[ih] What does TELNET stand for?

[Steve Crocker]

Others can fill in fuller details, so the following is brief.

Yes, ACM held annual conferences.

The Spring Joint Computer Conference (SJCC) and Fall Joint Computer
Conference (FJCC) were sponsored jointly by the ACM, IEEE and perhaps
another organization.  This was the basis for "Joint" in the conference
titles.  During the period of interest, the SJCCs were in the east and the
FJCCs were in the west.  The conferences grew large enough -- around 50,000
attendees, if I recall correctly -- that the only cities with adequate
facilities in those days were Atlantic City and Las Vegas.

There was a set of five Arpanet papers at the 1970 SJCC, and another set of
five papers at the 1972 SJCC.  In each of those, there was one paper on the
Arpanet host-level protocols.  The 1970 paper introduced the host-host
protocol.  The 1972 paper focused on the layers and the initial set of
application protocols.

Steve


On Sat, Aug 23, 2025 at 11:12 AM John Day <jeanjour at comcast.net> wrote:

> Okay, that may have been. I just know that ACM went from NCC, National
> Computer Conference to Fall and Spring.
>
> So there was an East and West Coast conference starting in the 50s?
> Interesting. By ACM.  What were they called. I can’t say I have ever seen
> them referenced.
>
> Have to do some digging.
>
> Thanks,
> John
>
> > On Aug 23, 2025, at 11:05, gsteemso <48bitsorbust at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > 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
>
>

-- 
Sent by a Verified

sender