[ih] early networking: "the solution"

[Scott Bradner]

yes but...

the ATM Forum people felt that ATM should replace TCP and most of IP
i.e. become the new IP and that new applications should assume they were
running over ATM and directly make use of ATM features (e.g., ABR)

ATM as yet another wire was just fine (though a bit choppy)

Scott



> On Apr 21, 2024, at 9:02 AM, Andrew G. Malis <agmalis at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Scott,
> 
> ATM could carry any protocol that you could carry over Ethernet, see RFCs 2225, 2492, and 2684. 
> 
> Cheers,
> Andy
> 
> 
> On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 8:15 PM Scott Bradner via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Apr 20, 2024, at 8:11 PM, John Gilmore via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> > 
> > John Day via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> >> In the early 70s, people were trying to figure out how to interwork multiple networks of different technologies. What was the solution that was arrived at that led to the current Internet?
> >> I conjectured yesterday that the fundamental solution must have been in hand by the time Cerf and Kahn published their paper.
> >> Are you conjecturing that the solution was gateways? and hence protocol translation at the gateways?
> > 
> > Maybe it's too obvious in retrospect.  But the "solution" that I see was
> > that everyone had to move to using a protocol that was independent of
> > their physical medium. 
> 
> and ATM was an example of the reverse - it was a protocol & a network - OK
> as long as you did not build applications that knew they were running over ATM 
> (or if ATM had been the last networking protocol)
> 
> Scott
> -- 
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history