probably BCPL because at this point I am thinking I got asked to do a modification because I was probably the only one around with BCPL experience from the Packet Radio station software.? There is a chance it was in C.? The big thing I remember was the code reminded me of more like something that might have been written by people used to a lower level language, like assembler.?
My memory might be wrong but I seem to remember Packet Radio had 256 byte packets.??
The different CAP version numbers indicated functionality in the Packet Radio network so if I remember correctly CAP6.2 included the Packet Radio Station while CAP7 was stationless.
barbara
? ? On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, 05:56:47 AM PDT, Lawrence Stewart via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:? 

?I can contribute a few bits of information about the Packet Radio Network.

In 1978 I designed the 1822 interface for the Xerox Alto.? It was used to connect to the Bay Area Packet Radio Network and for connecting PARC-MAXC2 to the Arpanet.

The Radios used an entirely different low level protocol than the IMPs.? It was called CAP, for Channel Access Protocol.? CAP was notable for a very small MTU - it had an 11 (16-bit) word header and up to 116 words of data.

PARC used the PRNet for a while to encapsulate PUP traffic between the PARC building and the Xerox Advanced Systems Devision (Ben Wegbreit and Charles Simonyi) building.

I wrote the CAP driver in Mesa, for connection to Hal Murray?s Mesa Gateway code.? It may still be around, in the files Paul McJones put up on the CHM servers at http://xeroxalto.computerhistory.org/Indigo/Alto-1822/.index.html <http://xeroxalto.computerhistory.org/Indigo/Alto-1822/.index.html>
The BCPL test software for the 1822 is definitely there. 

I don?t know what language the radio code used. It was written by Collins Radio and they had (from SRI accounts) a truly stone age attitude about it.? The master version was kept in a box of cards in the manager?s office.

I found the writeup of the Xerox work in IEN-78 at http://www.watersprings.org/pub/rfc/ien/ien78.pdf <http://www.watersprings.org/pub/rfc/ien/ien78.pdf>

-Larry

I guess I am surprised by the comments here about the subleties of the 1822 distant host signaling.? I don?t think the Alto board had optoisolaters and it did work in both local and distant host modes, but was never tried with very long cables or ground problems.

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

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

    

From steve at shinkuro.com  Thu Sep  2 13:12:28 2021
From: steve at shinkuro.com (Steve Crocker)
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 16:12:28 -0400
Subject: [ih] More Topology, Packet Radio
In-Reply-To: <180282603.2384077.1630613408862@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.915.1630366974.2981.internet-history@elists.isoc.org>
 <4C467B3F-2803-4F68-823C-8A141D9D6803@serissa.com>
 <1002464625.1436263.1630425715360@mail.yahoo.com>
 <859772975.1507758.1630436858010@mail.yahoo.com>
 <CAAFtm_XMUDBSaJzFcdykM1pHxsNn+s9Yx-YP49KWCWZf9fUYiQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1971660832.1860481.1630512303453@mail.yahoo.com>
 <180282603.2384077.1630613408862@mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <CABf5zvL7ePPyek7QSiSkjXnaDPLkD+O4-C9y2kYoCJpQYCkm6Q@mail.gmail.com>

I believe Brian Boesch is still accessible.  I don't know if he's on this
list.

Steve


On Thu, Sep 2, 2021 at 4:10 PM Barbara Denny via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

>  Dave Beyer let me know that Brian Boesch was the DARPA pm at the end of
> SURAN. He doesn't remember right now if there was anyone between Barry and
> Brian.
> barbara
>     On Wednesday, September 1, 2021, 09:05:03 AM PDT, Barbara Denny <
> b_a_denny at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>   As far as I remember,  Barry was running the PRNET/SURAN programs for
> most of the time I was at SRI and BBN.   I didn't work much  on SURAN but I
> seem to remember someone else might have eventually taken over from Barry
> on the SURAN contract. I am trying to verify this and get a name but the
> person I am asking is out of town and no response to my email yet.  Barry
> wasn't in Germany when I did the demo with the LPRs at the Warrior Prep
> center.  There was a different DARPA guy in Germany but I have this memory
> he was only involved for this particular demonstration.   I also don't
> think this is the same DARPA guy whose name I am trying to remember.
> barbara
>
>     On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, 12:38:09 PM PDT, vinton cerf <
> vgcerf at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  that must have been when Barry Leiner was running the PRNET/SURAN
> programs?
> v
>
> On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 3:07 PM Barbara Denny via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
>  Upon reflection I want to mention I think 6.2 supported multiple stations
> in a Packet Radio network.  I believe an earlier release supported a single
> station. I just don't remember if that version was something like Cap5
> versus Cap6.
> barbara
>     On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, 09:01:55 AM PDT, Barbara Denny <
> b_a_denny at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>   Eventually under the SURAN contract we/SRI got a version of the radio
> code.  What we received was probably BCPL because at this point I am
> thinking I got asked to do a modification because I was probably the only
> one around with BCPL experience from the Packet Radio station software.
> There is a chance it was in C.  The big thing I remember was the code
> reminded me of more like something that might have been written by people
> used to a lower level language, like assembler.
> My memory might be wrong but I seem to remember Packet Radio had 256 byte
> packets.
> The different CAP version numbers indicated functionality in the Packet
> Radio network so if I remember correctly CAP6.2 included the Packet Radio
> Station while CAP7 was stationless.
> barbara
>     On Tuesday, August 31, 2021, 05:56:47 AM PDT, Lawrence Stewart via
> Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
>  I can contribute a few bits of information about the Packet Radio Network.
>
> In 1978 I designed the 1822 interface for the Xerox Alto.  It was used to
> connect to the Bay Area Packet Radio Network and for connecting PARC-MAXC2
> to the Arpanet.
>
> The Radios used an entirely different low level protocol than the IMPs.
> It was called CAP, for Channel Access Protocol.  CAP was notable for a very
> small MTU - it had an 11 (16-bit) word header and up to 116 words of data.
>
> PARC used the PRNet for a while to encapsulate PUP traffic between the
> PARC building and the Xerox Advanced Systems Devision (Ben Wegbreit and
> Charles Simonyi) building.
>
> I wrote the CAP driver in Mesa, for connection to Hal Murray?s Mesa
> Gateway code.  It may still be around, in the files Paul McJones put up on
> the CHM servers at
> http://xeroxalto.computerhistory.org/Indigo/Alto-1822/.index.html <
> http://xeroxalto.computerhistory.org/Indigo/Alto-1822/.index.html>
> The BCPL test software for the 1822 is definitely there.
>
> I don?t know what language the radio code used. It was written by Collins
> Radio and they had (from SRI accounts) a truly stone age attitude about
> it.  The master version was kept in a box of cards in the manager?s office.
>
> I found the writeup of the Xerox work in IEN-78 at
> http://www.watersprings.org/pub/rfc/ien/ien78.pdf <
> http://www.watersprings.org/pub/rfc/ien/ien78.pdf>
>
> -Larry
>
> I guess I am surprised by the comments here about the subleties of the
> 1822 distant host signaling.  I don?t think the Alto board had
> optoisolaters and it did work in both local and distant host modes, but was
> never tried with very long cables or ground problems.
>
> --
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>
> --
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>
>
> --
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>


From touch at strayalpha.com  Thu Sep  2 17:21:31 2021
From: touch at strayalpha.com (touch at strayalpha.com)
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2021 17:21:31 -0700
Subject: [ih] Holly
Message-ID: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>

Forwarded on behalf of Dan Lynch:

> From: Bob Knight <bob at bobknight.net <mailto:bob at bobknight.net>>
> Date: September 2, 2021 at 2:43:47 PM PDT
> To: Dan Lynch <dan at lynch.com <mailto:dan at lynch.com>>
> Subject: Re: Holly
> Reply-To: bob at bobknight.net <mailto:bob at bobknight.net>
> 
> ?Hi Dan - https://www.facebook.com/hollynelsonknight <https://www.facebook.com/hollynelsonknight> is something. No posts since May, but it's worth a shot.
> 
> https://www.linkedin.com/in/holly-knight-ba0ab1/ <https://www.linkedin.com/in/holly-knight-ba0ab1/> is another bread crumb. Her last employer was Microsoft, so a query there may bear fruit.
> 
> https://checkpeople.com/search/Holly-Knight/in-WA/Olympia/731f791c69394682b3a8903a30949d0c <https://checkpeople.com/search/Holly-Knight/in-WA/Olympia/731f791c69394682b3a8903a30949d0c> alleges a phone number of (206) 390-5012. But those sites are rife with errors, in my experience.
> 
> I don't have an email, even though I "pack rat" emails back over 20 years.
> 
> Hopefully one of these bears fruit.
> 
> Thanks,
> Bob
> 505.672.8049

?
Joe Touch, temporal epistemologist
www.strayalpha.com



From jack at 3kitty.org  Fri Sep  3 08:31:04 2021
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 08:31:04 -0700
Subject: [ih] Holly
In-Reply-To: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
Message-ID: <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>

FYI, Holly's current email address:

Holly Knight <hollyk at live.com>

I'd tell her how to join this group, but it's been so long I can't 
remember...

When I moved to California in 1990, into a house in the Redwood forest 
in the hills west of Silicon Valley ,i noticed someone who looked 
familiar visiting our next door neighbor.?? She looked like someone I 
had encountered during the earlier days of the Internet when I was at 
BBN but frequently at meetings at SRI in the late 70s and early 80s.? It 
turned out that neighbor was Holly's sister Karin.? So I just emailed 
Karin to ask about Holly, who then sent me back an email with her 
address to post to the History group.?? It really is a small world and 
the Internet has made it now smaller.

/Jack Haverty


On 9/2/21 5:21 PM, touch--- via Internet-history wrote:
> Forwarded on behalf of Dan Lynch:
>
>> From: Bob Knight <bob at bobknight.net <mailto:bob at bobknight.net>>
>> Date: September 2, 2021 at 2:43:47 PM PDT
>> To: Dan Lynch <dan at lynch.com <mailto:dan at lynch.com>>
>> Subject: Re: Holly
>> Reply-To: bob at bobknight.net <mailto:bob at bobknight.net>
>>
>> ?Hi Dan - https://www.facebook.com/hollynelsonknight <https://www.facebook.com/hollynelsonknight> is something. No posts since May, but it's worth a shot.
>>
>> https://www.linkedin.com/in/holly-knight-ba0ab1/ <https://www.linkedin.com/in/holly-knight-ba0ab1/> is another bread crumb. Her last employer was Microsoft, so a query there may bear fruit.
>>
>> https://checkpeople.com/search/Holly-Knight/in-WA/Olympia/731f791c69394682b3a8903a30949d0c <https://checkpeople.com/search/Holly-Knight/in-WA/Olympia/731f791c69394682b3a8903a30949d0c> alleges a phone number of (206) 390-5012. But those sites are rife with errors, in my experience.
>>
>> I don't have an email, even though I "pack rat" emails back over 20 years.
>>
>> Hopefully one of these bears fruit.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Bob
>> 505.672.8049
> ?
> Joe Touch, temporal epistemologist
> www.strayalpha.com
>




From touch at strayalpha.com  Fri Sep  3 12:02:47 2021
From: touch at strayalpha.com (touch at strayalpha.com)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 12:02:47 -0700
Subject: [ih] Holly
In-Reply-To: <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>

> 
> On Sep 3, 2021, at 8:31 AM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> FYI, Holly's current email address:
> 
> Holly Knight <hollyk at live.com>
> 
> I'd tell her how to join this group, but it's been so long I can't remember...

It is at the bottom of every message you receive from the list (click the listinfo link).
- 
Internet-history mailing list
Internet-history at elists.isoc.org <mailto:Internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>
Joe

?
Joe Touch, temporal epistemologist
www.strayalpha.com

From jack at 3kitty.org  Fri Sep  3 13:01:47 2021
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 13:01:47 -0700
Subject: [ih] Holly
In-Reply-To: <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
Message-ID: <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>

Some of the "mailing lists" (groups, forums, whatever) that I get have 
similar links at the bottom of each message.?? But the link is supplied 
for "managing your account", and only works if you're already a member 
and supply your associated password to that site. Since my browser 
remembers such passwords and I'm invisibly logged in, it's often hard to 
tell if non-members can use the same link I use or need some other 
instructions to join.

I couldn't remember if this list behaves that way or not.

This seems like another example of silo-ization in the mailing 
functionality of the Internet, in that the techniques for "mailing 
lists" have never been standardized.?? Or if they have, it hasn't been 
followed uniformly.

/Jack


On 9/3/21 12:02 PM, touch at strayalpha.com wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 3, 2021, at 8:31 AM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history 
>> <internet-history at elists.isoc.org 
>> <mailto:internet-history at elists.isoc.org>> wrote:
>>
>> FYI, Holly's current email address:
>>
>> Holly Knight <hollyk at live.com <mailto:hollyk at live.com>>
>>
>> I'd tell her how to join this group, but it's been so long I can't 
>> remember...
>
> It is at the bottom of every message you receive from the list (click 
> the listinfo link).
> -
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org <mailto:Internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history 
> <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>
>
> Joe
>
> ?
> Joe Touch, temporal epistemologist
> www.strayalpha.com <http://www.strayalpha.com>



From bpurvy at gmail.com  Fri Sep  3 13:04:46 2021
From: bpurvy at gmail.com (Bob Purvy)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 13:04:46 -0700
Subject: [ih] Holly
In-Reply-To: <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>

Not being uniform is a feature, not a bug. It keeps the spammers in *their*
 silos.

On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 1:01 PM Jack Haverty via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> Some of the "mailing lists" (groups, forums, whatever) that I get have
> similar links at the bottom of each message.   But the link is supplied
> for "managing your account", and only works if you're already a member
> and supply your associated password to that site. Since my browser
> remembers such passwords and I'm invisibly logged in, it's often hard to
> tell if non-members can use the same link I use or need some other
> instructions to join.
>
> I couldn't remember if this list behaves that way or not.
>
> This seems like another example of silo-ization in the mailing
> functionality of the Internet, in that the techniques for "mailing
> lists" have never been standardized.   Or if they have, it hasn't been
> followed uniformly.
>
> /Jack
>
>
> On 9/3/21 12:02 PM, touch at strayalpha.com wrote:
> >>
> >> On Sep 3, 2021, at 8:31 AM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history
> >> <internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> >> <mailto:internet-history at elists.isoc.org>> wrote:
> >>
> >> FYI, Holly's current email address:
> >>
> >> Holly Knight <hollyk at live.com <mailto:hollyk at live.com>>
> >>
> >> I'd tell her how to join this group, but it's been so long I can't
> >> remember...
> >
> > It is at the bottom of every message you receive from the list (click
> > the listinfo link).
> > -
> > Internet-history mailing list
> > Internet-history at elists.isoc.org <mailto:
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
> > https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
> > <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>
> >
> > Joe
> >
> > ?
> > Joe Touch, temporal epistemologist
> > www.strayalpha.com <http://www.strayalpha.com>
>
> --
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>


From dhc at dcrocker.net  Fri Sep  3 13:08:15 2021
From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 13:08:15 -0700
Subject: [ih] Holly
In-Reply-To: <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <43bd86c6-1ac5-b875-d7d1-bd2281091a65@dcrocker.net>

On 9/3/2021 1:04 PM, Bob Purvy via Internet-history wrote:
> Not being uniform is a feature, not a bug. It keeps the spammers in*their*
>   silos.

Not really.  It just makes their probing software try additional 
alternatives.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net


From bpurvy at gmail.com  Fri Sep  3 13:11:20 2021
From: bpurvy at gmail.com (Bob Purvy)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 13:11:20 -0700
Subject: [ih] Holly
In-Reply-To: <43bd86c6-1ac5-b875-d7d1-bd2281091a65@dcrocker.net>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <43bd86c6-1ac5-b875-d7d1-bd2281091a65@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <CAFq6nVFhAfPvn_O90-J2MJyWSMWzjO_oNBoLSVjt2uB+etiefg@mail.gmail.com>

You're right, I should have said "makes their jobs more difficult."

Maybe not by much, but every little bit helps.

On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 1:08 PM Dave Crocker <dhc at dcrocker.net> wrote:

> On 9/3/2021 1:04 PM, Bob Purvy via Internet-history wrote:
> > Not being uniform is a feature, not a bug. It keeps the spammers
> in*their*
> >   silos.
>
> Not really.  It just makes their probing software try additional
> alternatives.
>
> d/
>
> --
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net
>


From bernie at fantasyfarm.com  Fri Sep  3 13:18:02 2021
From: bernie at fantasyfarm.com (Bernie Cosell)
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2021 16:18:02 -0400
Subject: [ih] Holly
In-Reply-To: <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>

i don't know about the links at the end, but do these links not work?
{in the header of every message}

List-Id: "Discussions about Internet History."
 <internet-history.elists.isoc.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/options/internet-history>,
 <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/>
List-Post: <mailto:internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
List-Help: <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>,
 <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=subscribe>

/b\

                    Bernie Cosell
          bernie at fantasyfarm.com
--- Too many people, too few sheep ---


From dan at lynch.com  Fri Sep  3 14:40:13 2021
From: dan at lynch.com (Dan Lynch)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 14:40:13 -0700
Subject: [ih] Holly
In-Reply-To: <43bd86c6-1ac5-b875-d7d1-bd2281091a65@dcrocker.net>
References: <43bd86c6-1ac5-b875-d7d1-bd2281091a65@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <8F29A2EC-1E56-40EF-83C5-AE0D5C031B22@lynch.com>

And it even prevents members like me from getting help. Let?s see if this message comes through?

Dan

Cell 650-776-7313

> On Sep 3, 2021, at 1:08 PM, Dave Crocker via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> ?On 9/3/2021 1:04 PM, Bob Purvy via Internet-history wrote:
>> Not being uniform is a feature, not a bug. It keeps the spammers in*their*
>>  silos.
> 
> Not really.  It just makes their probing software try additional alternatives.
> 
> d/
> 
> -- 
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net
> -- 
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history



From touch at strayalpha.com  Fri Sep  3 14:44:35 2021
From: touch at strayalpha.com (touch at strayalpha.com)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 14:44:35 -0700
Subject: [ih] Holly
In-Reply-To: <8F29A2EC-1E56-40EF-83C5-AE0D5C031B22@lynch.com>
References: <43bd86c6-1ac5-b875-d7d1-bd2281091a65@dcrocker.net>
 <8F29A2EC-1E56-40EF-83C5-AE0D5C031B22@lynch.com>
Message-ID: <201FDDC3-B588-4999-A0BF-98DFFA074634@strayalpha.com>

You can always send to internet-history-admin at elists.isoc.org <mailto:internet-history-admin at elists.isoc.org> for assistance.
(Which comes to me anyway)

?
Joe Touch, temporal epistemologist
www.strayalpha.com

> On Sep 3, 2021, at 2:40 PM, Dan Lynch via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> And it even prevents members like me from getting help. Let?s see if this message comes through?
> 
> Dan
> 
> Cell 650-776-7313
> 
>> On Sep 3, 2021, at 1:08 PM, Dave Crocker via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>> 
>> ?On 9/3/2021 1:04 PM, Bob Purvy via Internet-history wrote:
>>> Not being uniform is a feature, not a bug. It keeps the spammers in*their*
>>> silos.
>> 
>> Not really.  It just makes their probing software try additional alternatives.
>> 
>> d/
>> 
>> -- 
>> Dave Crocker
>> Brandenburg InternetWorking
>> bbiw.net
>> -- 
>> Internet-history mailing list
>> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
>> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
> 
> -- 
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history



From jack at 3kitty.org  Fri Sep  3 15:04:06 2021
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 15:04:06 -0700
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>
Message-ID: <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>

I didn't know about those header fields until you pointed them out. The 
mail app I use (Thunderbird)? doesn't appear to do anything with those 
fields, but I can see them only if I enable "Show All Headers".? That of 
course then makes a whole pageful of obscure stuff appear as visual 
noise. ? Perhaps other mail apps are more clever and provide something 
like a set of commands like "Join list" when they see such header 
fields.??? Those headers are an example of what I meant as not being 
standardized or widely implemented/adopted.

/Jack


On 9/3/21 1:18 PM, Bernie Cosell via Internet-history wrote:
> i don't know about the links at the end, but do these links not work?
> {in the header of every message}
>
> List-Id: "Discussions about Internet History."
> <internet-history.elists.isoc.org>
> List-Unsubscribe: 
> <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/options/internet-history>,
> <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> List-Archive: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/>
> List-Post: <mailto:internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=help>
> List-Subscribe: 
> <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>,
> <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=subscribe>
>
> /b\
>
> ?????????????????? Bernie Cosell
> ???????? bernie at fantasyfarm.com
> --- Too many people, too few sheep ---




From sob at sobco.com  Fri Sep  3 15:20:01 2021
From: sob at sobco.com (Scott O. Bradner)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 18:20:01 -0400
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>
 <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <26AF029D-CA58-4C5C-9B70-3964EBA5391F@sobco.com>

Apple mail (at least some versions) tells you if the mail is through a mailing list and asks if you want to unsubscribe

Scott

> On Sep 3, 2021, at 6:04 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> I didn't know about those header fields until you pointed them out. The mail app I use (Thunderbird)  doesn't appear to do anything with those fields, but I can see them only if I enable "Show All Headers".  That of course then makes a whole pageful of obscure stuff appear as visual noise.   Perhaps other mail apps are more clever and provide something like a set of commands like "Join list" when they see such header fields.    Those headers are an example of what I meant as not being standardized or widely implemented/adopted.
> 
> /Jack
> 
> 
> On 9/3/21 1:18 PM, Bernie Cosell via Internet-history wrote:
>> i don't know about the links at the end, but do these links not work?
>> {in the header of every message}
>> 
>> List-Id: "Discussions about Internet History."
>> <internet-history.elists.isoc.org>
>> List-Unsubscribe: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/options/internet-history>,
>> <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>> List-Archive: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/>
>> List-Post: <mailto:internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
>> List-Help: <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=help>
>> List-Subscribe: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>,
>> <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=subscribe>
>> 
>> /b\
>> 
>>                    Bernie Cosell
>>          bernie at fantasyfarm.com
>> --- Too many people, too few sheep ---
> 
> 
> -- 
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history



From casner at acm.org  Fri Sep  3 15:42:24 2021
From: casner at acm.org (Stephen Casner)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 15:42:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>
 <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.21.9999.2109031538340.83302@auge.attlocal.net>

On Fri, 3 Sep 2021, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:

> I didn't know about those header fields until you pointed them out. The mail
> app I use (Thunderbird)  doesn't appear to do anything with those fields, but
> I can see them only if I enable "Show All Headers".  That of course then makes
> a whole pageful of obscure stuff appear as visual noise.   Perhaps other mail
> apps are more clever and provide something like a set of commands like "Join
> list" when they see such header fields.    Those headers are an example of
> what I meant as not being standardized or widely implemented/adopted.

Good old text-based Alpine, descended from Mark Crispin's Pine, shows
the folowing line below such messages, where "email list management
information" is a link that becomes active when the cursor is there:

    [ Note: This message contains email list management information ]


                                                        -- Steve


From shiva at sewingwitch.com  Fri Sep  3 16:08:12 2021
From: shiva at sewingwitch.com (Kenneth Porter)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 16:08:12 -0700
Subject: [ih] Mailing list standards (was: Holly)
In-Reply-To: <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <4ac8600f-1fb9-d244-7d15-9f7a22579d81@sewingwitch.com>

On 9/3/2021 1:01 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> This seems like another example of silo-ization in the mailing 
> functionality of the Internet, in that the techniques for "mailing 
> lists" have never been standardized.?? Or if they have, it hasn't been 
> followed uniformly. 

They've been standardized:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5983#section-5

The format of the List-ID header has a defined format and I use that as 
a spam indicator, since some spammers try to use list headers to sneak 
spam past the filters. A correct List-ID looks like a domain name in 
angle brackets and matches this pattern: /<([\w-]+)(\.[\w-]+)+>/



From johnl at iecc.com  Fri Sep  3 20:12:45 2021
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 3 Sep 2021 23:12:45 -0400
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <20210904031247.63FAE2765328@ary.qy>

It appears that Jack Haverty via Internet-history <jack at 3kitty.org> said:
>I didn't know about those header fields until you pointed them out. ...
>fields.??? Those headers are an example of what I meant as not being 
>standardized or widely implemented/adopted.

Most of them were defined in RFC 2369 in 1998, List-ID by RFC 2919 in 2001.  

Lots of mail programs recognize them and do something with them, but
for some reason not Thunderbird.

Thunderbird seems sort of stuck, getting upgrades thrown over the wall from
the Firefox project but still missing some fairly basic stuff like the list
headers.

R's,
John


>On 9/3/21 1:18 PM, Bernie Cosell via Internet-history wrote:
>> i don't know about the links at the end, but do these links not work?
>> {in the header of every message}
>>
>> List-Id: "Discussions about Internet History."
>> <internet-history.elists.isoc.org>
>> List-Unsubscribe: 
>> <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/options/internet-history>,
>> <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>> List-Archive: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/>
>> List-Post: <mailto:internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
>> List-Help: <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=help>
>> List-Subscribe: 
>> <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>,
>> <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=subscribe>


From jack at 3kitty.org  Fri Sep  3 21:16:26 2021
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2021 21:16:26 -0700
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <20210904031247.63FAE2765328@ary.qy>
References: <20210904031247.63FAE2765328@ary.qy>
Message-ID: <2ae99978-c9e4-c5ba-02b5-331d8ab886eb@3kitty.org>

I took a quick look at those RFCs, and the 5983 one.? RFCs 2369 and 2919 
are "proposed standards" and 5983 is labelled "Experimental". Is there 
some other place to look that indicates these were actually later 
adopted as official "standards"?

Regardless of their status, you just described exactly what I observed:? 
"Lots of mail programs recognize them and do something with them "?? The 
phrase "do something" doesn't sound like a definition of a standard.

Those RFCs seem to define the format of several "header fields", but say 
nothing about how the information contained therein should be used by 
mail senders, receivers, list managers, etc. as they handle mail.

An analogy might be that there are RFCs which define the format of TCP 
and IP headers.? But they also define what the software handling those 
datagrams should do with that information.? For example, the TCP header 
contains a field for Sequence number, but it also specifies what a 
program sending or receiving must do with the contents of those 
fields.?? They specify the Formats and the Protocols.

Just out of curiousity, I let my mail program display all headers, and I 
looked at messages I've recently received on several dozen mailing 
lists.? Surprisingly, many contain "List-*" fields.?? But some have 
several such fields, while others have only one.?? Several mailing lists 
have no List-* headers at all (e.g., nextdoor.com). It appears, from my 
admittedly tiny data, that there are no standards for which of those 
headers must be created when a message is sent to a list of people.

So, "Lots of mail programs recognize them and do something with them" is 
the standard?

That's what I meant by "not being standardized or widely 
implemented/adopted."? The formats are defined; the associated 
protocol(s) are not.?? (Or I'm just not aware of them, it's been a long 
time since I was involved in mail protocols.)

/Jack Haverty


On 9/3/21 8:12 PM, John Levine wrote:
> It appears that Jack Haverty via Internet-history <jack at 3kitty.org> said:
>> I didn't know about those header fields until you pointed them out. ...
>> fields.??? Those headers are an example of what I meant as not being
>> standardized or widely implemented/adopted.
> Most of them were defined in RFC 2369 in 1998, List-ID by RFC 2919 in 2001.
>
> Lots of mail programs recognize them and do something with them, but
> for some reason not Thunderbird.
>
> Thunderbird seems sort of stuck, getting upgrades thrown over the wall from
> the Firefox project but still missing some fairly basic stuff like the list
> headers.
>
> R's,
> John
>
>
>> On 9/3/21 1:18 PM, Bernie Cosell via Internet-history wrote:
>>> i don't know about the links at the end, but do these links not work?
>>> {in the header of every message}
>>>
>>> List-Id: "Discussions about Internet History."
>>> <internet-history.elists.isoc.org>
>>> List-Unsubscribe:
>>> <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/options/internet-history>,
>>> <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>> List-Archive: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/>
>>> List-Post: <mailto:internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
>>> List-Help: <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=help>
>>> List-Subscribe:
>>> <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>,
>>> <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=subscribe>




From brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com  Fri Sep  3 21:39:26 2021
From: brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter)
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2021 16:39:26 +1200
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <2ae99978-c9e4-c5ba-02b5-331d8ab886eb@3kitty.org>
References: <20210904031247.63FAE2765328@ary.qy>
 <2ae99978-c9e4-c5ba-02b5-331d8ab886eb@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <ee3da0de-a33b-cd51-e23e-18ce80ff0425@gmail.com>

On 04-Sep-21 16:16, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> I took a quick look at those RFCs, and the 5983 one.? RFCs 2369 and 2919 
> are "proposed standards" and 5983 is labelled "Experimental". Is there 
> some other place to look that indicates these were actually later 
> adopted as official "standards"?

No. The status indicated by the RFC Editor is definitive. If a document
has been obsoleted or updated, that is also indicated, so
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5983 tells you that RFC5983 has been
obsoleted by https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6783, which is
Informational.

As I think Fred Baker was the first to say, the Internet runs on Proposed
Standards (except when it's running on Historic, Experimental or
Informational RFCs, not to mention that the whole BGP-4 system ran on an
Internet-Draft for a while). Fortunately, running code trumps rough
consensus, and they both trump the formal standards process.

For an entertaining snapshot, see the following trio of entries from the
RFC index, and think about actual reality in mid-1994 (and note that
the first one is still officially a Draft Standard):

1629 Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation in the Internet. R. Colella, R.
     Callon, E. Gardner, Y. Rekhter. May 1994. (Format: TXT, HTML)
     (Obsoletes RFC1237) (Status: DRAFT STANDARD) (DOI: 10.17487/RFC1629) 


1630 Universal Resource Identifiers in WWW: A Unifying Syntax for the
     Expression of Names and Addresses of Objects on the Network as used
     in the World-Wide Web. T. Berners-Lee. June 1994. (Format: TXT,
     HTML) (Status: INFORMATIONAL) (DOI: 10.17487/RFC1630) 

1631 The IP Network Address Translator (NAT). K. Egevang, P. Francis. May
     1994. (Format: TXT, HTML) (Obsoleted by RFC3022) (Status:
     INFORMATIONAL) (DOI: 10.17487/RFC1631)

Regards,
    Brian

> 
> Regardless of their status, you just described exactly what I observed:? 
> "Lots of mail programs recognize them and do something with them "?? The 
> phrase "do something" doesn't sound like a definition of a standard.
> 
> Those RFCs seem to define the format of several "header fields", but say 
> nothing about how the information contained therein should be used by 
> mail senders, receivers, list managers, etc. as they handle mail.
> 
> An analogy might be that there are RFCs which define the format of TCP 
> and IP headers.? But they also define what the software handling those 
> datagrams should do with that information.? For example, the TCP header 
> contains a field for Sequence number, but it also specifies what a 
> program sending or receiving must do with the contents of those 
> fields.?? They specify the Formats and the Protocols.
> 
> Just out of curiousity, I let my mail program display all headers, and I 
> looked at messages I've recently received on several dozen mailing 
> lists.? Surprisingly, many contain "List-*" fields.?? But some have 
> several such fields, while others have only one.?? Several mailing lists 
> have no List-* headers at all (e.g., nextdoor.com). It appears, from my 

> admittedly tiny data, that there are no standards for which of those 
> headers must be created when a message is sent to a list of people.
> 
> So, "Lots of mail programs recognize them and do something with them" is 
> the standard?
> 
> That's what I meant by "not being standardized or widely 
> implemented/adopted."? The formats are defined; the associated 
> protocol(s) are not.?? (Or I'm just not aware of them, it's been a long 
> time since I was involved in mail protocols.)
> 
> /Jack Haverty
> 
> 
> On 9/3/21 8:12 PM, John Levine wrote:
>> It appears that Jack Haverty via Internet-history <jack at 3kitty.org> said:
>>> I didn't know about those header fields until you pointed them out. ...
>>> fields.??? Those headers are an example of what I meant as not being
>>> standardized or widely implemented/adopted.
>> Most of them were defined in RFC 2369 in 1998, List-ID by RFC 2919 in 2001.
>>
>> Lots of mail programs recognize them and do something with them, but
>> for some reason not Thunderbird.
>>
>> Thunderbird seems sort of stuck, getting upgrades thrown over the wall 
from
>> the Firefox project but still missing some fairly basic stuff like the 
list
>> headers.
>>
>> R's,
>> John
>>
>>
>>> On 9/3/21 1:18 PM, Bernie Cosell via Internet-history wrote:
>>>> i don't know about the links at the end, but do these links not work?
>>>> {in the header of every message}
>>>>
>>>> List-Id: "Discussions about Internet History."
>>>> <internet-history.elists.isoc.org>
>>>> List-Unsubscribe:
>>>> <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/options/internet-history>,
>>>> <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>>>> List-Archive: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/>
>>>> List-Post: <mailto:internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
>>>> List-Help: <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=help>
>>>> List-Subscribe:
>>>> <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history>,
>>>> <mailto:internet-history-request at elists.isoc.org?subject=subscribe>
> 
> 



From dhc at dcrocker.net  Sat Sep  4 06:48:27 2021
From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2021 06:48:27 -0700
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>
 <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <039e6b25-b378-85cb-7b2e-0dba7351080b@dcrocker.net>

On 9/3/2021 3:04 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> I didn't know about those header fields until you pointed them out. The 
> mail app I use (Thunderbird)? doesn't appear to do anything with those 
> fields, but I can see them only if I enable "Show All Headers". 

I am responding to your email by using Thunderbird's Reply to List 
command.  It's had that ability for so long, I don't remember whether it 
is built in or I added an extension that does it.  The advantage of 
using that command is that it drops off all of the individual addresses.



On 9/3/2021 9:16 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> Regardless of their status, you just described exactly what I
> observed: "Lots of mail programs recognize them and do something with
> them "   The phrase "do something" doesn't sound like a definition of
> a standard.

Even in lower layers, there is information defined that does not include 
specification of what to 'do' with it.  Rather, the specification serves 
to standardize the syntax for finding the information and the semantics 
of what it means.  It leaves the 'doing something' as a consideration 
outside that specification.,

Consider RFC 791 and "source address".

There is no text in that specification that says what a receiver is to 
do with it.

(There's some text about sending-side and some text about maintaining 
the field when doing source routing.)

Sometimes, it's deemed reasonable to specify common syntax and semantics 
and carriage of information, without specifying what the current layer 
or higher-layers of a system will do with it.  This allows multiple 
consumers and it allows experimentation.

This distinction often causes confusion.  RFC 9078 defines labeling of 
emojis in a message as having the semantic of a 'reaction' to a previous 
message.  But how should user agents /use/ it?  The spec has a tiny 
amount of discussion, but doesn't tell a recipient system what something 
to do with it.  That's because there are lots of entirely reasonable 
choices and there is no need to constrain them.



d/
-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net


From el at lisse.na  Sat Sep  4 08:36:54 2021
From: el at lisse.na (Dr Eberhard W Lisse)
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2021 17:36:54 +0200
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <039e6b25-b378-85cb-7b2e-0dba7351080b@dcrocker.net>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>
 <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
 <039e6b25-b378-85cb-7b2e-0dba7351080b@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <5089bcf9-fef4-458e-a8e4-7f593a6a5068@Spark>

Thank you, this is a useful command. I shall look for it and if necessary install the add-on

el

?
Sent from Dr Lisse?s iPhone
On 4. Sep 2021, 15:48 +0200, Dave Crocker via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>, wrote:
> [...]
>
> I am responding to your email by using Thunderbird's Reply to List
> command. It's had that ability for so long, I don't remember whether it
> is built in or I added an extension that does it. The advantage of
> using that command is that it drops off all of the individual addresses.
>
> [...]


From jack at 3kitty.org  Sat Sep  4 11:51:48 2021
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2021 11:51:48 -0700
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <039e6b25-b378-85cb-7b2e-0dba7351080b@dcrocker.net>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>
 <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
 <039e6b25-b378-85cb-7b2e-0dba7351080b@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <259b5312-76f6-d58a-18a5-96d714cc6556@3kitty.org>

So that's what Reply-List does and why it sometimes appears as an option 
for a message!

I admit being a victim of the Confusion.?? I often get multiple copies 
of mailing-list messages.? Some messages offer the "Reply-List" choice; 
others just show "Reply".

 ?After a bit of experimentation, it seems that what happens depends on 
how the original message arrived.? It appears that when mailing-list 
messages somehow get my email address into a CC or TO field, behavior of 
the reply options varies depending on whether I reply to the copy that 
came through the mailing list or the one that came direct.

E.g., "Reply" to a message that came direct goes to the mailing-list; 
"Reply" to the same message, but using the copy that was delivered by 
the list goes back to only the original sender (or maybe it's using the 
"Reply To" field).

So depending on which copy of a message I reply to, different people get 
my reply.?? If I "Reply" to the copy I got direct, the mailing list 
doesn't get my reply at all - might explain a lot of "I never got your 
message" reports.

I've never seen anything like "List-Unsubscribe" offered in a menu.?? I 
guess Thunderbird doesn't do anything with those other List-* fields.?? 
Or perhaps there's some options somewhere in the Preferences that 
changes the behavior or enables more commands.

Confusing...?? I wonder if the other email apps I use, on smartphones, 
tablets, or web app, exhibit the same behavior.

/Jack
PS - I have some historical comments on RFC 791 -- I'll send those 
separately.??? To avoid confusion...


On 9/4/21 6:48 AM, Dave Crocker via Internet-history wrote:
> On 9/3/2021 3:04 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
>> I didn't know about those header fields until you pointed them out. 
>> The mail app I use (Thunderbird) doesn't appear to do anything with 
>> those fields, but I can see them only if I enable "Show All Headers". 
>
> I am responding to your email by using Thunderbird's Reply to List 
> command.? It's had that ability for so long, I don't remember whether 
> it is built in or I added an extension that does it.? The advantage of 
> using that command is that it drops off all of the individual addresses.
>
>
>
> On 9/3/2021 9:16 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
>> Regardless of their status, you just described exactly what I
>> observed: "Lots of mail programs recognize them and do something with
>> them "?? The phrase "do something" doesn't sound like a definition of
>> a standard.
>
> Even in lower layers, there is information defined that does not 
> include specification of what to 'do' with it.? Rather, the 
> specification serves to standardize the syntax for finding the 
> information and the semantics of what it means.? It leaves the 'doing 
> something' as a consideration outside that specification.,
>
> Consider RFC 791 and "source address".
>
> There is no text in that specification that says what a receiver is to 
> do with it.
>
> (There's some text about sending-side and some text about maintaining 
> the field when doing source routing.)
>
> Sometimes, it's deemed reasonable to specify common syntax and 
> semantics and carriage of information, without specifying what the 
> current layer or higher-layers of a system will do with it.? This 
> allows multiple consumers and it allows experimentation.
>
> This distinction often causes confusion.? RFC 9078 defines labeling of 
> emojis in a message as having the semantic of a 'reaction' to a 
> previous message.? But how should user agents /use/ it?? The spec has 
> a tiny amount of discussion, but doesn't tell a recipient system what 
> something to do with it.? That's because there are lots of entirely 
> reasonable choices and there is no need to constrain them.
>
>
>
> d/




From olejacobsen at me.com  Sat Sep  4 11:59:12 2021
From: olejacobsen at me.com (Ole Jacobsen)
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2021 11:59:12 -0700
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <259b5312-76f6-d58a-18a5-96d714cc6556@3kitty.org>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>
 <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
 <039e6b25-b378-85cb-7b2e-0dba7351080b@dcrocker.net>
 <259b5312-76f6-d58a-18a5-96d714cc6556@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <8852635A-0A52-49F4-A295-3A186C437A55@me.com>

Notice how this is displayed in Apple Mail:



This is really crazy because not only has it changed the sender name to "Jack Haverty via Internet-history"
it has ALSO changed the recipient name to "touch--via..." and look what happens when I started this
reply:



Dave Crocker??

I know that this is a "feature" of my mail agent, but it also seems to be related to
how ISOC set up its mailing lists.

Yikes.

Ole

> On Sep 4, 2021, at 11:51, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> So that's what Reply-List does and why it sometimes appears as an option for a message!
> 
> I admit being a victim of the Confusion.   I often get multiple copies of mailing-list messages.  Some messages offer the "Reply-List" choice; others just show "Reply".
> 
>  After a bit of experimentation, it seems that what happens depends on how the original message arrived.  It appears that when mailing-list messages somehow get my email address into a CC or TO field, behavior of the reply options varies depending on whether I reply to the copy that came through the mailing list or the one that came direct.
> 
> E.g., "Reply" to a message that came direct goes to the mailing-list; "Reply" to the same message, but using the copy that was delivered by the list goes back to only the original sender (or maybe it's using the "Reply To" field).
> 
> So depending on which copy of a message I reply to, different people get my reply.   If I "Reply" to the copy I got direct, the mailing list doesn't get my reply at all - might explain a lot of "I never got your message" reports.
> 
> I've never seen anything like "List-Unsubscribe" offered in a menu.   I guess Thunderbird doesn't do anything with those other List-* fields.   Or perhaps there's some options somewhere in the Preferences that changes the behavior or enables more commands.
> 
> Confusing...?  I wonder if the other email apps I use, on smartphones, tablets, or web app, exhibit the same behavior.
> 
> /Jack
> PS - I have some historical comments on RFC 791 -- I'll send those separately.    To avoid confusion...
> 
> 
> On 9/4/21 6:48 AM, Dave Crocker via Internet-history wrote:
>> On 9/3/2021 3:04 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
>>> I didn't know about those header fields until you pointed them out. The mail app I use (Thunderbird) doesn't appear to do anything with those fields, but I can see them only if I enable "Show All Headers". 
>> 
>> I am responding to your email by using Thunderbird's Reply to List command.  It's had that ability for so long, I don't remember whether it is built in or I added an extension that does it.  The advantage of using that command is that it drops off all of the individual addresses.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 9/3/2021 9:16 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
>>> Regardless of their status, you just described exactly what I
>>> observed: "Lots of mail programs recognize them and do something with
>>> them "   The phrase "do something" doesn't sound like a definition of
>>> a standard.
>> 
>> Even in lower layers, there is information defined that does not include specification of what to 'do' with it.  Rather, the specification serves to standardize the syntax for finding the information and the semantics of what it means.  It leaves the 'doing something' as a consideration outside that specification.,
>> 
>> Consider RFC 791 and "source address".
>> 
>> There is no text in that specification that says what a receiver is to do with it.
>> 
>> (There's some text about sending-side and some text about maintaining the field when doing source routing.)
>> 
>> Sometimes, it's deemed reasonable to specify common syntax and semantics and carriage of information, without specifying what the current layer or higher-layers of a system will do with it.  This allows multiple consumers and it allows experimentation.
>> 
>> This distinction often causes confusion.  RFC 9078 defines labeling of emojis in a message as having the semantic of a 'reaction' to a previous message.  But how should user agents /use/ it?  The spec has a tiny amount of discussion, but doesn't tell a recipient system what something to do with it.  That's because there are lots of entirely reasonable choices and there is no need to constrain them.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> d/
> 
> 
> -- 
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history

Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher
The Internet Protocol Journal
Office: +1 415-550-9433
Cell:   +1 415-370-4628
Web: protocoljournal.org
E-mail: olejacobsen at me.com
E-mail: ole at protocoljournal.org
Skype: organdemo





From bernie at fantasyfarm.com  Sat Sep  4 12:19:47 2021
From: bernie at fantasyfarm.com (Bernie Cosell)
Date: Sat, 04 Sep 2021 15:19:47 -0400
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <8852635A-0A52-49F4-A295-3A186C437A55@me.com>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>
 <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
 <039e6b25-b378-85cb-7b2e-0dba7351080b@dcrocker.net>
 <259b5312-76f6-d58a-18a5-96d714cc6556@3kitty.org>
 <8852635A-0A52-49F4-A295-3A186C437A55@me.com>
Message-ID: <17bb240a838.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>

On September 4, 2021 14:59:20 Ole Jacobsen via Internet-history 
<internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> Notice how this is displayed in Apple Mail:
>
>
>
> This is really crazy because not only has it changed the sender name to 
> "Jack Haverty via Internet-history"

that's necessary.  the problem is that some isps have "registered"
every smtp server that is allowed to originate email  from their
domain.   when you send through a mailing list the originating
server isn't your server but the mailing list manager's server.
many, but not all, servers upon receiving it will bounce it as
not coming from one of the author's domain's allowed server.
what mailman does {and Likely other mailing list managers}
is replace all of the apparent origination info with "from
the mailing list"  generally {dunno on this list} mailman will
put the author's original email address in as a "cc:"

>
/b\
                    Bernie Cosell
          bernie at fantasyfarm.com
--- Too many people, too few sheep ---


From shiva at sewingwitch.com  Sat Sep  4 12:57:35 2021
From: shiva at sewingwitch.com (Kenneth Porter)
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2021 12:57:35 -0700
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <259b5312-76f6-d58a-18a5-96d714cc6556@3kitty.org>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>
 <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
 <039e6b25-b378-85cb-7b2e-0dba7351080b@dcrocker.net>
 <259b5312-76f6-d58a-18a5-96d714cc6556@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <f9e2d1df-8612-a75b-7086-26d3549fbccf@sewingwitch.com>

On 9/4/2021 11:51 AM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
>
> I've never seen anything like "List-Unsubscribe" offered in a menu.?? 
> I guess Thunderbird doesn't do anything with those other List-* 
> fields.?? Or perhaps there's some options somewhere in the Preferences 
> that changes the behavior or enables more commands. 

Perhaps we could upvote this bug:

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1512453

(I'd suggest providing a patch, but I've found Thunderbird hard to 
build. I did try recently on Windows 10 and had much greater success, 
but it was still quite complicated.)




From dhc at dcrocker.net  Sat Sep  4 15:19:16 2021
From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2021 15:19:16 -0700
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <259b5312-76f6-d58a-18a5-96d714cc6556@3kitty.org>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>
 <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
 <039e6b25-b378-85cb-7b2e-0dba7351080b@dcrocker.net>
 <259b5312-76f6-d58a-18a5-96d714cc6556@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <000617d0-d4d5-0d3d-6a09-553de14d62a7@dcrocker.net>

Replying to multiple messages on the thread, to reduce my posting count, 
and since they are all related...


On 9/4/2021 11:51 AM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> So that's what Reply-List does and why it sometimes appears as an option 
> for a message!
> 
> I admit being a victim of the Confusion.?? I often get multiple copies 
> of mailing-list messages.? Some messages offer the "Reply-List" choice; 
> others just show "Reply".
> 
>  ?After a bit of experimentation, it seems that what happens depends on 
> how the original message arrived.? It appears that when mailing-list 
> messages somehow get my email address into a CC or TO field, behavior of 
> the reply options varies depending on whether I reply to the copy that 
> came through the mailing list or the one that came direct.

Your direct copy does not have the List-* header fields.  The message 
didn't go through the list system.  So you have only the usual 
reply/reply-all choices.

Via the list, the header fields are present and your user agent can make 
some choices, such as Reply-List, of course.

User agents vary on whether Reply defaults to reply-all or reply-author. 
 From very early and very hard experience I learned -- as I suspect all 
of you have -- that unintentionally replying to all recipients, such as 
is certain to happen when that's the default, ensures results varying 
from embarrassing to professionally disruptive.



> E.g., "Reply" to a message that came direct goes to the mailing-list; 

That's not a Thunderbird default, as I recall.  It certainly shouldn't 
be, per above.


> I've never seen anything like "List-Unsubscribe" offered in a menu. 

Yeah, one could wish for more integrated awareness of list issues in MUAs.

Such vagaries are, of course, the benefit and bain of having freedom to 
design mail user agents... freely.


  9/4/2021 11:59 AM, Ole Jacobsen via Internet-history wrote:
 > Notice how this is displayed in Apple Mail:

If there was supposed to be something like a graphic here, I didn't see it.


 > This is really crazy because not only has it changed the sender name 
to "Jack Haverty via Internet-history"
 > it has ALSO changed the recipient name to "touch--via..." and look 
what happens when I started this
 > reply:

Missing image, again?

Anyhow, it appears you haven't been seeing the From: field display-name 
modifications that have been going on since DMARC started getting 
expanded use, some years ago.

For author domains that publish a DMARC record -- and sometimes for all 
authors -- some/many mailing lists now patch the From: field to avoid 
rejection by final recipients.  Mailing lists break DMARC validation.

The hack is to change the From: field address, so it doesn't have the 
author's domain name, and to modify the display-name so it signals that 
a modification took place.  They also create a Reply-to field (if there 
wasn't already one -- and sometimes even if there is -- adding the 
original author's address, so that recipients can still reply to the author.

 > Dave Crocker??
 >
 > I know that this is a "feature" of my mail agent, but it also seems 
to be related to
 > how ISOC set up its mailing lists.

I think they were relatively late to the game in using this hack.  But, 
yeah.



On 9/4/2021 12:19 PM, Bernie Cosell via Internet-history wrote:
 > that's necessary.  the problem is that some isps have "registered"
 > every smtp server that is allowed to originate email  from their
 > domain.   when you send through a mailing list the originating
 > server isn't your server but the mailing list manager's server.
 > many, but not all, servers upon receiving it will bounce it as
 > not coming from one of the author's domain's allowed server.
 > what mailman does {and Likely other mailing list managers}
 > is replace all of the apparent origination info with "from
 > the mailing list"  generally {dunno on this list} mailman will
 > put the author's original email address in as a "cc:"

It's a bit different than that.

The actual culprit is DMARC, which enforces authenticated From header 
field domain name use.  If there is a DMARC record for that domain and 
the domain isn't authenticated, receiving systems might choose to reject 
the mail or handle it differentially.

Authenticated?  This is done by SPF or DKIM.  SPF is the mechanism that 
'authorizes' sending MTAs.  It validates for only one email hop.  DKIM 
uses a digital signature mechanism on some of the message object.  It 
works through regular email relaying, but pretty much never through 
mailing lists, which change some of the data that are part of the DKIM 
signature.

There's a recent, added mechanism, called ARC, that is intended to 
mitigate this mailing list DMARC problem.  We'll see how it fares.



On 9/4/2021 12:57 PM, Kenneth Porter via Internet-history wrote:
 > Perhaps we could upvote this bug:
 >
 > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1512453

Please don't.  This is a truly terrible suggestion.  Understandable. 
But terrible.

A mailing list is a user-level process.  The mail is delivered and then 
re-posted.  User agents need to do whatever they feel reasonable.  There 
is 45 years of established practice for much of this.

DMARC has distorted things enough.



d/
-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net


From steffen at sdaoden.eu  Mon Sep  6 06:40:11 2021
From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso)
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2021 15:40:11 +0200
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <000617d0-d4d5-0d3d-6a09-553de14d62a7@dcrocker.net>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>
 <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
 <039e6b25-b378-85cb-7b2e-0dba7351080b@dcrocker.net>
 <259b5312-76f6-d58a-18a5-96d714cc6556@3kitty.org>
 <000617d0-d4d5-0d3d-6a09-553de14d62a7@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <20210906134011.zCCVl%steffen@sdaoden.eu>

dcrocker at bbiw.net wrote in
 <000617d0-d4d5-0d3d-6a09-553de14d62a7 at dcrocker.net>:
 ...
 |For author domains that publish a DMARC record -- and sometimes for all 
 |authors -- some/many mailing lists now patch the From: field to avoid 
 |rejection by final recipients.  Mailing lists break DMARC validation.
 |
 |The hack is to change the From: field address, so it doesn't have the 
 |author's domain name, and to modify the display-name so it signals that 
 |a modification took place.  They also create a Reply-to field (if there 
 |wasn't already one -- and sometimes even if there is -- adding the 
 |original author's address, so that recipients can still reply to the \
 |author.

  ...
 |The actual culprit is DMARC, which enforces authenticated From header 
 |field domain name use.  If there is a DMARC record for that domain and 
 |the domain isn't authenticated, receiving systems might choose to reject 
 |the mail or handle it differentially.
 |
 |Authenticated?  This is done by SPF or DKIM.  SPF is the mechanism that 
 |'authorizes' sending MTAs.  It validates for only one email hop.  DKIM 
 |uses a digital signature mechanism on some of the message object.  It 
 |works through regular email relaying, but pretty much never through 
 |mailing lists, which change some of the data that are part of the DKIM 
 |signature.
 |
 |There's a recent, added mechanism, called ARC, that is intended to 
 |mitigate this mailing list DMARC problem.  We'll see how it fares.

And RFC 9057 which added the Author: header field that likely
would have avoided this obnoxious situation when it would have
been shipped alongside DMARC.
It felt it would be nice if the big players would bend their minds
and enforce it instead (..so much i added at least production
support for my tiny little MUA on June 23rd).

--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 dhc at dcrocker.net  Mon Sep  6 06:50:49 2021
From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2021 06:50:49 -0700
Subject: [ih] Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <20210906134011.zCCVl%steffen@sdaoden.eu>
References: <4B0AE563-E669-43FA-8E72-D17C9AD63DCA@strayalpha.com>
 <65bc44fd-07f0-86fc-7c5d-669bfc062418@3kitty.org>
 <EEBACAA7-658A-4DA9-AEC3-0F4D1AFF902A@strayalpha.com>
 <923c067f-5600-8bd8-7a7c-1a042f84538d@3kitty.org>
 <CAFq6nVEKBL6z1WBxtotQi7B34x4yZpGyEia1DKmkxXdX1-wyCg@mail.gmail.com>
 <17bad4fa090.27fc.742cd0bcba90c1f7f640db99bf6503c5@fantasyfarm.com>
 <6334ad05-d306-d14d-e4d4-b506c2c48882@3kitty.org>
 <039e6b25-b378-85cb-7b2e-0dba7351080b@dcrocker.net>
 <259b5312-76f6-d58a-18a5-96d714cc6556@3kitty.org>
 <000617d0-d4d5-0d3d-6a09-553de14d62a7@dcrocker.net>
 <20210906134011.zCCVl%steffen@sdaoden.eu>
Message-ID: <caa466bb-7a3c-76b2-d15f-d435474cc3ed@dcrocker.net>

On 9/6/2021 6:40 AM, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> And RFC 9057 which added the Author: header field that likely
> would have avoided this obnoxious situation when it would have
> been shipped alongside DMARC.
> It felt it would be nice if the big players would bend their minds
> and enforce it instead (..so much i added at least production
> support for my tiny little MUA on June 23rd).


During development of the Author: field, it was interesting to see some 
folk react against it by saying that it would get abused in the same way 
the From: field has.  That is, they did it once, so they'll do it again.

Given the nature of the protection benefit that DMARC provides, and 
given that it is actually quite easy to circumvent -- as the mailing 
list From field modification hacks demonstrate -- it means that the 
DMARC benefit as not inherent.  That is, it provides relatively 
short-term correlation benefit, but isn't robust over time.

Note that most users don't even see the From field address and even for 
those that do, there is no indication that their behavior changes if 
that field is spoofed, and some indication it doesn't!

But since it validates the From field domain name, people tend to have 
an unshakeable belief in it as a core protection.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net


From johnl at iecc.com  Mon Sep  6 19:55:18 2021
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 6 Sep 2021 22:55:18 -0400
Subject: [ih] Grotty Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <20210906134011.zCCVl%steffen@sdaoden.eu>
Message-ID: <20210907025519.89354277C8E8@ary.qy>

It appears that Steffen Nurpmeso via Internet-history <steffen at sdaoden.eu> said:
>dcrocker at bbiw.net wrote in
> |The actual culprit is DMARC, which enforces authenticated From header 
> |field domain name use. ...

>And RFC 9057 which added the Author: header field that likely
>would have avoided this obnoxious situation when it would have
>been shipped alongside DMARC.

Very unlikely.

The original motivation for DMARC was heavily forged commercial domains
like paypal.com that send direct from the company to the recipient.  The
only thing a message from Paypal ever says is "something happened, look
at the web site to see what it was" so they made a reasonable decision that
if a strict DMARC policy lost a little legit mail along with a lot of phishes,
that's a good tradeoff.

Unfortunately, AOL and Yahoo which were at the time separate badly run companies
each had huge security breaches (twice for Yahoo) in which crooks stole people's
entire address books.  The crooks took pairs of stolen addresses and started
sending spam that appeared to come from a friend of the recipient.  Not surprisingly,
this led to vast numbers of support calls.  AOL and Yahoo independently decided
to outsource their support problem to the rest of the Internet by publishing
a DMARC policy record that made all the forged spam bounce, with the side effect
of breaking every mailing list in the world.  (Yahoo knew that would happen and
did not care, according to someone who was in the room.)

Now we have sort of a cargo cult around DMARC, with putative experts insisting
that everyone should have a p=reject DMARC policy because it is "more secure"
which it is for only a rather narrow version of "secure."  In fact it can be
helpful if A) your mail is forged a lot and B) you don't send any legit mail
via paths that DMARC cannot describe.  Some domains are like that, but many
are not.   Mine are not which is why I have no plan ever to publsh a DMARC
policy other than p=none.

The yelling about mailing lists was loud enough that there is now a thing called
ARC which more or less provides a log in the message of what the authentication
results were a prior hops, so in principle recipient systems can look at mail
they know is from something like a mailing list and use the ARC info to see if
it would have passed DMARC when it arrived at the list.  Several large mail
systems including Gmail and Outlook/Hotmail are now added ARC headers (I think
invalid ones at Microsoft) but so far nobody I know is using it to fix DMARC
overfiltering.

As Dave has often pointed out, many mail programs, perhaps most these days, do
not show the From: address so the nominal benefit of DMARC, that you can tell
that the sender is "real" does not exist.  People who run large mail systems
tell me that despite the fact that it is so easy to evade, DMARC still blocks
a lot of phishing which means unsurprisingly that many crooks are lazy or
ignorant.

It's hard to see how an additional Author header would make much difference here.

R's,
John


From steffen at sdaoden.eu  Tue Sep  7 14:10:34 2021
From: steffen at sdaoden.eu (Steffen Nurpmeso)
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2021 23:10:34 +0200
Subject: [ih] Grotty Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <20210907025519.89354277C8E8@ary.qy>
References: <20210907025519.89354277C8E8@ary.qy>
Message-ID: <20210907211034.GG8NY%steffen@sdaoden.eu>

John Levine wrote in
 <20210907025519.89354277C8E8 at ary.qy>:
 |It appears that Steffen Nurpmeso via Internet-history <steffen at sdaoden.eu> \
 |said:
 |>dcrocker at bbiw.net wrote in
 |>|The actual culprit is DMARC, which enforces authenticated From header 
 |>|field domain name use. ...
 |
 |>And RFC 9057 which added the Author: header field that likely
 |>would have avoided this obnoxious situation when it would have
 |>been shipped alongside DMARC.
 |
 |Very unlikely.

You would not believe it, but i really reread RFC 7489 ;  What
nonsense!

  ...
 |this led to vast numbers of support calls.  AOL and Yahoo independently \
 |decided
 |to outsource their support problem to the rest of the Internet by publis\
 |hing
 |a DMARC policy record that made all the forged spam bounce, with the \
 |side effect
 |of breaking every mailing list in the world.  (Yahoo knew that would \
 |happen and
 |did not care, according to someone who was in the room.)
 ...

This discussion was already in the past, you seem to remember.
User interfaces are terrible and the abstraction and
trivialization that ... leaves enough room for doing more logic
training for a better IQ test next time ... is a good thing.  My
tmux status line includes

  [2:40?/1:44? | 0.32 0.29 0.17 1/346 | RF:W~B! wlp1s0~#223/18 wgppp-104/4 browse-8/94 | 100% "" | 2021-09-07 16:03]

and funnily that starts quite a bit right of the 80 columns, not
even 30%, of the screen width i am working in.  That looks so
funny if you see it from distance!  (I still think that the
"browse" namespace counter of the Linux kernel 5.10.* is wrong and
treats receive as send and vice versa, .. because the wgppp, which
almost solely but DNS sends out via a WireGuard device, gets it
right.  But well.  wgppp now at least _does_ count again even if
it uses a WG device.)

I personally do not like DMARC at all, not its XML schemata
(help!), not the report URI mechanism (would postmaster at X not
suffice, for example), but maybe all this is really used in
practice.  I like envelopes, it is MIME, but it would mirror the
historic behaviour of enwrapping in sealed envelopes.  It seems
bitter that this cannot be used in practice; but maybe i would not
like it myself, seeing all these envelopes around the actual mail
i wrote.  I do not know.

 |The original motivation for DMARC was heavily forged commercial domains
 |like paypal.com that send direct from the company to the recipient.  The
 |only thing a message from Paypal ever says is "something happened, look
 |at the web site to see what it was" so they made a reasonable decision that
 |if a strict DMARC policy lost a little legit mail along with a lot \
 |of phishes,
 |that's a good tradeoff.
 |
 |Unfortunately, AOL and Yahoo which were at the time separate badly \
 |run companies
 |each had huge security breaches (twice for Yahoo) in which crooks stole \
 |people's
 |entire address books.  The crooks took pairs of stolen addresses and \
 |started
 |sending spam that appeared to come from a friend of the recipient. \

On the other hand that, if the big picture would allow easy S/MIME
and/or OpenPGP for everyone, to be usable at a fingertip, it would
have prevented this.  And if the user would be given the
certificate to own it, and only install it (back) to the big
provider, then this would be real freedom.

I mean, isn't that laughable.  You in U.S.A. have no problem with
looking in mirrors which state "Objects in the rear view mirror
may appear closer than they are" (i would live in fear of
accidentally not looking to the front while reading this), or
"Children can choke on nuts" (which i find a masterpiece of
reduction given what Children can possibly put in their mouth,
poor nuts, how about USB-sticks, for example!), but heck, when
looking at the mailer in the 1000$ smartphone you want it clean.

They could also have said that existence of a DMARC DNS entry
requires mails to be DKIM signed, or otherwise the mail is per se
invalid.  At that time i would have simply extended SPF with
a flag which says exactly this.  Maybe like that?  Wouldn't this
have worked?  But it is useless talk of mine as all that is not
true.

 | Not surprisingly,
 |this led to vast numbers of support calls.  AOL and Yahoo independently \
 |decided
 |to outsource their support problem to the rest of the Internet by publis\
 |hing
 |a DMARC policy record that made all the forged spam bounce, with the \
 |side effect
 |of breaking every mailing list in the world.  (Yahoo knew that would \
 |happen and
 |did not care, according to someone who was in the room.)
 |Now we have sort of a cargo cult around DMARC, with putative experts \
 |insisting
 |that everyone should have a p=reject DMARC policy because it is "more \
 |secure"
 |which it is for only a rather narrow version of "secure."  In fact \
 |it can be
 |helpful if A) your mail is forged a lot and B) you don't send any legit \
 |mail
 |via paths that DMARC cannot describe.  Some domains are like that, but many
 |are not.   Mine are not which is why I have no plan ever to publsh a DMARC
 |policy other than p=none.
 |
 |The yelling about mailing lists was loud enough that there is now a \
 |thing called
 |ARC which more or less provides a log in the message of what the authent\
 |ication
 |results were a prior hops, so in principle recipient systems can look \
 |at mail
 |they know is from something like a mailing list and use the ARC info \
 |to see if
 |it would have passed DMARC when it arrived at the list.  Several large mail
 |systems including Gmail and Outlook/Hotmail are now added ARC headers \
 |(I think
 |invalid ones at Microsoft) but so far nobody I know is using it to \
 |fix DMARC
 |overfiltering.
 |
 |As Dave has often pointed out, many mail programs, perhaps most these \
 |days, do
 |not show the From: address so the nominal benefit of DMARC, that you \
 |can tell
 |that the sender is "real" does not exist.  People who run large mail \
 |systems
 |tell me that despite the fact that it is so easy to evade, DMARC still \
 |blocks
 |a lot of phishing which means unsurprisingly that many crooks are lazy or
 |ignorant.
 |
 |It's hard to see how an additional Author header would make much differe\
 |nce here.

You are surely right with this.
The MUA i maintain has such a long way to go ... but i hope
Author: will become used so that it can be used in favour (and if
that is by matter of highlighting or similar) of the mutilated and
rewritten From:'s that are everywhere.

--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 dhc at dcrocker.net  Tue Sep  7 14:15:07 2021
From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2021 14:15:07 -0700
Subject: [ih] Grotty Email behavior (better subject ID...)
In-Reply-To: <20210907025519.89354277C8E8@ary.qy>
References: <20210907025519.89354277C8E8@ary.qy>
Message-ID: <8a907d51-386c-4d17-e2d6-55ab28e9e15f@dcrocker.net>


> It's hard to see how an additional Author header would make much difference here.


Actually, it's pretty easy, and the RFC discusses this.

At the least it means that a receiving user agent can return to properly 
correlated mail from the same... author.

Whether it will actually get used -- nevermind used much -- is of course 
a different matter.


d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net


From geoff at iconia.com  Fri Sep 10 14:33:43 2021
From: geoff at iconia.com (the keyboard of geoff goodfellow)
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 11:33:43 -1000
Subject: [ih] EXCERPTing from "Ruminating with VINT CERF" interview
Message-ID: <CAEf-zrhSYi22VuTcUxo5A3qmTzi8MvYs=Ccn6b8mvbV8ReCNWw@mail.gmail.com>

OLD GOATS with Jonathan Alter
Sep 9:

[...]

*JON:*

*When you and Bob Kahn founded the Internet in 1973, was there an ?Aha?
moment where you're working on these packets and one day you go, ?We've got
it now!?*

*VINT CERF:*

No, absolutely not. This was an engineering effort--not like discovery.
This is more like, ?I have a problem. What are the boundary conditions of
the problem and what solutions could work?? The ARPANET had been based on
packet switching and it was intended to be a resource for sharing time on
different brands of computers, which was a hard problem to solve.

JON:

*Getting these different brands and machines to talk to each other?*

*VINT CERF:*

The challenge here was that there were many different companies making
computers and we had quite a different collection of them on the ARPANET
because of the various universities that were being supported by [the
government network]. There were more computer companies then. [Our
intention] was to allow researchers to share each other's software and
computing capability across the network, instead of having to buy new
computers every year for everybody.

JON:

*Is it fair to say that the larger goal of DARPA was survivability in case
of a nuclear war?*

*VINT CERF:*

No, that?s a confusion with a *1962 RAND Corporation report focused on post
nuclear attack survival <https://www.rand.org/about/history/baran.html>*.
Bob [Kahn] had gone to DARPA in 1972 and now the question was, having
demonstrated the utility of computer networking, can we use the computers
to assist us in command-and-control? It means you're doing both numeric and
non- numeric computation, including voice, video and data. How do we build
networks that don't lose airplanes, mobile vehicles, ships at sea? So we
then had to develop packet radio for mobile communication?airborne and
ground base?and satellite communication, especially for long distance ships
at sea. [Then we had to figure out] how do we hook all these different
kinds of packet switch nets together and make the whole shebang work.

 There is a wider range of challenges associated with using multiple
networks with different bandwidths, different data rates, different delays
and latencies and so on. So that was the Internet challenge.

*JON:*

*Right, so then it's not til the 1980s?10 years later? before the rest of
us can go on the Internet. Why did it take so long before it left the
government and academia and became something that the whole world could
use?*

*VINT CERF:*

It was not easy to figure out how to make it work. It took a small group of
us four iterations of protocol design [before] ultimately ending up with
this TCP and IP split that was capable of supporting video and voice and
data. I spent five years or so promoting implementation of the protocols on
various computer operating systems, getting it done at IBM, Hewlett
Packard, and Digital Equipment Corporation in their research labs.

And around then we?re starting to see some European interest in this, in
spite of the fact that there is a huge collision that began in 1978 and we
were in conflict over what was going to be the international standard until
about 1993.

JON:

*Wow, but you guys won. If you had lost, how would the world be different?*

*VINT CERF:*

 Well, you'd be running a different suite of protocols. They would probably
work, but they would be much more complicated and elaborate and in my
opinion, they'd be more clumsy. Your email addresses would not be anything
as simple as we have today. They [European protocols] were just horrendous.
There was something just overbearing about the seven-layer design that they
pushed. We won only because we had real world experience and real products
and services.

*You got to Google in 2005 which was just a year after Gmail was developed.
When you look back at the last 16 years there, what would you tell your
grandchildren about what it?s like? What stands out for you in that period
in terms of your own contributions and the way the world changed?*

*VINT CERF:*

Well, you know I got hired as the Chief Internet Evangelist, a title I
didn't ask for. They asked what title do you want and I said: ?Archduke.?

[...]

https://oldgoats.substack.com/p/ruminating-with-vint-cerf
-- 
Geoff.Goodfellow at iconia.com
living as The Truth is True


From joly at punkcast.com  Tue Sep 14 10:08:04 2021
From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie)
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 13:08:04 -0400
Subject: [ih] =?utf-8?q?WEBCAST_TODAY=3A_Internet2_Internet_History_Webin?=
	=?utf-8?q?ar=3A_How_the_US_NSNET_Regional_Academic_Networks_Evolve?=
	=?utf-8?q?d_to_Become_the_Global_Internet_=281985_=E2=80=94_1995?=
	=?utf-8?q?=29?=
Message-ID: <CAM9VJk0W+sqSMRbHXF3f=T5JmyiN3ZoSvNUfW_JZo242PQ4OiA@mail.gmail.com>

Anyone who watched last week's Renwick Lecture
<https://archive.org/details/renwick2021> will have heard Vint Cerf refer
to this important stage in the Internet's development. Today we will learn
more!



[image: livestream]
<http://livestream.com/internetsociety/i2internethistory>Today, Tuesday 14
September 2020, at 13:00 EDT (18:00 UTC) *Internet2
<https://internet2.edu/>* hosts an Internet History Webinar: '*How the US
NSFNET Regional Academic Networks Evolved to Become the Global Internet
(1985 ? 1995) <https://internet2.edu/internet2-internet-history-webinar/>*'.

The National Science Foundation?s (NSF) *NSFNET Program
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Science_Foundation_Network>*
(partially)
funded a range of (academic) regional networks1, starting in 1985/86. Over
a relatively short period of time, the regional networks developed their
customer base and funding models and became Internet service providers
(ISPs). Connections to the Federal Internet Exchange(s) (FIXs) and the
Commercial Internet eXchange(s) (CIXs) were developed, and some of the
regional networks evolved to become global ISPs.

The webinar will feature short presentations from some of the Regional
Network / ISP pioneers, followed by a panel discussion and Q&A session.

*PANEL*
*Glenn Ricart*, SURAnet
*Elise Gerich*, NSFNET National Backbone
*Susan Estrada*, CERFnet
*MODERATOR* *Steve Wolff*, NSF Networking Division Director (1986-1995)

*LIVESTREAM http://livestream.com/internetsociety/i2internethistory
<http://livestream.com/internetsociety/i2internethistory>*

*PARTICIPATE VIA ZOOM https://bit.ly/398Itjk <https://bit.ly/398Itjk>*

*REAL TIME TEXT:  https://bit.ly/3AdSM18 <https://bit.ly/3AdSM18>*

*TWITTER #i2online <http://bit.ly/i2online> @Internet2 @gricart #SURAnet
@EliseGerich #NSFNET Susan Estrada #CERFnet Steve Wolff #InternetHistory*

*SIMULCASTS*
*https://www.twitter.com/ISOC_Live/ <https://www.twitter.com/ISOC_Live/>*
*https://www.twitch.tv/isoclive <https://www.twitch.tv/isoclive>*
*https://www.facebook.com/liveisoc <https://www.facebook.com/liveisoc>*

*ARCHIVE*
*https://archive.org/details/i2internethistory
<https://archive.org/details/i2internethistory>*

*Permalink*
https://isoc.live/14520/



-

-- 
--------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  +12185659365
--------------------------------------
-


From joly at punkcast.com  Tue Sep 14 16:52:22 2021
From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie)
Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 19:52:22 -0400
Subject: [ih] 
	=?utf-8?q?WEBCAST_TODAY=3A_Internet2_Internet_History_Webin?=
	=?utf-8?q?ar=3A_How_the_US_NSNET_Regional_Academic_Networks_Evolve?=
	=?utf-8?q?d_to_Become_the_Global_Internet_=281985_=E2=80=94_1995?=
	=?utf-8?q?=29?=
In-Reply-To: <CAM9VJk0W+sqSMRbHXF3f=T5JmyiN3ZoSvNUfW_JZo242PQ4OiA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM9VJk0W+sqSMRbHXF3f=T5JmyiN3ZoSvNUfW_JZo242PQ4OiA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAM9VJk3yjgoTkh90rw2PEH9XhJrOwKkc6K9N9ykh3MVPWzjY8A@mail.gmail.com>

I'm afraid the Otter AI speech recognition struggled mightily with many of
the tech terms / names on this.

See *https://bit.ly/3AdSM18 <https://bit.ly/3AdSM18>*

If anyone would like to volunteer their own, or some student's, time to
work on correction, it would be very welcome at support at isoc.live

joly

On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 1:08 PM Joly MacFie <joly at punkcast.com> wrote:

> Anyone who watched last week's Renwick Lecture
> <https://archive.org/details/renwick2021> will have heard Vint Cerf refer
> to this important stage in the Internet's development. Today we will learn
> more!
>
>
>
> [image: livestream]
> <http://livestream.com/internetsociety/i2internethistory>Today, Tuesday
> 14 September 2020, at 13:00 EDT (18:00 UTC) *Internet2
> <https://internet2.edu/>* hosts an Internet History Webinar: '*How the US
> NSFNET Regional Academic Networks Evolved to Become the Global Internet
> (1985 ? 1995) <https://internet2.edu/internet2-internet-history-webinar/>*
> '.
>
> The National Science Foundation?s (NSF) *NSFNET Program
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Science_Foundation_Network>* (partially)
> funded a range of (academic) regional networks1, starting in 1985/86. Over
> a relatively short period of time, the regional networks developed their
> customer base and funding models and became Internet service providers
> (ISPs). Connections to the Federal Internet Exchange(s) (FIXs) and the
> Commercial Internet eXchange(s) (CIXs) were developed, and some of the
> regional networks evolved to become global ISPs.
>
> The webinar will feature short presentations from some of the Regional
> Network / ISP pioneers, followed by a panel discussion and Q&A session.
>
> *PANEL*
> *Glenn Ricart*, SURAnet
> *Elise Gerich*, NSFNET National Backbone
> *Susan Estrada*, CERFnet
> *MODERATOR* *Steve Wolff*, NSF Networking Division Director (1986-1995)
>
> *LIVESTREAM http://livestream.com/internetsociety/i2internethistory
> <http://livestream.com/internetsociety/i2internethistory>*
>
> *PARTICIPATE VIA ZOOM https://bit.ly/398Itjk <https://bit.ly/398Itjk>*
>
> *REAL TIME TEXT:  https://bit.ly/3AdSM18 <https://bit.ly/3AdSM18>*
>
> *TWITTER #i2online <http://bit.ly/i2online> @Internet2 @gricart #SURAnet
> @EliseGerich #NSFNET Susan Estrada #CERFnet Steve Wolff #InternetHistory*
>
> *SIMULCASTS*
> *https://www.twitter.com/ISOC_Live/ <https://www.twitter.com/ISOC_Live/>*
> *https://www.twitch.tv/isoclive <https://www.twitch.tv/isoclive>*
> *https://www.facebook.com/liveisoc <https://www.facebook.com/liveisoc>*
>
> *ARCHIVE*
> *https://archive.org/details/i2internethistory
> <https://archive.org/details/i2internethistory>*
>
> *Permalink*
> https://isoc.live/14520/
>
>
>
> -
>
> --
> --------------------------------------
> Joly MacFie  +12185659365
> --------------------------------------
> -
>


-- 
--------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  +12185659365
--------------------------------------
-


From joly at punkcast.com  Mon Sep 20 02:08:56 2021
From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie)
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 05:08:56 -0400
Subject: [ih] 
	=?utf-8?q?WEBCAST_TODAY=3A_Internet2_Internet_History_Webin?=
	=?utf-8?q?ar=3A_How_the_US_NSNET_Regional_Academic_Networks_Evolve?=
	=?utf-8?q?d_to_Become_the_Global_Internet_=281985_=E2=80=94_1995?=
	=?utf-8?q?=29?=
In-Reply-To: <CAM9VJk0W+sqSMRbHXF3f=T5JmyiN3ZoSvNUfW_JZo242PQ4OiA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM9VJk0W+sqSMRbHXF3f=T5JmyiN3ZoSvNUfW_JZo242PQ4OiA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAM9VJk0r=y89vAWgObtgDz5eVcrUWcD51fAZiei2ibeRDDb0EQ@mail.gmail.com>

With invaluable help from Ruth Moulton, the real time text of this has been
corrected to the best of our ability.

*https://bit.ly/3AdSM18 <https://bit.ly/3AdSM18>*

However there are a few things that defy even concerted googling.

11: 05  Jess Poor
20:17   Dick Lee Paper from MCI
33:20 JB and C net (?), if you were using Backson (?) for routers.
35:25  ANF10
57:19 Vouch (?) Amendment, PO 102, mumble mumble, (?)

Any suggestions will be welcomed, here or direct at support at isoc.live

Thanks

joly

On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 1:08 PM Joly MacFie <joly at punkcast.com> wrote:

> Anyone who watched last week's Renwick Lecture
> <https://archive.org/details/renwick2021> will have heard Vint Cerf refer
> to this important stage in the Internet's development. Today we will learn
> more!
>
>
>
> [image: livestream]
> <http://livestream.com/internetsociety/i2internethistory>Today, Tuesday
> 14 September 2020, at 13:00 EDT (18:00 UTC) *Internet2
> <https://internet2.edu/>* hosts an Internet History Webinar: '*How the US
> NSFNET Regional Academic Networks Evolved to Become the Global Internet
> (1985 ? 1995) <https://internet2.edu/internet2-internet-history-webinar/>*
> '.
>
> The National Science Foundation?s (NSF) *NSFNET Program
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Science_Foundation_Network>* (partially)
> funded a range of (academic) regional networks1, starting in 1985/86. Over
> a relatively short period of time, the regional networks developed their
> customer base and funding models and became Internet service providers
> (ISPs). Connections to the Federal Internet Exchange(s) (FIXs) and the
> Commercial Internet eXchange(s) (CIXs) were developed, and some of the
> regional networks evolved to become global ISPs.
>
> The webinar will feature short presentations from some of the Regional
> Network / ISP pioneers, followed by a panel discussion and Q&A session.
>
> *PANEL*
> *Glenn Ricart*, SURAnet
> *Elise Gerich*, NSFNET National Backbone
> *Susan Estrada*, CERFnet
> *MODERATOR* *Steve Wolff*, NSF Networking Division Director (1986-1995)
>
> *LIVESTREAM http://livestream.com/internetsociety/i2internethistory
> <http://livestream.com/internetsociety/i2internethistory>*
>
> *PARTICIPATE VIA ZOOM https://bit.ly/398Itjk <https://bit.ly/398Itjk>*
>
> *REAL TIME TEXT:  https://bit.ly/3AdSM18 <https://bit.ly/3AdSM18>*
>
> *TWITTER #i2online <http://bit.ly/i2online> @Internet2 @gricart #SURAnet
> @EliseGerich #NSFNET Susan Estrada #CERFnet Steve Wolff #InternetHistory*
>
> *SIMULCASTS*
> *https://www.twitter.com/ISOC_Live/ <https://www.twitter.com/ISOC_Live/>*
> *https://www.twitch.tv/isoclive <https://www.twitch.tv/isoclive>*
> *https://www.facebook.com/liveisoc <https://www.facebook.com/liveisoc>*
>
> *ARCHIVE*
> *https://archive.org/details/i2internethistory
> <https://archive.org/details/i2internethistory>*
>
> *Permalink*
> https://isoc.live/14520/
>
>
>
> -
>
> --
> --------------------------------------
> Joly MacFie  +12185659365
> --------------------------------------
> -
>


-- 
--------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  +12185659365
--------------------------------------
-


From joly at punkcast.com  Mon Sep 20 07:36:02 2021
From: joly at punkcast.com (Joly MacFie)
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 10:36:02 -0400
Subject: [ih] 
	=?utf-8?q?WEBCAST_TODAY=3A_Internet2_Internet_History_Webin?=
	=?utf-8?q?ar=3A_How_the_US_NSNET_Regional_Academic_Networks_Evolve?=
	=?utf-8?q?d_to_Become_the_Global_Internet_=281985_=E2=80=94_1995?=
	=?utf-8?q?=29?=
In-Reply-To: <CAM9VJk0r=y89vAWgObtgDz5eVcrUWcD51fAZiei2ibeRDDb0EQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAM9VJk0W+sqSMRbHXF3f=T5JmyiN3ZoSvNUfW_JZo242PQ4OiA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAM9VJk0r=y89vAWgObtgDz5eVcrUWcD51fAZiei2ibeRDDb0EQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAM9VJk3s_KbM-0hhk4Mw3HLQWRMCa_PcVxxrf6sz1BtQrQyM5g@mail.gmail.com>

OK, Thanks everybody.

PDF is now posted at
https://archive.org/download/i2internethistory/i2internethistory_TRANSCRIPT.pdf

and I'll work on captions for the video at
https://archive.org/details/i2internethistory

Thanks again to Ruth Moulton for the donkey work, and Timothy J. Also, Guy
Almes, and David Belson for the tips.

On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 5:08 AM Joly MacFie <joly at punkcast.com> wrote:

>
> With invaluable help from Ruth Moulton, the real time text of this has
> been corrected to the best of our ability.
>
> *https://bit.ly/3AdSM18 <https://bit.ly/3AdSM18>*
>
> However there are a few things that defy even concerted googling.
>
> 11: 05  Jess Poor
> 20:17   Dick Lee Paper from MCI
> 33:20 JB and C net (?), if you were using Backson (?) for routers.
> 35:25  ANF10
> 57:19 Vouch (?) Amendment, PO 102, mumble mumble, (?)
>
> Any suggestions will be welcomed, here or direct at support at isoc.live
>
> Thanks
>
> joly
>
> On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 1:08 PM Joly MacFie <joly at punkcast.com> wrote:
>
>> Anyone who watched last week's Renwick Lecture
>> <https://archive.org/details/renwick2021> will have heard Vint Cerf
>> refer to this important stage in the Internet's development. Today we will
>> learn more!
>>
>>
>>
>> [image: livestream]
>> <http://livestream.com/internetsociety/i2internethistory>Today, Tuesday
>> 14 September 2020, at 13:00 EDT (18:00 UTC) *Internet2
>> <https://internet2.edu/>* hosts an Internet History Webinar: '*How the
>> US NSFNET Regional Academic Networks Evolved to Become the Global Internet
>> (1985 ? 1995) <https://internet2.edu/internet2-internet-history-webinar/>*
>> '.
>>
>> The National Science Foundation?s (NSF) *NSFNET Program
>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Science_Foundation_Network>* (partially)
>> funded a range of (academic) regional networks1, starting in 1985/86. Over
>> a relatively short period of time, the regional networks developed their
>> customer base and funding models and became Internet service providers
>> (ISPs). Connections to the Federal Internet Exchange(s) (FIXs) and the
>> Commercial Internet eXchange(s) (CIXs) were developed, and some of the
>> regional networks evolved to become global ISPs.
>>
>> The webinar will feature short presentations from some of the Regional
>> Network / ISP pioneers, followed by a panel discussion and Q&A session.
>>
>> *PANEL*
>> *Glenn Ricart*, SURAnet
>> *Elise Gerich*, NSFNET National Backbone
>> *Susan Estrada*, CERFnet
>> *MODERATOR* *Steve Wolff*, NSF Networking Division Director (1986-1995)
>>
>> *LIVESTREAM http://livestream.com/internetsociety/i2internethistory
>> <http://livestream.com/internetsociety/i2internethistory>*
>>
>> *PARTICIPATE VIA ZOOM https://bit.ly/398Itjk <https://bit.ly/398Itjk>*
>>
>> *REAL TIME TEXT:  https://bit.ly/3AdSM18 <https://bit.ly/3AdSM18>*
>>
>> *TWITTER #i2online <http://bit.ly/i2online> @Internet2 @gricart #SURAnet
>> @EliseGerich #NSFNET Susan Estrada #CERFnet Steve Wolff #InternetHistory*
>>
>> *SIMULCASTS*
>> *https://www.twitter.com/ISOC_Live/ <https://www.twitter.com/ISOC_Live/>*
>> *https://www.twitch.tv/isoclive <https://www.twitch.tv/isoclive>*
>> *https://www.facebook.com/liveisoc <https://www.facebook.com/liveisoc>*
>>
>> *ARCHIVE*
>> *https://archive.org/details/i2internethistory
>> <https://archive.org/details/i2internethistory>*
>>
>> *Permalink*
>> https://isoc.live/14520/
>>
>>
>>
>> -
>>
>> --
>> --------------------------------------
>> Joly MacFie  +12185659365
>> --------------------------------------
>> -
>>
>
>
> --
> --------------------------------------
> Joly MacFie  +12185659365
> --------------------------------------
> -
>


-- 
--------------------------------------
Joly MacFie  +12185659365
--------------------------------------
-


From dhc at dcrocker.net  Tue Sep 28 20:09:40 2021
From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 20:09:40 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of Anonymous FTP
Message-ID: <46f24b1e-c084-eb91-d74a-908f47e8ff60@dcrocker.net>

The history of the Web usually has citations to work such as Engelbarts, 
for its conceptual history.  And that's entirely reasonable.  But that 
system was not a widely distributed set of independent operations.

So I always point to Anonymous FTP as the operational base, for the 
model.  We relied on it for roughly 20 years, before gopher and the web 
gave us improved choices.

But I don't remember the details of when Anonymous FTP came into 
service.  Just did a quick search and didn't find anything helpful.

Perhaps this group knows some relevant details?

d/
-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net


From wayne at playaholic.com  Tue Sep 28 20:49:08 2021
From: wayne at playaholic.com (Wayne Hathaway)
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 23:49:08 -0400
Subject: [ih] History of Anonymous FTP
In-Reply-To: <46f24b1e-c084-eb91-d74a-908f47e8ff60@dcrocker.net>
References: <46f24b1e-c084-eb91-d74a-908f47e8ff60@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <1632887348.x9yctzwlq8gcg084@hostingemail.digitalspace.net>

In 1972, I implemented an early version of the FTP protocol on the TSS/360 system at NASA Ames.  Because I felt it might be interesting to others to document some of the issues that arose and how I got around them, I wrote RFC 418, "Server File Transfer Under TSS/360 at NASA-Ames Research Cenrer."? I just pulled that RFC up to remind myself how I handled anonymous, and was a little surprised to see that the word appears nowhere in the RFC!? I did define three userids ARPA, ARPA1, and ARPA2 so users could access files without having their own userids added, but any concept of anonymous FTP doesn't seem to have existed in 1972.? Interesting.



On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 20:09:40 -0700, Dave Crocker via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

>> The history of the Web usually has citations to work such as Engelbarts,
>> for its conceptual history. And that's entirely reasonable. But that
>> system was not a widely distributed set of independent operations.
>>
>> So I always point to Anonymous FTP as the operational base, for the
>> model. We relied on it for roughly 20 years, before gopher and the web
>> gave us improved choices.
>>
>> But I don't remember the details of when Anonymous FTP came into
>> service. Just did a quick search and didn't find anything helpful.
>>
>> Perhaps this group knows some relevant details?
>>
>> d/
>> --
>> Dave Crocker
>> Brandenburg InternetWorking
>> bbiw.net
>> --
>> Internet-history mailing list
>> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
>> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history


From darius.kazemi at gmail.com  Tue Sep 28 20:56:12 2021
From: darius.kazemi at gmail.com (Darius Kazemi)
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 20:56:12 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of Anonymous FTP
In-Reply-To: <1632887348.x9yctzwlq8gcg084@hostingemail.digitalspace.net>
References: <46f24b1e-c084-eb91-d74a-908f47e8ff60@dcrocker.net>
 <1632887348.x9yctzwlq8gcg084@hostingemail.digitalspace.net>
Message-ID: <CADHc3QEyPR=Nq_NNs7bvnKb-wMco7g3-AczN14K0h+yq9cvwDg@mail.gmail.com>

There is of course Padlipsky's anecdote (that probably won't settle
anything to anyone's satisfaction) on the invention of anonymous login for
FTP:

https://multicians.org/allnight.html

(Fifth paragraph beginning "Let's start")

On Tue, Sep 28, 2021, 8:49 PM Wayne Hathaway via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> In 1972, I implemented an early version of the FTP protocol on the TSS/360
> system at NASA Ames.  Because I felt it might be interesting to others to
> document some of the issues that arose and how I got around them, I wrote
> RFC 418, "Server File Transfer Under TSS/360 at NASA-Ames Research
> Cenrer."  I just pulled that RFC up to remind myself how I handled
> anonymous, and was a little surprised to see that the word appears nowhere
> in the RFC!  I did define three userids ARPA, ARPA1, and ARPA2 so users
> could access files without having their own userids added, but any concept
> of anonymous FTP doesn't seem to have existed in 1972.  Interesting.
>
>
>
> On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 20:09:40 -0700, Dave Crocker via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
> >> The history of the Web usually has citations to work such as Engelbarts,
> >> for its conceptual history. And that's entirely reasonable. But that
> >> system was not a widely distributed set of independent operations.
> >>
> >> So I always point to Anonymous FTP as the operational base, for the
> >> model. We relied on it for roughly 20 years, before gopher and the web
> >> gave us improved choices.
> >>
> >> But I don't remember the details of when Anonymous FTP came into
> >> service. Just did a quick search and didn't find anything helpful.
> >>
> >> Perhaps this group knows some relevant details?
> >>
> >> d/
> >> --
> >> Dave Crocker
> >> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> >> bbiw.net
> >> --
> >> Internet-history mailing list
> >> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> >> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
> --
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>


From geoff at iconia.com  Tue Sep 28 21:01:03 2021
From: geoff at iconia.com (the keyboard of geoff goodfellow)
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 18:01:03 -1000
Subject: [ih] History of Anonymous FTP
In-Reply-To: <46f24b1e-c084-eb91-d74a-908f47e8ff60@dcrocker.net>
References: <46f24b1e-c084-eb91-d74a-908f47e8ff60@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <CAEf-zrjjt=RFWYK-wGriNUSj4GR+Z4AFa78ez+sDAk5fQ3Pg2A@mail.gmail.com>

yours truly believes Anonymous FTP (login) showed up on Tenex first, but
Anonymous FTP without logging in probably was present on the MIT ITS
{ai,dm,ml) systems before that

with the above laconic supposition out, now here's an anecdote about
Tenex's Anonymous FTP "implementation" that let's call

WOE IS TO THEE WHO PLAYS/SIMULATES THE OPERATING SYSTEM'S "FILE SYSTEM"

the Tenex FTP Server (FTPSRV) was auto logged in as <SYSTEM>, a "wheeled"
(i.e. super-user privileged/credentialed user) at system boot time

when a remote user connected to a Tenex's FTP Server, the FTPSRV process
did a lookup on said users file permissions (user groups, etc) to see what
files said logged in user was able to access -- thereby "emulating exactly"
the access the user would have if they themselves were logged in on a
terminal

in essence, the wheel enabled and privileged FTPSRV program "emulated" what
the operating system (Tenex) itself would do

this all "worked pretty well" until Anonymous FTP was introduced into
FTPSRV wherein a user would login with user Anonymous with any password

but there was actually no Tenex user directory/account Anonymous... it only
"existed" inside of FTPSRV

so when an Anonymous user logged in to FTPSRV, "user" Anonymous's system
wide file access was, like with real users, "simulated" and "restricted" to
only globally readablr files

on Tenex the equivalent of /etc/passwd on Unix was <SYSTEM>INDEX -- a
highly protected binary file of users, their (non-encrypted) passwords,
directory access groups and such

there was a Tenex program (for super-user "wheels") called ULIST which
would print out a text readable version of this file through a get
directory information system call

ULIST also had an option to include user's passwords, and in so doing,
would get the non-encrypted passwords directly from the <SYSTEM>INDEX file
itself

so with the above background:

when Anonymous FTP was introduced on Tenex, with the wheeled FTPSRV process
playing file system, yours truly found that by first logging in to a Tenex
FTP Server with anonymous (with any password), one could then subsequently
login as any other Tenex user with any password on that connection

so what did yours truly do?

connected to BBN-Tenex (the purveyors of Tenex), logged in Anonymous(ly),
then logged in as SYSTEM and retrieved the INDEX file

good for BBN in that they actually looked at/monitored their FTPSRV.LOG
file and saw this, the result of which (other than a highly perturbed Dan
Lynch) was that not only did Tenex get encrypted passwords implemented, but
also the "let's play/simulate the file system" from a privileged account
FTPSRV was ditched and replaced with a new mechanism that had users
actually be logged in as themselves (now including an actual Tenex
directory/user ANONYMOUS)

so WOE IS TO THEE WHO PLAYS/SIMULATES AN OPERATING SYSTEM'S "FILE SYSTEM"
and also has a "treasure chest" of unencrypted passwords to be sought after
for "plunder"

The End.

On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 5:10 PM Dave Crocker via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> The history of the Web usually has citations to work such as Engelbarts,
> for its conceptual history.  And that's entirely reasonable.  But that
> system was not a widely distributed set of independent operations.
>
> So I always point to Anonymous FTP as the operational base, for the
> model.  We relied on it for roughly 20 years, before gopher and the web
> gave us improved choices.
>
> But I don't remember the details of when Anonymous FTP came into
> service.  Just did a quick search and didn't find anything helpful.
>
> Perhaps this group knows some relevant details?
>
> d/
> --
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net
> --
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>
>

-- 
Geoff.Goodfellow at iconia.com
living as The Truth is True


From dhc at dcrocker.net  Wed Sep 29 05:39:49 2021
From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 05:39:49 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of Anonymous FTP
In-Reply-To: <CADHc3QEyPR=Nq_NNs7bvnKb-wMco7g3-AczN14K0h+yq9cvwDg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <46f24b1e-c084-eb91-d74a-908f47e8ff60@dcrocker.net>
 <1632887348.x9yctzwlq8gcg084@hostingemail.digitalspace.net>
 <CADHc3QEyPR=Nq_NNs7bvnKb-wMco7g3-AczN14K0h+yq9cvwDg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20a0c9f4-4d3e-ab6a-a1ea-af561c4842bd@dcrocker.net>

On 9/28/2021 8:56 PM, Darius Kazemi wrote:
> There is of course Padlipsky's anecdote (that probably won't settle 
> anything to anyone's satisfaction) on the invention of anonymous login 
> for FTP:

While one should never take an "I'm the inventor and here are the 
details" statement on it's own(*), the existence of it can, of course, 
be helpful.  I'm not an historian, but I'd assume that it would count as 
part of a collection of bits of complementary information, to form a 
'likelihood' assessment.

So, for example, I've been saying that I know Anonymous FTP was not in 
the initial use but appeared quickly, and I guess around 1974 or 1975. 
Padlisky's claim of 1973 is close enough, IMO, since that leaves some 
buffer for propagation (and impinging on my slow awareness.)

So, no, it doesn't 'settle' the question, but I'd count it as helpful. 
Thanks!

d/

(*) As least he didn't claim to invent email.

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net


From touch at strayalpha.com  Wed Sep 29 10:12:38 2021
From: touch at strayalpha.com (touch at strayalpha.com)
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 10:12:38 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of Anonymous FTP
In-Reply-To: <20a0c9f4-4d3e-ab6a-a1ea-af561c4842bd@dcrocker.net>
References: <46f24b1e-c084-eb91-d74a-908f47e8ff60@dcrocker.net>
 <1632887348.x9yctzwlq8gcg084@hostingemail.digitalspace.net>
 <CADHc3QEyPR=Nq_NNs7bvnKb-wMco7g3-AczN14K0h+yq9cvwDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20a0c9f4-4d3e-ab6a-a1ea-af561c4842bd@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <4E491991-C83F-4882-B005-C063CA768926@strayalpha.com>

Hi, all,

Does anyone remember when each of the following happened:

	anonymous/no password
	guest/no password
	anonymous/anonymous
	anonymous/guest
	guest/guest
	ftp/ftp

I recall seeing these variants (there may have been others).

Joe
?
Joe Touch, temporal epistemologist
www.strayalpha.com

> On Sep 29, 2021, at 5:39 AM, Dave Crocker via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> On 9/28/2021 8:56 PM, Darius Kazemi wrote:
>> There is of course Padlipsky's anecdote (that probably won't settle anything to anyone's satisfaction) on the invention of anonymous login for FTP:
> 
> While one should never take an "I'm the inventor and here are the details" statement on it's own(*), the existence of it can, of course, be helpful.  I'm not an historian, but I'd assume that it would count as part of a collection of bits of complementary information, to form a 'likelihood' assessment.
> 
> So, for example, I've been saying that I know Anonymous FTP was not in the initial use but appeared quickly, and I guess around 1974 or 1975. Padlisky's claim of 1973 is close enough, IMO, since that leaves some buffer for propagation (and impinging on my slow awareness.)
> 
> So, no, it doesn't 'settle' the question, but I'd count it as helpful. Thanks!
> 
> d/
> 
> (*) As least he didn't claim to invent email.
> 
> -- 
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> bbiw.net
> -- 
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history



From jack at 3kitty.org  Wed Sep 29 12:00:41 2021
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 12:00:41 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of Anonymous FTP
In-Reply-To: <4E491991-C83F-4882-B005-C063CA768926@strayalpha.com>
References: <46f24b1e-c084-eb91-d74a-908f47e8ff60@dcrocker.net>
 <1632887348.x9yctzwlq8gcg084@hostingemail.digitalspace.net>
 <CADHc3QEyPR=Nq_NNs7bvnKb-wMco7g3-AczN14K0h+yq9cvwDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20a0c9f4-4d3e-ab6a-a1ea-af561c4842bd@dcrocker.net>
 <4E491991-C83F-4882-B005-C063CA768926@strayalpha.com>
Message-ID: <0674fae4-a8a8-57cd-417a-6bdcae1e0b8c@3kitty.org>

I doubt you can find specific times/places for use of such 
names/passwords.? IIRC, there was no effort to standardize such things.? 
Some site would start to use a specific name/password, and other sites 
would adopt it if they chose to do so.

My recollection is that the introduction of "anonymous" FTP happened 
when electronic mail started being handled by mail servers. 
Specifically, I recall that I was implementing a mail server on MIT-DM 
(which didn't believe in any passwords at the time), but other systems 
were less cavalier about security.

Prior to mail, FTP usage was pretty similar to Telnet usage. ? If you 
wanted to interact using FTP with another machine on the ARPANET, you 
had to have an account there so you could log in to that machine. ? Then 
you could move files with whatever permissions your account had on that 
machine's file system.?? Some machines had "public" accounts that were 
available (IIRC that was how SRI-NIC provided the Network Information 
Center where all sorts of useful files were available.)

That wasn't workable for mail, since it was desirable to be able to mail 
someone even when you didn't have an account on their system.??? Also, 
the "server" had to start running before it knew which user it was 
working for, and somehow deal with mail sent to multiple users.

For systems like ITS on MIT-DM, that wasn't a problem.? For systems like 
MIT-MULTICS (and no doubt others), it wasn't clear how to build such a 
server which wouldn't be operating for any specific user, especially as 
it received incoming mail.

Some systems had trouble accommodating such issues created by 
networking.? E.g., I remember discussing this with Ken Pogran, who was 
implementing mail on MIT-MULTICS, which tried very hard to enforce a 
"secure" system where all users were protected from each other.?? Which 
account should it be running on? ? How does it switch to another user 
when it later becomes clear who is to receive the incoming mail. ? (Ken 
probably remembers more).

So, I *think* the "Anonymous" convention was created as a way to have a 
"user" that could be associated with the activities of a mail server, 
where it wasn't possible to tell which real user of the system should 
actually be associated.?? That affected things like allocation of costs, 
disk space quotas, permissions to read/write parts of the file system, 
etc.?? Computer OSes would have a "user" who ran the mail server, which 
of necessity had to be able to "serve" mail for all of the real users 
who had accounts there.

This was certainly in the early 70s but I can't remember exactly when.?? 
IMHO, it was probably the first, or at least early, instance of the 
shift from the "users on their computers running their jobs" model into 
the richer "distributed system" structure with lots of interacting 
servers performing tasks for all users throughout the network, even when 
a user is not "logged in" at the time.

Abhay Bhushan's office was down the hall from mine, and I remember 
discussing various issues with him about FTP's support for "mail". In 
particular, I lobbied for MLFL as an addition to the MAIL command in FTP 
in order to solve some problems which came up while implementing a mail 
system on MIT-DM.?? Abhay released several RFCs in the early 70s 
refining the FTP spec, and it's possible that "Anonymous" was included 
in one of those, which might supply a timeframe for when it happened.

So, IMHO some systems were unwilling to easily make that shift as the 
ARPANET took hold.?? There had to be "The User" for any compute job to 
run, as had been required since the days of punch cards. "Anonymous" was 
that User.

/Jack Haverty
(JFH at MIT-DM 1970-1977)

On 9/29/21 10:12 AM, touch--- via Internet-history wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> Does anyone remember when each of the following happened:
>
> 	anonymous/no password
> 	guest/no password
> 	anonymous/anonymous
> 	anonymous/guest
> 	guest/guest
> 	ftp/ftp
>
> I recall seeing these variants (there may have been others).
>
> Joe
> ?
> Joe Touch, temporal epistemologist
> www.strayalpha.com
>
>> On Sep 29, 2021, at 5:39 AM, Dave Crocker via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 9/28/2021 8:56 PM, Darius Kazemi wrote:
>>> There is of course Padlipsky's anecdote (that probably won't settle anything to anyone's satisfaction) on the invention of anonymous login for FTP:
>> While one should never take an "I'm the inventor and here are the details" statement on it's own(*), the existence of it can, of course, be helpful.  I'm not an historian, but I'd assume that it would count as part of a collection of bits of complementary information, to form a 'likelihood' assessment.
>>
>> So, for example, I've been saying that I know Anonymous FTP was not in the initial use but appeared quickly, and I guess around 1974 or 1975. Padlisky's claim of 1973 is close enough, IMO, since that leaves some buffer for propagation (and impinging on my slow awareness.)
>>
>> So, no, it doesn't 'settle' the question, but I'd count it as helpful. Thanks!
>>
>> d/
>>
>> (*) As least he didn't claim to invent email.
>>
>> -- 
>> Dave Crocker
>> Brandenburg InternetWorking
>> bbiw.net
>> -- 
>> Internet-history mailing list
>> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
>> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history