[ih] Politics behind the Internet

[Scott O. Bradner]

it helped that Dennis Jennings insisted that NSFNET would be TCP/IP-only

Scott

> On Jul 22, 2024, at 4:50 PM, Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> On 23-Jul-24 05:38, Craig Partridge via Internet-history wrote:
>> You may or may not remember Milo Medin (later of @Home) in his role pushing
>> the NASA Science Internet.
>> Quite the reverse of bureaucratic BS -- rather bureaucratic leverage.  My
>> favorite one was c. 1990 -- Milo needed a single-mode fiber optic
>> connection to carry data from NASA Ames up the peninsula to, I think,
>> somewhere in Palo Alto.  Pac Bell's representatives didn't want to sell him
>> one and made various comments about how T3 could meet his needs.  So Milo
>> lost his patience and said something along the lines of "look, I'm the
>> Federal government, and I can run my own fiber up the railroad tracks.  I'm
>> giving you an opportunity to have me not do that".  PacBell caved quickly.
> 
> That is *so* Milo, made me smile.
> 
> In both DoE and NASA there were very strong DECnet communities that showed the
> way to go. When those two user communities started migrating away from VAX/VMS
> to Ultrix and other varieties of Unix, they created a strong pull for TCP/IP
> support. At least in the DoE case, this pull was strongly coordinated with the
> European (and increasingly Asian) pull from the high energy physics people.
> 
> This is how I ended up in meetings with Milo at places like Lawrence Livermore
> and even NASA Goddard, iirc.
> 
>   Brian
> 
>> Craig
>> On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 9:38 AM Bob Purvy <bpurvy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> most of us know Licklider, Taylor, Kahn, Cerf, Wolfe - the folks at DOE
>>> & NASA, not so much.
>>> 
>>> My point exactly. The DOE & NASA folks could have smothered it all in
>>> bureaucratic BS, but they didn't.
>>> 
>>> On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 8:25 AM Miles Fidelman <mfidelman at meetinghouse.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Bob Purvy wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> The program
>>>> managers involved did something very unlike government program managers
>>>> - they connected their networks instead of building their own fiefdoms
>>>> (and they let their users design and build the various networks).
>>>> 
>>>> ... and this is why, on the Internet Old Farts on Facebook, I gave a
>>>> shoutout to the admins who did this. Everyone knows the names of the people
>>>> on this list, and they should, but those anonymous managers in the
>>>> government COULD have done the safe thing and followed normal bureaucratic
>>>> protocols, but did not.
>>>> 
>>>> Well, I think most of us know Licklider, Taylor, Kahn, Cerf, Wolfe - the
>>>> folks at DOE & NASA, not so much.
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> 
>>>> Miles
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 7:10 AM Miles Fidelman via Internet-history <
>>>> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Craig Partridge via Internet-history wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 7:59 PM Jack Haverty via Internet-history <
>>>>>> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> IIRC, there was little talk of "spreading" either politically or
>>>>>>> economically.  Simply put, there was no relevant audience reachable
>>>>>>> through the networks.   All users were internal, working on or for
>>>>>>> government projects.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I broadly agree with Jack but will disagree in one element - it wasn't
>>>>> all
>>>>>> inward focused on ARPA funded folks.  By 1980, computer science
>>>>> programs in
>>>>>> the United States noticed that departments that had ARPANET access were
>>>>>> experiencing greater research success, in part because it was easier to
>>>>>> collaborate with other researchers.  This led to the notion of
>>>>> providing
>>>>>> email and (limited) TCP/IP access to the Internet via CSNET, which was
>>>>> set
>>>>>> up as a joint DARPA-NSF program in 1981.  Broadly, that worked -- by
>>>>> 1986,
>>>>>> over 150 universities and research labs (such as HP Labs) were on
>>>>> CSNET, to
>>>>>> which you have to add the many universities directly on ARPANET.
>>>>>> Essentially, any top 100 and most top 200 research universities in the
>>>>> US
>>>>>> were on ARPANET or CSNET.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thus when NSF was looking for a way to supercharge computing and
>>>>> research
>>>>>> in STEM, with supercomputers and network access, CSNET showed how that
>>>>>> could work.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> The magic of the Internet, is that it grew by demand-pull, from the
>>>>> beginning.  The ARPANET was created to reduce comms costs for
>>>>> researchers - who were basically told to spend their communications
>>>>> budgets on ARPANET connectivity - forcing universities to start building
>>>>> campus networks.  Then non-ARPA-funded researchers saw the value their
>>>>> colleagues were getting from connectivity - and demanded that NSF, and
>>>>> DOE, and NASA, and ... build networks for them - and the program
>>>>> managers involved did something very unlike government program managers
>>>>> - they connected their networks instead of building their own fiefdoms
>>>>> (and they let their users design and build the various networks).
>>>>> Government contractors discovered that they needed to be plugged in, and
>>>>> found ways to get connectivity. Graduating students needed connectivity
>>>>> - if only to email with potential employers.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Barry Shein set up the World.  I started reselling TELENET services.
>>>>> NEARNET was built, largely with user funding - hence not subject to
>>>>> "government only" traffic restrictions (Prospect Hill allowed a
>>>>> microwave dish on their roof, in return for a connection to their campus
>>>>> network).
>>>>> 
>>>>> And it all just happened.
>>>>> 
>>>>> And then the marketeers stepped in, and started rebuilding a world of
>>>>> walled gardens, designed to capture markets, instead of fostering
>>>>> communication & collaboration.  And now we find ourselves in today's
>>>>> mess - where connectivity & interoperability are no longer the core
>>>>> values & virtues of the net.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sigh...
>>>>> 
>>>>> Miles Fidelman
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>>>>> In practice, there is.  .... Yogi Berra
>>>>> 
>>>>> Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
>>>>> Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
>>>>> In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
>>>>> nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Internet-history mailing list
>>>>> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
>>>>> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>>>> In practice, there is.  .... Yogi Berra
>>>> 
>>>> Theory is when you know everything but nothing works.
>>>> Practice is when everything works but no one knows why.
>>>> In our lab, theory and practice are combined:
>>>> nothing works and no one knows why.  ... unknown
>>>> 
>>>> 
> -- 
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history