[ih] What does TELNET stand for?

[John R. Levine]

On Sat, 23 Aug 2025, John Day 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.)  ;-)

I went to the 1970 SJCC with the RESISTORS.  There was a phone company 
strike that years so everyone else was stuck, but we used an acoustic 
coupler with a payphone in the lobby to call a PDP-8 in Hopewell we used.

I also went to the 1971 IFIP conference in Ljubljana.  In those days there 
was only one international computer conference every three ywars.  I still 
have my copy of the proceedings.  I don't recall anything Arpanet related, 
but the logistics were terrible, meeting rooms in buildings all over town 
with very crowded bus rides between them, so I missed a lot.

R's,
John
>>
>> 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
>>> -
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> https://app.smartsheet.com/b/form/9b6ef0621638436ab0a9b23cb0668b0b?The%20list%20to%20be%20unsubscribed%20from=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
>> -
>> Unsubscribe: https://app.smartsheet.com/b/form/9b6ef0621638436ab0a9b23cb0668b0b?The%20list%20to%20be%20unsubscribed%20from=Internet-history
>
>

Regards,
John Levine, johnl at taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly