[ih] Correct name for early TCP/IP working group?

[Vint Cerf]

Thanks for that bit of lore, Andy!!

v


On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 11:42 AM Andrew G. Malis via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> Vint and Jack,
>
> There weren't any "gateway" functions per se in the IMPs. Rather, the IMPs
> kept the same unique IMP numbering (no IMP duplicate numbers) until the
> physical split was complete. Thus, routing continued as usual for the
> single merged network. The logical split was enforced by only allowing
> hosts on the same "network" to communicate. Thus, any gateway functionality
> would have to occur in a host, as usual.
>
> Once the physical split was complete, each network then had its own
> independent routing, and we could have duplicate IMP numbers in the two
> networks. We then added network numbering to the routing updates and link
> management to forestall any issues if AT&T accidentally cross-connected the
> network links. As I recall, this did happen on occasion. Alan Hill would
> probably have the best recollection of any operational issues that came up
> as a result of accidental cross-connection.
>
> Cheers,
> Andy
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 9:43 AM vinton cerf <vgcerf at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for that, Andy - I had not realized that this was used as a
> > scaffolding - must have affected routing in some way and created a kind
> of
> > gateway IMP notion for IMPs lying along a border between two connected
> > subsets?
> >
> > v
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 9:28 AM Andrew G. Malis via Internet-history <
> > internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Jack,
> >>
> >> - There was some work however within the ARPANET IMP software to
> >> > acknowledge the need for multiple networks.   For example, some of the
> >> > formats of data as it passed through the ARPANET included fields
> >> > labelled "Network Number".  AFAIK this was never actually fully
> >> > implemented so the ARPANET itself never achieved connectivity between
> >> > multiple networks until TCP was deployed.
> >>
> >>
> >> As I recall, the ARPANET's "network number" field was used during the
> >> ARPANET/MILNET split to allow logical separation of the IMPs and hosts
> >> sharing the same backbone infrastructure until the physical split could
> be
> >> completed.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Andy
> >> --
> >> 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
>


-- 
Please send any postal/overnight deliveries to:
Vint Cerf
Google, LLC
1900 Reston Metro Plaza, 16th Floor
Reston, VA 20190
+1 (571) 213 1346


until further notice