[ih] What does TELNET stand for?

[gsteemso]

Hi all,

A nitpick of a nit:  AFAIK there were two conferences ever since they started in the 1950s [except for a single year where one was skipped], it's just they were originally "East" and "West" rather than "Spring" and "Fall".

Gordon S.

> On Aug 23, 2025, at 7:23 AM, John Day via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> Just a nit of a typo only because it might confuse younger members of this list.
> 
> Steve meant, the paper for “Spring Joint Computer Conference” not Sprint. ;-)
> 
> When computing graduated from one conference a year to two.  (I know hard to believe there were only two a year.)  ;-)
> 
> Take care,
> John
> 
>> On Aug 23, 2025, at 09:48, Steve Crocker via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>> 
>> John, et al,
>> 
>> This question caught me by surprise.  I was directly involved in the design
>> and development of the initial suite of protocols for the Arpanet.  The
>> initial suite consisted of the Host-Host protocol, the Telnet protocol, and
>> File Transfer Protocol (FTP).
>> 
>> An aside: The Host-Host Protocol later became known as the Network Control
>> Protocol (NCP).  The acronym NCP originally meant Network Control Program,
>> and it referred to the software that had to be added to the operating
>> system to interact with the IMP and make access to the network available to
>> user level processes in the time-shared systems.  Eventually, there was no
>> need for a special term for that software and the term "Host-Host Protocol"
>> was too bland.  People started referring to the protocol as the Network
>> Control Protocol, and thus the meaning of "NCP" changed.
>> 
>> Even though I had been actively involved in the developments of those
>> protocols, and even though I was first author on the 1972 Sprint Joint
>> Computer Conference paper, the words "Teletype Network" or
>> "Telecommunications Network" do not ring a bell for me.  A possible caveat:
>> The Network Working Group grew from a handful of representatives from the
>> first four sites in early 1969 to about fifty or so people attending the
>> Network Working Group meetings in the next two years.  I remember realizing
>> we needed to split our meetings into two parallel groups, one focused on
>> the Hot-Host protocol and one focused on the application protocols.  I
>> concentrated primarily on the Host-Host protocol and stepped back from the
>> detailed development of the application protocols.
>> 
>> The first mention of "Telnet" in the RFC series is in RFC 97, A First Cut
>> at a Proposed Telnet Protocol, by John Melvin and Richard Watson.  They
>> were at SRI in Doug Engelbart's group, i.e.. the second node on the
>> Arpanet, and hence an intimate part of the Network Working Group.
>> 
>> So far as I can recall, "Telnet" or "TELNET"sprang forth as an easy and
>> natural designation for the remote terminal access protocol that we
>> envisioned as one of the two initial application protocols.  I never
>> thought of it as an acronym for a lengthier phrase.  I'm pretty sure we
>> used the term "Telnet" in our informal NWG meetings.  By the time Melvin
>> and Watson wrote RFC 97 in February 1971, the term was in common use within
>> the group.
>> 
>> It's possible they created the word as an acronym of Terminal Network,
>> Telephone Network, Telecommunications Network, or something similar.  It's
>> equally possible they created the word as a nominal but unspecified acronym
>> of one of those phrases.  To do better than I can, one would have to ask
>> them.  (I think Watson is no longer with us.  I don't know about Melvin.)
>> 
>> In the 1972 paper, I agree with John Levine.  The phrase
>> "Telecommunications Network" feels to me as a back formation of an
>> appositive.  It's even possible I wrote that sentence, though I do not
>> recall doing so.  Haefner, Metcalfe and Postel were the other co-authors.
>> Postel is no longer available.  Metcalfe is, and I don't know about Haefner.
>> 
>> Bottom line: I can't say for sure whether "TELNET" was created as an
>> acronym or as a free-standing word.  I'm inclined to believe it was the
>> latter.  In any case, as best I can tell, the 1972 paper is the only time
>> it was associated with "Telecommunications Network."
>> 
>> Steve
>> 
>> 
>>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 6:45 PM John Levine via Internet-history <
>>> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> This question came up on another list.
>>> 
>>> I have seen claims that it's Teletype Network or Telecommunications
>>> Network, which smells like acronym reverse engineering to me.
>>> 
>>> Does it stand for anything?  Where did the name come from?
>>> 
>>> R's,
>>> John
>>> --
>>> Internet-history mailing list
>>> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
>>> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>> 
>> --
>> Sent by a Verified
>> 
>> sender
>> --
>> 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