[ih] Internet analyses (Was Re: IPv8...)

[Greg Skinner]

On Apr 23, 2026, at 12:38 PM, Jack Haverty <jack at 3kitty.org> wrote:
> 
> Thanks, Greg.  Those studies are not quite what I was seeking.  I was curious if there had been "system level" analyses of different approaches, decisions made, and results from field observations, and conclusions about which was the "right choice" with retrospective experience.
> 
> For example, the ARPANET (and others) provided a "virtual circuit" service to its attached computers.  In the Internet, TCP provided a similar service of a reliable byte-stream between two computers.
> 
> Early ARPANET analyses, circa 1970s or before, analyzed various techniques for providing a virtual circuit service.  For example, I recall reading arguments proposing or opposing the use of a "front-end" to hold much of the communications mechanisms, in lieu of putting such mechanisms in the attached computers.   The resultant implementation had the ARPANET composed of IMP minicomputers, where much of the flow, error, addressing, and such communications mechanisms were implemented.
> 
> In contrast, the TCP architecture moved much of that same kind of mechanism into the attached computers, rather than into all of the various switching boxes that most underlying component networks.   There were some "front end" implementations of TCP, but I think they all died out.  While I was at BBN, I saw evidence in comments in IMP code that indicated other ideas for Internet capabilities were being considered for implementation within IMPs.  For example, there were comments in the IMP code about things like "network numbers" of other networks.
> 
> A "system level" analysis might have compared these two approaches.   The ARPANET ran for more than a decade and was measured a lot, so the data about its behavior may still be available.  The Internet has been operational for more than 40 years, so lots of operational data may also be available.  A system analysis would consider performance, efficiency, reliability, and even things like economics.
> 
> For example, the recent discussions about "installed base" effects might be analyzed from an economics perspectove; the "installed base" of the TCP universe is not only large because of all the devices and people we now have using the Internet, the architectural differences alone make a TCP network "larger" than a similar-sized ARPANET.   Such effects were even noticeable back in the early 1980s, when the Internet wasn't much bigger than the ARPANET by itself.  Changing some mechanism or protocol in an IMP was a lot easier than changing a similar mechanism in TCP, which had all sorts of computers, operating systems, and organizations involved.  Has the "cost" of that difference in size of installed base been helpful or harmful?
> 

Unfortunately, again, I only have time for a quick response.  I asked ChatGPT where one could find analyses such as you described in your previous message.  It gave me several general descriptions of sources. [1] (I used the ChatGPT share feature to produce these links, and don’t know how long they will last.)  When I asked it to follow up with specific papers and authors, it gave me several, including kc claffy <https://www.caida.org/staff/kc__claffy/>, the founder of CAIDA. [2] She collaborates with many people, including Dave Clark and Geoff Huston. [3] IMO, it would be worthwhile to contact her or members of her team for the types of system level studies you seek.  Some of their datasets go back to 1998. [4]

--gregbo

[1] https://chatgpt.com/s/t_69eafc45702c8191ad72783f81ecf1da
[2] https://chatgpt.com/s/t_69eb16dad9ec819199fdd9e06d503e1d
[3] https://www.potaroo.net/papers/2018-07-sigcomm-48-3-ccr.pdf
[4] https://catalog.caida.org/dataset/as_relationships_serial_1