From lukasz at bromirski.net  Wed Jul  1 03:17:47 2026
From: lukasz at bromirski.net (Lukasz Bromirski)
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2026 12:17:47 +0200
Subject: [ih] capacity v bandwidth
In-Reply-To: <CAHQj4CdA=LTDZBqGmG-qKKZGMg83gMk3iE2pvJWbGzUtKpkMFA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20260602172828.3E3EB18C074@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
 <CAHQj4CdA=LTDZBqGmG-qKKZGMg83gMk3iE2pvJWbGzUtKpkMFA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <19F15EC8-50C0-47EA-BBED-F96399F4E6A3@bromirski.net>


> On 2 Jun 2026, at 21:24, Craig Partridge via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> [?] At some point Milo Medin took pity on me and took me out
> onto the Moffat Field runway to watch a U2 take off (still a treasured
> memory).

Haha, Network Management < U2. I bet a lot of folks would agree :)

Legends :)

-- 
?ukasz Bromirski         | "There's no sense in being precise when you don?t
infosec.exchange/@mr0vka | know what you're talking about.? John von Neumann



From vgcerf at gmail.com  Thu Jul  2 08:01:51 2026
From: vgcerf at gmail.com (vinton cerf)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2026 11:01:51 -0400
Subject: [ih] clever usc creation
Message-ID: <CAAFtm_V1ddramQXKDm_ThEmXMDu2Fu0he7cGQhxzQ7FVtNFvbg@mail.gmail.com>

https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2026/06/for-americas-250th-we-created-commemorative-stamps-of-trojan-builders/

v


From 6.internet at gmail.com  Thu Jul  2 09:02:15 2026
From: 6.internet at gmail.com (Sivan)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2026 21:32:15 +0530
Subject: [ih] clever usc creation
In-Reply-To: <CAAFtm_V1ddramQXKDm_ThEmXMDu2Fu0he7cGQhxzQ7FVtNFvbg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAFtm_V1ddramQXKDm_ThEmXMDu2Fu0he7cGQhxzQ7FVtNFvbg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKsgsGyqfV9uTHC1MEKcHtciZNbkWWVjrv1SWe_B5kD=YGBWYQ@mail.gmail.com>

Vint,

>From what little I know, the list of names seems to eloquently miss out on
at least a few Comouting and Internet heroes.


 Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
sender

On Thu, 2 Jul, 2026, 20:32 vinton cerf via Internet-history, <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

>
> https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2026/06/for-americas-250th-we-created-commemorative-stamps-of-trojan-builders/
>
> v
> --
> 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
>


From vgcerf at gmail.com  Thu Jul  2 11:19:44 2026
From: vgcerf at gmail.com (vinton cerf)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2026 14:19:44 -0400
Subject: [ih] clever usc creation
In-Reply-To: <CAKsgsGyqfV9uTHC1MEKcHtciZNbkWWVjrv1SWe_B5kD=YGBWYQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAFtm_V1ddramQXKDm_ThEmXMDu2Fu0he7cGQhxzQ7FVtNFvbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKsgsGyqfV9uTHC1MEKcHtciZNbkWWVjrv1SWe_B5kD=YGBWYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAFtm_UfTPESL-f9yCWqv=e2Sw0Otp1uJZUteh9U2U8mZVGfsA@mail.gmail.com>

they excluded people who did not have an affiliation with USC.

v


On Thu, Jul 2, 2026 at 12:02?PM Sivan <6.internet at gmail.com> wrote:

> Vint,
>
> From what little I know, the list of names seems to eloquently miss out on
> at least a few Comouting and Internet heroes.
>
>
>  Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
> sender
>
> On Thu, 2 Jul, 2026, 20:32 vinton cerf via Internet-history, <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2026/06/for-americas-250th-we-created-commemorative-stamps-of-trojan-builders/
>>
>> v
>> --
>> 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
>>
>


From karl at iwl.com  Thu Jul  2 12:20:22 2026
From: karl at iwl.com (Karl Auerbach)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2026 12:20:22 -0700
Subject: [ih] clever usc creation
In-Reply-To: <CAAFtm_V1ddramQXKDm_ThEmXMDu2Fu0he7cGQhxzQ7FVtNFvbg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAFtm_V1ddramQXKDm_ThEmXMDu2Fu0he7cGQhxzQ7FVtNFvbg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f479bd97-6e5d-4bf3-9446-2c423741ace4@iwl.com>

I am so very thrilled to see Steve Casner in this collection.

He and I worked very closely together for several years and after that 
he and his wife Karen used to come over to our house for gatherings and 
to attend plays at Santa Cruz Shakespeare.

I never had an conversation with Steve Casner that did not leave me more 
educated and informed than I had been before.? In my mind there is a tie 
for the prize of "nicest person on the Internet" between Steve Casner 
and John Romkey.

I don't know if it is appropriate on this list to include a photo (Of 
Steve C and Eve S - [and Dave Crocker and I believe the back of Bob 
Hinden's head] , but here it goes...? (This was taken at the Computer 
History Museum event for Danny Cohen.)

 ? ? ? ? --karl--

On 7/2/26 8:01 AM, vinton cerf via Internet-history wrote:
> https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2026/06/for-americas-250th-we-created-commemorative-stamps-of-trojan-builders/
>
> v

From geoff at iconia.com  Thu Jul  2 15:36:31 2026
From: geoff at iconia.com (the keyboard of geoff goodfellow)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2026 15:36:31 -0700
Subject: [ih] clever usc creation
In-Reply-To: <f479bd97-6e5d-4bf3-9446-2c423741ace4@iwl.com>
References: <CAAFtm_V1ddramQXKDm_ThEmXMDu2Fu0he7cGQhxzQ7FVtNFvbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <f479bd97-6e5d-4bf3-9446-2c423741ace4@iwl.com>
Message-ID: <CAEf-zriYh_ANSRsY0bjNUnd8eOaCWn3r5z_61r9rCN8zNB00Gw@mail.gmail.com>

gotta chime in here with in yours truly's mind the tie for the prize of
"nicest person on the Internet" would have to be between Vint Cerf and
Steve Crocker (with whom yours truly has interacted with since the 70's)

g

On Thu, Jul 2, 2026 at 12:20?PM Karl Auerbach via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> I am so very thrilled to see Steve Casner in this collection.
>
> He and I worked very closely together for several years and after that
> he and his wife Karen used to come over to our house for gatherings and
> to attend plays at Santa Cruz Shakespeare.
>
> I never had an conversation with Steve Casner that did not leave me more
> educated and informed than I had been before.  In my mind there is a tie
> for the prize of "nicest person on the Internet" between Steve Casner
> and John Romkey.
>
> I don't know if it is appropriate on this list to include a photo (Of
> Steve C and Eve S - [and Dave Crocker and I believe the back of Bob
> Hinden's head] , but here it goes...  (This was taken at the Computer
> History Museum event for Danny Cohen.)
>
>          --karl--
>
> On 7/2/26 8:01 AM, vinton cerf via Internet-history wrote:
> >
> https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2026/06/for-americas-250th-we-created-commemorative-stamps-of-trojan-builders/
> >
> > v
> --
> 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
>
>

-- 
Geoff.Goodfellow at iconia.com
living as The Truth is True


From carl at media.org  Thu Jul  2 15:45:06 2026
From: carl at media.org (Carl Malamud)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2026 15:45:06 -0700
Subject: [ih] clever usc creation
In-Reply-To: <CAEf-zriYh_ANSRsY0bjNUnd8eOaCWn3r5z_61r9rCN8zNB00Gw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAFtm_V1ddramQXKDm_ThEmXMDu2Fu0he7cGQhxzQ7FVtNFvbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <f479bd97-6e5d-4bf3-9446-2c423741ace4@iwl.com>
 <CAEf-zriYh_ANSRsY0bjNUnd8eOaCWn3r5z_61r9rCN8zNB00Gw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAFr-4ghmGF2uELKUrtKMVo3GCfa0J1ps-pSLUC4hgFzCTTbTLQ@mail.gmail.com>

+1.

On Thu, Jul 2, 2026 at 3:37?PM the keyboard of geoff goodfellow via
Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> gotta chime in here with in yours truly's mind the tie for the prize of
> "nicest person on the Internet" would have to be between Vint Cerf and
> Steve Crocker (with whom yours truly has interacted with since the 70's)
>
> g
>
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2026 at 12:20?PM Karl Auerbach via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
> > I am so very thrilled to see Steve Casner in this collection.
> >
> > He and I worked very closely together for several years and after that
> > he and his wife Karen used to come over to our house for gatherings and
> > to attend plays at Santa Cruz Shakespeare.
> >
> > I never had an conversation with Steve Casner that did not leave me more
> > educated and informed than I had been before.  In my mind there is a tie
> > for the prize of "nicest person on the Internet" between Steve Casner
> > and John Romkey.
> >
> > I don't know if it is appropriate on this list to include a photo (Of
> > Steve C and Eve S - [and Dave Crocker and I believe the back of Bob
> > Hinden's head] , but here it goes...  (This was taken at the Computer
> > History Museum event for Danny Cohen.)
> >
> >          --karl--
> >
> > On 7/2/26 8:01 AM, vinton cerf via Internet-history wrote:
> > >
> >
> https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2026/06/for-americas-250th-we-created-commemorative-stamps-of-trojan-builders/
> > >
> > > v
> > --
> > 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
> >
> >
>
> --
> Geoff.Goodfellow at iconia.com
> living as The Truth is True
> --
> 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
>


From karl at iwl.com  Thu Jul  2 16:36:41 2026
From: karl at iwl.com (Karl Auerbach)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2026 16:36:41 -0700
Subject: [ih] clever usc creation
In-Reply-To: <f479bd97-6e5d-4bf3-9446-2c423741ace4@iwl.com>
References: <CAAFtm_V1ddramQXKDm_ThEmXMDu2Fu0he7cGQhxzQ7FVtNFvbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <f479bd97-6e5d-4bf3-9446-2c423741ace4@iwl.com>
Message-ID: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>

Well apparently image attachments don't make it through? the ISOC mail 
systems.

Here is a link to the photo I mentioned...

https://cavebear.com/images/misc/steve-and-eve.jpg

On 7/2/26 12:20 PM, Karl Auerbach via Internet-history wrote:
> I am so very thrilled to see Steve Casner in this collection.
>
> He and I worked very closely together for several years and after that 
> he and his wife Karen used to come over to our house for gatherings 
> and to attend plays at Santa Cruz Shakespeare.
>
> I never had an conversation with Steve Casner that did not leave me 
> more educated and informed than I had been before.? In my mind there 
> is a tie for the prize of "nicest person on the Internet" between 
> Steve Casner and John Romkey.
>
> I don't know if it is appropriate on this list to include a photo (Of 
> Steve C and Eve S - [and Dave Crocker and I believe the back of Bob 
> Hinden's head] , but here it goes...? (This was taken at the Computer 
> History Museum event for Danny Cohen.)
>
> ? ? ? ? --karl--
>
> On 7/2/26 8:01 AM, vinton cerf via Internet-history wrote:
>> https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2026/06/for-americas-250th-we-created-commemorative-stamps-of-trojan-builders/ 
>>
>>
>> v


From vgcerf at gmail.com  Thu Jul  2 17:36:34 2026
From: vgcerf at gmail.com (vinton cerf)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2026 20:36:34 -0400
Subject: [ih] clever usc creation
In-Reply-To: <CAEf-zriYh_ANSRsY0bjNUnd8eOaCWn3r5z_61r9rCN8zNB00Gw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAFtm_V1ddramQXKDm_ThEmXMDu2Fu0he7cGQhxzQ7FVtNFvbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <f479bd97-6e5d-4bf3-9446-2c423741ace4@iwl.com>
 <CAEf-zriYh_ANSRsY0bjNUnd8eOaCWn3r5z_61r9rCN8zNB00Gw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAFtm_Wv-i_QOa8od81YSaRZ4BHEFBrBxf8XariAM43YiBx8Cg@mail.gmail.com>

Steve an all-around nice guy, smart, helpful, and very persistent ( that's
a compliment)
V

On Thu, Jul 2, 2026, 18:37 the keyboard of geoff goodfellow via
Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> gotta chime in here with in yours truly's mind the tie for the prize of
> "nicest person on the Internet" would have to be between Vint Cerf and
> Steve Crocker (with whom yours truly has interacted with since the 70's)
>
> g
>
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2026 at 12:20?PM Karl Auerbach via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
> > I am so very thrilled to see Steve Casner in this collection.
> >
> > He and I worked very closely together for several years and after that
> > he and his wife Karen used to come over to our house for gatherings and
> > to attend plays at Santa Cruz Shakespeare.
> >
> > I never had an conversation with Steve Casner that did not leave me more
> > educated and informed than I had been before.  In my mind there is a tie
> > for the prize of "nicest person on the Internet" between Steve Casner
> > and John Romkey.
> >
> > I don't know if it is appropriate on this list to include a photo (Of
> > Steve C and Eve S - [and Dave Crocker and I believe the back of Bob
> > Hinden's head] , but here it goes...  (This was taken at the Computer
> > History Museum event for Danny Cohen.)
> >
> >          --karl--
> >
> > On 7/2/26 8:01 AM, vinton cerf via Internet-history wrote:
> > >
> >
> https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2026/06/for-americas-250th-we-created-commemorative-stamps-of-trojan-builders/
> > >
> > > v
> > --
> > 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
> >
> >
>
> --
> Geoff.Goodfellow at iconia.com
> living as The Truth is True
> --
> 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
>


From ajs at crankycanuck.ca  Thu Jul  2 21:09:50 2026
From: ajs at crankycanuck.ca (Andrew Sullivan)
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2026 00:09:50 -0400
Subject: [ih] Meta: attachment policy (was Re:  clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
Message-ID: <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>

Hi,

While there are doubtless many issues with Internet Society systems that can be laid at their (and depending on the age, my) feet, this is just a matter of list policy. AFAIK this list doesn?t allow attachments.  Attachments make it through Internet Society mail systems just fine. 

Best regards ,

A 
? 
Andrew Sullivan 
Please excuse my clumbsy thums

> On Jul 2, 2026, at 19:36, Karl Auerbach via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> ?Well apparently image attachments don't make it through  the ISOC mail systems.
> 
> Here is a link to the photo I mentioned...
> 
> https://cavebear.com/images/misc/steve-and-eve.jpg
> 
>> On 7/2/26 12:20 PM, Karl Auerbach via Internet-history wrote:
>> I am so very thrilled to see Steve Casner in this collection.
>> 
>> He and I worked very closely together for several years and after that he and his wife Karen used to come over to our house for gatherings and to attend plays at Santa Cruz Shakespeare.
>> 
>> I never had an conversation with Steve Casner that did not leave me more educated and informed than I had been before.  In my mind there is a tie for the prize of "nicest person on the Internet" between Steve Casner and John Romkey.
>> 
>> I don't know if it is appropriate on this list to include a photo (Of Steve C and Eve S - [and Dave Crocker and I believe the back of Bob Hinden's head] , but here it goes...  (This was taken at the Computer History Museum event for Danny Cohen.)
>> 
>>         --karl--
>> 
>>> On 7/2/26 8:01 AM, vinton cerf via Internet-history wrote:
>>> https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2026/06/for-americas-250th-we-created-commemorative-stamps-of-trojan-builders/
>>> 
>>> v
> --
> 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



From carl at media.org  Thu Jul  2 21:19:45 2026
From: carl at media.org (Carl Malamud)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2026 21:19:45 -0700
Subject: [ih] Meta: attachment policy (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
Message-ID: <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>

Well, if we?re going to walk the walk and do Internet History the right way
we should go totally 7-bit.  I vote that in addition to attachments, we ban
Unicode.

On Thu, Jul 2, 2026 at 9:10?PM Andrew Sullivan via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> While there are doubtless many issues with Internet Society systems that
> can be laid at their (and depending on the age, my) feet, this is just a
> matter of list policy. AFAIK this list doesn?t allow attachments.
> Attachments make it through Internet Society mail systems just fine.
>
> Best regards ,
>
> A
> ?
> Andrew Sullivan
> Please excuse my clumbsy thums
>
> > On Jul 2, 2026, at 19:36, Karl Auerbach via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> >
> > ?Well apparently image attachments don't make it through  the ISOC mail
> systems.
> >
> > Here is a link to the photo I mentioned...
> >
> > https://cavebear.com/images/misc/steve-and-eve.jpg
> >
> >> On 7/2/26 12:20 PM, Karl Auerbach via Internet-history wrote:
> >> I am so very thrilled to see Steve Casner in this collection.
> >>
> >> He and I worked very closely together for several years and after that
> he and his wife Karen used to come over to our house for gatherings and to
> attend plays at Santa Cruz Shakespeare.
> >>
> >> I never had an conversation with Steve Casner that did not leave me
> more educated and informed than I had been before.  In my mind there is a
> tie for the prize of "nicest person on the Internet" between Steve Casner
> and John Romkey.
> >>
> >> I don't know if it is appropriate on this list to include a photo (Of
> Steve C and Eve S - [and Dave Crocker and I believe the back of Bob
> Hinden's head] , but here it goes...  (This was taken at the Computer
> History Museum event for Danny Cohen.)
> >>
> >>         --karl--
> >>
> >>> On 7/2/26 8:01 AM, vinton cerf via Internet-history wrote:
> >>>
> https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2026/06/for-americas-250th-we-created-commemorative-stamps-of-trojan-builders/
> >>>
> >>> v
> > --
> > 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
>
> --
> 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
>


From gregskinner0 at icloud.com  Sat Jul 18 11:01:47 2026
From: gregskinner0 at icloud.com (Greg Skinner)
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2026 11:01:47 -0700
Subject: [ih] naming
Message-ID: <27CE96D6-C480-48E1-935E-2BB31DDEE619@icloud.com>

IMO, it?s interesting that Larry Peterson wrote an article in the Systems Approach newsletter about how naming applies to web resources <https://systemsapproach.org/2026/05/18/sound-advice-from-the-white-knight/> around the same time as the discussion here on locator/identity separation a few weeks ago.  He mentioned Jerry Saltzer and John Shoch?s publications as well.  Perhaps he or Bruce Davie are on the list?

--gregbo

From jack at 3kitty.org  Sat Jul 18 12:51:04 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2026 12:51:04 -0700
Subject: [ih] Meta: attachment policy (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>

Speaking of "walking the walk".... but on a more serious note.

Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to several 
ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email by serving as 
a prominent example of "how to do email right".? ?That of course might 
require policies to possibly be changed, technical flaws to be 
addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps governments' actions.

Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing 
attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that make 
email untrustworthy in their views.? ?Most of the Internet users have no 
idea how to protect themselves from such attacks. ?Most regulatory and 
government authorities seem to have no idea what, if anything, they can 
do about it.

 From a historical perspective, there has been lots of work in the past 
to create technologies that address such problems.? In the email world, 
that includes things like digital signatures, S/MIME, DMARC, and many 
others.

But few users of the Internet use, or perhaps even know how to use, or 
that they should use, such technologies.? Personally, all of my emails 
are digitally signed, but I rarely see signatures on incoming email.? 
Perhaps that's because few know how to use it.? Perhaps it just doesn't 
work.? Perhaps it has serious flaws, such as the fact that passing 
through a "forum" such as this one invalidates a digital signature, 
making it ineffective and looking like a forgery.? Perhaps no one thinks 
it's a problem to address.

My suggestion over the past decades has been that ISOC use email as a 
vehicle for demonstrating how to Do Email Right.? I.e., to show others 
how to "walk the walk", ISOC could lead down the walk, show users how to 
do it right, find the cracks and potholes in the walkway, and perhaps 
task or convince IETF to fix them.? A good start would be to have every 
official email from ISOC appear in all users' mailboxes in a way that 
they can trust it actually came from ISOC.? Perhaps set up the 
technology and processes so that every member of ISOC can send 
authenticated email.

With all the work that went in to developing such technologies, going as 
far back as the 1970s, personally I don't understand why nothing seems 
to have happened, to at least make email more trustworthy.? ?Anyone know 
more?

/Jack Haverty
(my digital signature is probably invalid when you get this; you'll just 
have to trust that I actually did write it...)

On 7/2/26 21:19, Carl Malamud via Internet-history wrote:
> Well, if we?re going to walk the walk and do Internet History the right way
> we should go totally 7-bit.  I vote that in addition to attachments, we ban
> Unicode.
>
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2026 at 9:10?PM Andrew Sullivan via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> While there are doubtless many issues with Internet Society systems that
>> can be laid at their (and depending on the age, my) feet, this is just a
>> matter of list policy. AFAIK this list doesn?t allow attachments.
>> Attachments make it through Internet Society mail systems just fine.
>>
>> Best regards ,
>>
>> A
>> ?
>> Andrew Sullivan
>> Please excuse my clumbsy thums
>>
>>> On Jul 2, 2026, at 19:36, Karl Auerbach via Internet-history <
>> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>> ?Well apparently image attachments don't make it through  the ISOC mail
>> systems.
>>> Here is a link to the photo I mentioned...
>>>
>>> https://cavebear.com/images/misc/steve-and-eve.jpg
>>>
>>>> On 7/2/26 12:20 PM, Karl Auerbach via Internet-history wrote:
>>>> I am so very thrilled to see Steve Casner in this collection.
>>>>
>>>> He and I worked very closely together for several years and after that
>> he and his wife Karen used to come over to our house for gatherings and to
>> attend plays at Santa Cruz Shakespeare.
>>>> I never had an conversation with Steve Casner that did not leave me
>> more educated and informed than I had been before.  In my mind there is a
>> tie for the prize of "nicest person on the Internet" between Steve Casner
>> and John Romkey.
>>>> I don't know if it is appropriate on this list to include a photo (Of
>> Steve C and Eve S - [and Dave Crocker and I believe the back of Bob
>> Hinden's head] , but here it goes...  (This was taken at the Computer
>> History Museum event for Danny Cohen.)
>>>>          --karl--
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/2/26 8:01 AM, vinton cerf via Internet-history wrote:
>>>>>
>> https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2026/06/for-americas-250th-we-created-commemorative-stamps-of-trojan-builders/
>>>>> v
>>> --
>>> 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
>>
>> --
>> 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
>>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260718/f8269d02/attachment.asc>

From geoff at iconia.com  Sat Jul 18 15:09:13 2026
From: geoff at iconia.com (the keyboard of geoff goodfellow)
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2026 15:09:13 -0700
Subject: [ih] Meta: attachment policy (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <CAEf-zri9QB6arnHHEtPU2fu_kpg92u9iGHVumz5MiHG0ObbFQA@mail.gmail.com>

ANALOGY: email (and to a further extent The Extant Internet itself) "works"
so good (or even "just") "good" enough in that it's not gotten so/to "bad"
enough for a "Network" (1976) Howard Beale:

"... I don't have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are
bad... So I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your
chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window. Open it, and
stick your head out, and yell, 'I'M AS MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO
TAKE THIS ANYMORE!' moment"


put another way: email (and to a further extent The Extant Internet itself)
is not summarily "broken enough" that it has become a PRIORITY or even an
ABSOLUTE NECESSITY to be "fixed" since it just seems to "work JUST enough"
-- most/enough of the time -- to get by...

these things you speak of (and more), are a "nuisance" -- to be sure --
they are not (apparently) so much of a "nuisance" that enough people are AS
MAD AS HELL (ENOUGH) THAT "THEY" ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE"
(amongst all the other "important" things that are being summarily "worked
on") to effectuate a "fix"

yours truly's decades of observational 2 cents,

g

On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51?PM Jack Haverty via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> Speaking of "walking the walk".... but on a more serious note.
>
> Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to several
> ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email by serving as
> a prominent example of "how to do email right".   That of course might
> require policies to possibly be changed, technical flaws to be
> addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps governments' actions.
>
> Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
> attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that make
> email untrustworthy in their views.   Most of the Internet users have no
> idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.  Most regulatory and
> government authorities seem to have no idea what, if anything, they can
> do about it.
>
>  From a historical perspective, there has been lots of work in the past
> to create technologies that address such problems.  In the email world,
> that includes things like digital signatures, S/MIME, DMARC, and many
> others.
>
> But few users of the Internet use, or perhaps even know how to use, or
> that they should use, such technologies.  Personally, all of my emails
> are digitally signed, but I rarely see signatures on incoming email.
> Perhaps that's because few know how to use it.  Perhaps it just doesn't
> work.  Perhaps it has serious flaws, such as the fact that passing
> through a "forum" such as this one invalidates a digital signature,
> making it ineffective and looking like a forgery.  Perhaps no one thinks
> it's a problem to address.
>
> My suggestion over the past decades has been that ISOC use email as a
> vehicle for demonstrating how to Do Email Right.  I.e., to show others
> how to "walk the walk", ISOC could lead down the walk, show users how to
> do it right, find the cracks and potholes in the walkway, and perhaps
> task or convince IETF to fix them.  A good start would be to have every
> official email from ISOC appear in all users' mailboxes in a way that
> they can trust it actually came from ISOC.  Perhaps set up the
> technology and processes so that every member of ISOC can send
> authenticated email.
>
> With all the work that went in to developing such technologies, going as
> far back as the 1970s, personally I don't understand why nothing seems
> to have happened, to at least make email more trustworthy.   Anyone know
> more?
>
> /Jack Haverty
> (my digital signature is probably invalid when you get this; you'll just
> have to trust that I actually did write it...)
>
> On 7/2/26 21:19, Carl Malamud via Internet-history wrote:
> > Well, if we?re going to walk the walk and do Internet History the right
> way
> > we should go totally 7-bit.  I vote that in addition to attachments, we
> ban
> > Unicode.
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 2, 2026 at 9:10?PM Andrew Sullivan via Internet-history <
> > internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> While there are doubtless many issues with Internet Society systems that
> >> can be laid at their (and depending on the age, my) feet, this is just a
> >> matter of list policy. AFAIK this list doesn?t allow attachments.
> >> Attachments make it through Internet Society mail systems just fine.
> >>
> >> Best regards ,
> >>
> >> A
> >> ?
> >> Andrew Sullivan
> >> Please excuse my clumbsy thums
> >>
> >>> On Jul 2, 2026, at 19:36, Karl Auerbach via Internet-history <
> >> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> >>> ?Well apparently image attachments don't make it through  the ISOC mail
> >> systems.
> >>> Here is a link to the photo I mentioned...
> >>>
> >>> https://cavebear.com/images/misc/steve-and-eve.jpg
> >>>
> >>>> On 7/2/26 12:20 PM, Karl Auerbach via Internet-history wrote:
> >>>> I am so very thrilled to see Steve Casner in this collection.
> >>>>
> >>>> He and I worked very closely together for several years and after that
> >> he and his wife Karen used to come over to our house for gatherings and
> to
> >> attend plays at Santa Cruz Shakespeare.
> >>>> I never had an conversation with Steve Casner that did not leave me
> >> more educated and informed than I had been before.  In my mind there is
> a
> >> tie for the prize of "nicest person on the Internet" between Steve
> Casner
> >> and John Romkey.
> >>>> I don't know if it is appropriate on this list to include a photo (Of
> >> Steve C and Eve S - [and Dave Crocker and I believe the back of Bob
> >> Hinden's head] , but here it goes...  (This was taken at the Computer
> >> History Museum event for Danny Cohen.)
> >>>>          --karl--
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 7/2/26 8:01 AM, vinton cerf via Internet-history wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>
> https://viterbischool.usc.edu/news/2026/06/for-americas-250th-we-created-commemorative-stamps-of-trojan-builders/
> >>>>> v
> >>> --
> >>> 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
> >>
> >> --
> >> 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
> >>
>
> --
> 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
>


-- 
Geoff.Goodfellow at iconia.com
living as The Truth is True


From johnl at iecc.com  Sun Jul 19 05:31:05 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 19 Jul 2026 14:31:05 +0200
Subject: [ih] mail security,
 was Meta: attachment policy (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
References: <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <20260719123106.7A029116627BD@dhcp-82b5.users.meeting.ietf.org>

It appears that Jack Haverty via Internet-history <jack at 3kitty.org> said:
>But few users of the Internet use, or perhaps even know how to use, or 
>that they should use, such technologies.? Personally, all of my emails 
>are digitally signed, but I rarely see signatures on incoming email.? 
>Perhaps that's because few know how to use it.? Perhaps it just doesn't 
>work.? Perhaps it has serious flaws, such as the fact that passing 
>through a "forum" such as this one invalidates a digital signature, 
>making it ineffective and looking like a forgery.? Perhaps no one thinks 
>it's a problem to address.

We became painfully aware of the mailing list digital signature problem a decade
ago when AOL and Yahoo, which were then separate, each published a DMARC
p=reject policy which made large amounts of the mail their users sent through
mailing lists bounce. They'd each had user records stolen which let crooks send
their users spam pretending to be from a friend of the recipient. This led to
vast numbers of user complaints, which the p=reject fixed at the cost of
oursourcing the costs of their security failures to the rest of the Internet.

Since then we came up with ARC which was intended to log a message's security
history as it went through things like mailing lists, but turned out not to work
because the ARC chain was too easy to forge. Now the IETF DKIM working group is
designing DKIM2 which is sort of like ARC, but with a signed chain of message
changes that recipient systems can mechanically verify and look back through
mailing list changes. All of the large mail operators are involved in this so
the chances of it getting adopted in practice are high.

S/MIME and PGP have been around since the last millenium but as you note, hardly
anyone uses them, which tells us that they're unusuable. I think that's because
their key management problem is intractable and the practical benefits for most
people are marginal. They are intended to be "end-to-end", but these days most
people send and read mail through webmail or mobile apps controlled by their
mail operators, not the individual user, so I have no idea what end-to-end even
means any more.

We have made some progress. DKIM really works for mail sent directly from the
sender to the recipient which is the vast majority of mail most people get. If
any ISOC employee sends you mail, the message has an isoc.org DKIM signature
which is a strong indicator that it's really from them. Most other mail systems
including all the big ones add DKIM signatures, too.

R's,
John



From brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com  Wed Jul 22 13:55:15 2026
From: brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 08:55:15 +1200
Subject: [ih] Internet Talk Radio
In-Reply-To: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
References: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>

I just realised what a fantastic historical resource Carl Malamud created:

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: the dangers of April Fool's RFCs....
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 08:53:28 +1200
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>
To: Craig Partridge <craig at tereschau.net>, IETF discussion list <ietf at ietf.org>

Craig,

BTW, it was probably about a year after April 1, 1992 that Carl Malamud started Internet Talk Radio and Geek of the Week. Milo Medin was the first geek, interview published May 7, 1993. Carl interviewed quite a number of geeks during IETF 27 (Amsterdam, July 1983).

See https://archive.org/search?query=creator%3A%22Internet+Talk+Radio%22

The point is: things move fast on the Internet.

Regards/Ng? mihi
     Brian Carpenter

On 23-Jul-26 07:23, Craig Partridge wrote:
> Dan Harkin wrote:
>  > You know, I wrote an April Fools I-D suggesting this sort of thing
> to ensure diversity and I got in trouble!
> 
> And I wrote an April Fools RFC (1313) that posited the notion of a radio station broadcasting audio over the Internet, an outlandish idea we now call podcasting!
> 
> We should, perhaps, compose an (?April Fools?) RFC on the hazards of April Fools RFCs becoming reality.
> 
> Craig
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> *****
> Craig Partridge's email account for professional society activities and mailing lists.

From carl at media.org  Wed Jul 22 14:11:01 2026
From: carl at media.org (Carl Malamud)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 14:11:01 -0700
Subject: [ih] Internet Talk Radio
In-Reply-To: <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>
References: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
 <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAFr-4gi_4gOxunptsZh9zR-jsk0jVvq8XzMWVKfamhL_iNru7g@mail.gmail.com>

:) thanks Brian. Here?s a pointer to the full collection:

https://archive.org/details/RT-FM?sort=date&and%5B%5D=subject%3A%22Publications%22

On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 1:55?PM Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> I just realised what a fantastic historical resource Carl Malamud created:
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: Re: the dangers of April Fool's RFCs....
> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 08:53:28 +1200
> From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>
> To: Craig Partridge <craig at tereschau.net>, IETF discussion list <
> ietf at ietf.org>
>
> Craig,
>
> BTW, it was probably about a year after April 1, 1992 that Carl Malamud
> started Internet Talk Radio and Geek of the Week. Milo Medin was the first
> geek, interview published May 7, 1993. Carl interviewed quite a number of
> geeks during IETF 27 (Amsterdam, July 1983).
>
> See https://archive.org/search?query=creator%3A%22Internet+Talk+Radio%22
>
> The point is: things move fast on the Internet.
>
> Regards/Ng? mihi
>      Brian Carpenter
>
> On 23-Jul-26 07:23, Craig Partridge wrote:
> > Dan Harkin wrote:
> >  > You know, I wrote an April Fools I-D suggesting this sort of thing
> > to ensure diversity and I got in trouble!
> >
> > And I wrote an April Fools RFC (1313) that posited the notion of a radio
> station broadcasting audio over the Internet, an outlandish idea we now
> call podcasting!
> >
> > We should, perhaps, compose an (?April Fools?) RFC on the hazards of
> April Fools RFCs becoming reality.
> >
> > Craig
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *****
> > Craig Partridge's email account for professional society activities and
> mailing lists.
> --
> 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
>


From jack at 3kitty.org  Wed Jul 22 14:43:54 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 14:43:54 -0700
Subject: [ih] Internet Talk Radio
In-Reply-To: <CAFr-4gi_4gOxunptsZh9zR-jsk0jVvq8XzMWVKfamhL_iNru7g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
 <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>
 <CAFr-4gi_4gOxunptsZh9zR-jsk0jVvq8XzMWVKfamhL_iNru7g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <da81f821-d780-4d18-b00d-51fa77563761@3kitty.org>

Wow, Thanks Carl!? ?Just out of curiousity, I found the "Interop Movie" 
that was filmed at Interop in San Francisco in 1992, but I guess was 
shown later at Interop France.? I had never seen that movie until just 
now, and was surprised to find that I'm in it!

That was the year that Oracle took the MazeWars game to Interop and it 
seems at some point someone stuck a video camera in my face to hear 
about what we were doing at Oracle.? ?I don't remember that, and didn't 
even recognize myself at first -- until my name appeared on the screen.? 
The memories of that show are a bit fuzzy.? But I seemed to be fairly 
articulate, even after spending my first and only 96-hour period with no 
sleep, working before the show opened on getting everything to work 
(along with a bunch of other sleep-deprived Oracle engineers).

A true historical resource at archive.org!

/Jack Haverty


On 7/22/26 14:11, Carl Malamud via Internet-history wrote:
> :) thanks Brian. Here?s a pointer to the full collection:
>
> https://archive.org/details/RT-FM?sort=date&and%5B%5D=subject%3A%22Publications%22
>
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 1:55?PM Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
>> I just realised what a fantastic historical resource Carl Malamud created:
>>
>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> Subject: Re: the dangers of April Fool's RFCs....
>> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 08:53:28 +1200
>> From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>
>> To: Craig Partridge <craig at tereschau.net>, IETF discussion list <
>> ietf at ietf.org>
>>
>> Craig,
>>
>> BTW, it was probably about a year after April 1, 1992 that Carl Malamud
>> started Internet Talk Radio and Geek of the Week. Milo Medin was the first
>> geek, interview published May 7, 1993. Carl interviewed quite a number of
>> geeks during IETF 27 (Amsterdam, July 1983).
>>
>> See https://archive.org/search?query=creator%3A%22Internet+Talk+Radio%22
>>
>> The point is: things move fast on the Internet.
>>
>> Regards/Ng? mihi
>>       Brian Carpenter
>>
>> On 23-Jul-26 07:23, Craig Partridge wrote:
>>> Dan Harkin wrote:
>>>   > You know, I wrote an April Fools I-D suggesting this sort of thing
>>> to ensure diversity and I got in trouble!
>>>
>>> And I wrote an April Fools RFC (1313) that posited the notion of a radio
>> station broadcasting audio over the Internet, an outlandish idea we now
>> call podcasting!
>>> We should, perhaps, compose an (?April Fools?) RFC on the hazards of
>> April Fools RFCs becoming reality.
>>> Craig
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> *****
>>> Craig Partridge's email account for professional society activities and
>> mailing lists.
>> --
>> 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
>>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260722/add6f042/attachment.asc>

From dhc at dcrocker.net  Wed Jul 22 15:06:58 2026
From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 22:06:58 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [ih] Meta: attachment policy (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <e018d53d-520e-4c6d-bd90-b52a48c3f5a0@dcrocker.net>

On 7/18/2026 12:51 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> From a historical perspective, there has been lots of work in the past 
> to create technologies that address such problems.? In the email 
> world, that includes things like digital signatures, S/MIME, DMARC, 
> and many others.

PEM, PGP, and S/MIME actually do 'sign and encrypt a message'. All of 
them suffer basic problems with key administration and usability 
design.? Especially in a world with minimal adoption. These appear to be 
basic barriers.

If there were strong market demand, for a truly viable form of 
/interoperable/ end user email authentication and encryption, I suspect 
these barriers would get much better attention.? Alas, there isn't.


DKIM has come the closest except that, really, it does not sign the 
message.? This, of course, is at odds with how folk talk about it, but 
that disparity highlights some of the problems of doing security at 
scale.? (Much like the common refrain that using https means that you 
are talking to a secure server...)

DKIM uses crypto to attach an identifier to the message, so that the 
message stream using that identifier can be evaluated with almost no 
noise.? Quite different from protecting content authentication or 
privacy.? First, DKIM uses a domain name, rather than user identifier, 
for identification.? Second, it doesn't (have to) sign the entire message.

So, DKIM was only designed as a transmission channel signal, between the 
posting of a message and its associated delivery. (This echoes the 
authentication-related use of server-to-server PEM that TIS played with.)

Alas, its design has a hole which allows a collaborating sending user 
and a receiving host operator to re-post to additional recipients, but 
with no change in the signature.? This was certainly beyond its design goal.

DKIM was never intended to survive re-posting, since mailing lists, and 
the like, modify the message enough to break the signature.? Simple, 
classic MTA relaying does not modify the message (except for adding some 
trace header fields) and so the DKIM signature survives any number of 
MTA hops.? Serendipitously, aliasing does re-posting but only changes 
the SMTP RCPT-TO, and so DKIM survives that too.


DMARC was carefully designed only for use from a bulk-sender to direct 
recipients.? It validates use of the From: field domain name.? Hence, it 
really is doing some actual message authentication.? But precious 
little.? In reality, it is extending the model of validating sending 
platforms, more than message authors.

DMARC does not survive re-posting, but then, it wasn't intended to.

The expanded use that John L. cites was done by fiat and does break 
mailing list delivery.? The various hacks done to From: fields works 
around this problem, but only by making the From: field a lot less 
useful that it was.? By way of example, Jack is probably getting two 
copies of this message.? They? will be handled by his email system as 
coming from two different authors...

DMARC, therefore, should serve as a cautionary tail to designers about 
their expectations for use of their output.


DKIM2 has been underway for several years.? At base, it takes the lesson 
of strict, hop by hop compliance and extends it considerably.? That is, 
it is an infrastructure play, far beyond anything attempted for email so 
far. It will require adoption by everything in the handling sequence, 
from original posting to final delivery.

"Hop by hop":? Over quite a few interactions, with different folk, over 
an extended time, I have found this has sometimes meant compliance by 
posting and and delivering sites, but not classic MTA relays.? At others 
times it has meant every site touching the message.? (I haven't checked 
where the current language about this lands.)



> With all the work that went in to developing such technologies, going 
> as far back as the 1970s, personally I don't understand why nothing 
> seems to have happened, to at least make email more trustworthy.? 
> ?Anyone know more? 

Basic email functionality is simple and spectacularly useful. For all of 
the impressive array of functional enhancements that would make sense 
for it, it seems that 'good enough for basic use' defeated any market 
motivation for 'a lot better than that'. There have been quite a few 
demonstrations of the market's disinterest in more feature-packed 
capabilities.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker

dhc at dcrocker.net
bluesky: @dcrocker.bsky.social
mast: @dcrocker at mastodon.social
+1.408.329.0791

Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
Northern California Coastal Region
Information & Planning Coordinator
American Red Cross
dave.crocker2 at redcross.org



From carl at media.org  Wed Jul 22 15:48:12 2026
From: carl at media.org (Carl Malamud)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 15:48:12 -0700
Subject: [ih] Internet Talk Radio
In-Reply-To: <da81f821-d780-4d18-b00d-51fa77563761@3kitty.org>
References: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
 <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>
 <CAFr-4gi_4gOxunptsZh9zR-jsk0jVvq8XzMWVKfamhL_iNru7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <da81f821-d780-4d18-b00d-51fa77563761@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <CAFr-4ggdwT5TiJWhVzkHS24cBF5tYTKQbaoF3xB+2Bn_fhh40w@mail.gmail.com>

The Paris show was scheduled to be announced and the marketing people
decided they had to have a video so they could show the people of france
what this was all about. Ole hired a camera crew in San Francisco and we
stalked the halls with the video camera looking for people like you. :) I
got to play a role in the subsequent show, which was held at La Defence
(near the arch!). We were, as was the usually case in those days, the first
network ever held in that convention center (we did the same thing at
Moscone center). French was my maternal language and I also spoke geek
fluently, so I remember helping defuse a big showdown between NOC team
members and the convention center security team. I wasn't Interop staff or
anything official, wasn't even a member of the noc team, was actually just
a freelance writer at the time but there weren't a lot of other press
following this, so I had great access.

On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 2:44?PM Jack Haverty via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> Wow, Thanks Carl!   Just out of curiousity, I found the "Interop Movie"
> that was filmed at Interop in San Francisco in 1992, but I guess was
> shown later at Interop France.  I had never seen that movie until just
> now, and was surprised to find that I'm in it!
>
> That was the year that Oracle took the MazeWars game to Interop and it
> seems at some point someone stuck a video camera in my face to hear
> about what we were doing at Oracle.   I don't remember that, and didn't
> even recognize myself at first -- until my name appeared on the screen.
> The memories of that show are a bit fuzzy.  But I seemed to be fairly
> articulate, even after spending my first and only 96-hour period with no
> sleep, working before the show opened on getting everything to work
> (along with a bunch of other sleep-deprived Oracle engineers).
>
> A true historical resource at archive.org!
>
> /Jack Haverty
>
>
> On 7/22/26 14:11, Carl Malamud via Internet-history wrote:
> > :) thanks Brian. Here?s a pointer to the full collection:
> >
> >
> https://archive.org/details/RT-FM?sort=date&and%5B%5D=subject%3A%22Publications%22
> >
> > On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 1:55?PM Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <
> > internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> >
> >> I just realised what a fantastic historical resource Carl Malamud
> created:
> >>
> >> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> >> Subject: Re: the dangers of April Fool's RFCs....
> >> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 08:53:28 +1200
> >> From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>
> >> To: Craig Partridge <craig at tereschau.net>, IETF discussion list <
> >> ietf at ietf.org>
> >>
> >> Craig,
> >>
> >> BTW, it was probably about a year after April 1, 1992 that Carl Malamud
> >> started Internet Talk Radio and Geek of the Week. Milo Medin was the
> first
> >> geek, interview published May 7, 1993. Carl interviewed quite a number
> of
> >> geeks during IETF 27 (Amsterdam, July 1983).
> >>
> >> See
> https://archive.org/search?query=creator%3A%22Internet+Talk+Radio%22
> >>
> >> The point is: things move fast on the Internet.
> >>
> >> Regards/Ng? mihi
> >>       Brian Carpenter
> >>
> >> On 23-Jul-26 07:23, Craig Partridge wrote:
> >>> Dan Harkin wrote:
> >>>   > You know, I wrote an April Fools I-D suggesting this sort of thing
> >>> to ensure diversity and I got in trouble!
> >>>
> >>> And I wrote an April Fools RFC (1313) that posited the notion of a
> radio
> >> station broadcasting audio over the Internet, an outlandish idea we now
> >> call podcasting!
> >>> We should, perhaps, compose an (?April Fools?) RFC on the hazards of
> >> April Fools RFCs becoming reality.
> >>> Craig
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> *****
> >>> Craig Partridge's email account for professional society activities and
> >> mailing lists.
> >> --
> >> 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
> >>
>
> --
> 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
>


From jack at 3kitty.org  Wed Jul 22 16:44:40 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 16:44:40 -0700
Subject: [ih] Internet Talk Radio
In-Reply-To: <CAFr-4ggdwT5TiJWhVzkHS24cBF5tYTKQbaoF3xB+2Bn_fhh40w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
 <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>
 <CAFr-4gi_4gOxunptsZh9zR-jsk0jVvq8XzMWVKfamhL_iNru7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <da81f821-d780-4d18-b00d-51fa77563761@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ggdwT5TiJWhVzkHS24cBF5tYTKQbaoF3xB+2Bn_fhh40w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <a887e7d3-03b0-4b68-86aa-c9cdadcf8bdb@3kitty.org>

Interesting, another part of Internet History.? ?I didn't know about the 
Paris show, but I did later help with a show (probably Oracle's "User 
Group" annual event) at Place de la Defense.? ?A bunch of us almost got 
lost trying to take public transportation from there to visit the 
Louvre, and with only high-school French in our group we came very close 
to ending up in Louvre, France, which is a town quite a distance from 
the Museum.

I've always thought of Interop as the "marketing department" of The 
Internet.? I knew Dan from his previous career when he ran the 
datacenter at USC, where lots of ARPA work was carried out.? At one 
point I recall that Interop started using a catchphrase of "I know it 
works; I saw it at Interop!"? Then at the shows I saw that working in 
real time on the show floor.? A horde of people would descend on a 
booth, consisting of the VPs (in suits) and the techies (in jeans and 
sweatshirts).? The Suits would listen to the pitch, and turn to their 
techies to get confirmation that whatever was being sold was a good idea 
for their company.? The Suits had an environment being deluged with 
personal computers, workstations, and LANs, and still had their 
mainframes too.? The Internet tied it all together, and could be 
observed actually working on the Interop floor.? ?Everyone was tired of 
single-vendor designs and waiting for OSI to make it all wonderful.? 
 ?TCP worked, you could see it, you could buy it, and all your new hires 
likely had experience with it already.? ?Interop brought all that 
together and connected the techies to the suits to the vendors - i.e., 
the Marketing Department.

After I left BBN and joined Oracle in 1990, I was local to Silicon 
Valley, and Dan recruited me to be on some Interop committee ("Program 
Committee?" can't remember).? The committee got involved in figuring out 
what sessions and tutorials would be selected, and our vetting focussed 
on presenters that were techies rather than marketers.? I think that 
made a difference in the attendance, encouraging techies to come to 
learn, and bring their suits as well to "see it working at Interop".? ?I 
recall going with Dan to meet the people who ran Moscone and being 
disappointed when they said Interop wasn't big enough to book Moscone.? 
Several years later I recall another meeting with the Moscone management 
to inform them that the next Interop would be too big for Moscone and 
would be held in Las Vegas instead.? The Internet was growing 
explosively and so was Interop.

Fun times.? ?The history of Interop is an important part of the History 
of The Internet.

/Jack Haverty


On 7/22/26 15:48, Carl Malamud wrote:
> The?Paris show was scheduled to be announced and the marketing people 
> decided they had to have a video so they could show the people of 
> france what this was all about. Ole hired a camera crew in San 
> Francisco and we stalked the halls with the video camera looking for 
> people like you. :) I got to play a role in the subsequent show, which 
> was held at La Defence (near the arch!). We were, as was the usually 
> case in those days, the first network ever held in that convention 
> center (we did the same thing at Moscone center). French was my 
> maternal language and I also spoke geek fluently, so I remember 
> helping defuse a big showdown between NOC team members and the 
> convention center security team. I wasn't Interop staff or anything 
> official, wasn't even a member of the noc team, was actually just a 
> freelance writer at the time but there weren't a lot of other press 
> following this, so I had great access.
>
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 2:44?PM Jack Haverty via Internet-history 
> <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
>     Wow, Thanks Carl!? ?Just out of curiousity, I found the "Interop
>     Movie"
>     that was filmed at Interop in San Francisco in 1992, but I guess was
>     shown later at Interop France.? I had never seen that movie until
>     just
>     now, and was surprised to find that I'm in it!
>
>     That was the year that Oracle took the MazeWars game to Interop
>     and it
>     seems at some point someone stuck a video camera in my face to hear
>     about what we were doing at Oracle.? ?I don't remember that, and
>     didn't
>     even recognize myself at first -- until my name appeared on the
>     screen.
>     The memories of that show are a bit fuzzy.? But I seemed to be fairly
>     articulate, even after spending my first and only 96-hour period
>     with no
>     sleep, working before the show opened on getting everything to work
>     (along with a bunch of other sleep-deprived Oracle engineers).
>
>     A true historical resource at archive.org <http://archive.org>!
>
>     /Jack Haverty
>
>
>     On 7/22/26 14:11, Carl Malamud via Internet-history wrote:
>     > :) thanks Brian. Here?s a pointer to the full collection:
>     >
>     >
>     https://archive.org/details/RT-FM?sort=date&and%5B%5D=subject%3A%22Publications%22
>     <https://archive.org/details/RT-FM?sort=date&and%5B%5D=subject%3A%22Publications%22>
>     >
>     > On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 1:55?PM Brian E Carpenter via
>     Internet-history <
>     > internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>     >
>     >> I just realised what a fantastic historical resource Carl
>     Malamud created:
>     >>
>     >> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>     >> Subject: Re: the dangers of April Fool's RFCs....
>     >> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 08:53:28 +1200
>     >> From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>
>     >> To: Craig Partridge <craig at tereschau.net>, IETF discussion list <
>     >> ietf at ietf.org>
>     >>
>     >> Craig,
>     >>
>     >> BTW, it was probably about a year after April 1, 1992 that Carl
>     Malamud
>     >> started Internet Talk Radio and Geek of the Week. Milo Medin
>     was the first
>     >> geek, interview published May 7, 1993. Carl interviewed quite a
>     number of
>     >> geeks during IETF 27 (Amsterdam, July 1983).
>     >>
>     >> See
>     https://archive.org/search?query=creator%3A%22Internet+Talk+Radio%22
>     >>
>     >> The point is: things move fast on the Internet.
>     >>
>     >> Regards/Ng? mihi
>     >>? ? ? ?Brian Carpenter
>     >>
>     >> On 23-Jul-26 07:23, Craig Partridge wrote:
>     >>> Dan Harkin wrote:
>     >>>? ?> You know, I wrote an April Fools I-D suggesting this sort
>     of thing
>     >>> to ensure diversity and I got in trouble!
>     >>>
>     >>> And I wrote an April Fools RFC (1313) that posited the notion
>     of a radio
>     >> station broadcasting audio over the Internet, an outlandish
>     idea we now
>     >> call podcasting!
>     >>> We should, perhaps, compose an (?April Fools?) RFC on the
>     hazards of
>     >> April Fools RFCs becoming reality.
>     >>> Craig
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>>
>     >>> --
>     >>> *****
>     >>> Craig Partridge's email account for professional society
>     activities and
>     >> mailing lists.
>     >> --
>     >> 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
>     >>
>
>     -- 
>     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
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260722/e7494322/attachment.asc>

From karl at iwl.com  Wed Jul 22 18:10:17 2026
From: karl at iwl.com (Karl Auerbach)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 18:10:17 -0700
Subject: [ih] Internet Talk Radio
In-Reply-To: <da81f821-d780-4d18-b00d-51fa77563761@3kitty.org>
References: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
 <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>
 <CAFr-4gi_4gOxunptsZh9zR-jsk0jVvq8XzMWVKfamhL_iNru7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <da81f821-d780-4d18-b00d-51fa77563761@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <404d72b3-5660-46b8-a790-89368c8747f4@iwl.com>

I'm not sure which "Interop Movie" you mean.

There was one filmed by Linda Fefferman, under contract to the Interop 
Company, at a DC interop in 1993.? (I contacted her several years ago 
-?I was hoping for a chance to get them and digitize the raw takes.??I 
have a suspicion that those original Beta-SP takes were destroyed in the 
big fires in Los Angeles.? And yes, she and her camera person did seem 
to stick the camera into our nasal passages.

(I think it was at that same DC Interop where I gave you and Vint the 
very first Interop Shownet Tour.? I think it was that same show where we 
came up with our rules for "five hours of sleep" and "take a shower!!" - 
yes, we did kinda stink, but one person from Cisco, after several days 
in the same clothing, revealed to us that there was a previously 
undiscovered higher level of work-generated scents.)

The DC Interop movie is up on YouTube and somewhere on the Internet 
Archives.? Here's the YouTube link (where yours truly can be seen, among 
others...)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMkKIaHee4c

My wife and I have a quite incomplete set of video interviews that we 
did for our never finished "History of the Internet 1965-1995" project.? 
I've got those materials squirreled away on many a backup drive in 
multiple locations, but with a few early exceptions they've never been 
published, much less edited.? For instance, we talked with Dave Farber 
for about eight hours - we did the interview at the University Club in 
San Francisco, so the audio is punctuated with cable car bells.? We were 
prepping for a second visit to Dan Lynch when he died.? Our lack of 
skills in video and sound are quite apparent.? We've always intended to 
publish those unedited raw materials under a creative commons 
attribution/non-commercial license (except for some materials which, as 
requested, will go into the public domain.)? We want to leave a body of 
raw materials that others can edit to tell their stories of what 
happened.? Our focus was not so much on technology as it was on the 
process of creation, of conflicts of ideas, and of the way we were 
uncertain where we were going.? One thought I tried to bring up in the 
interviews was that there were so many ideas that were never fully, or 
even partially, explored.? (We also tried to illuminate some of the fun 
and social aspects - some of the almost Gatsby level parties we had 
[such as on top of the La Grande Arche in Paris, at the Howard Hughes 
penthouse in Las Vegas - everyone wore a bath robe, or a three-day long 
blur at my house in Santa Cruz and various beaches], some of the lesser 
events such as gathering at the Einstein memorial on the DC Mall, the 
amount of alcohol consumed by the Interop show net team (which we 
usually charged to Dan Lynch's credit card), or white water rafting 
(there is a person on this list who perhaps remembers that day, in 
particular an inoperable passenger door that required people - or 
person, me - to climb in via the window.)? The Puritan ethos was not 
strong - The Interop experience brought on many marriages, including my 
own.)

We haven't done many such interviews of late - many people are tired of 
having a microphone/camera stuck in front of them and being asked 
onion-skin thin questions.? And too many have died.? Because my wife and 
I know so many of the people we tried to go deeper, particularly with 
regard to the humanity that went into (and continues to go into) the 
creation of the Internet.

(We have a long list of people we would like to interview - probably 
includes every one on this list - Our kit is still too large for easy 
travel and I need to buy a new camera.? [We've been using an aging 
Panasonic 4K GH-4] as the primary camera.] And, we are getting older and 
increasingly adverse to travel outside of the West Coast.)

 ? ? ? ? --karl--

On 7/22/26 2:43 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> Wow, Thanks Carl!? ?Just out of curiousity, I found the "Interop 
> Movie" that was filmed at Interop in San Francisco in 1992, but I 
> guess was shown later at Interop France.? I had never seen that movie 
> until just now, and was surprised to find that I'm in it!
>
> That was the year that Oracle took the MazeWars game to Interop and it 
> seems at some point someone stuck a video camera in my face to hear 
> about what we were doing at Oracle.? ?I don't remember that, and 
> didn't even recognize myself at first -- until my name appeared on the 
> screen.? The memories of that show are a bit fuzzy.? But I seemed to 
> be fairly articulate, even after spending my first and only 96-hour 
> period with no sleep, working before the show opened on getting 
> everything to work (along with a bunch of other sleep-deprived Oracle 
> engineers).
>
> A true historical resource at archive.org!
>
> /Jack Haverty
>
>
> On 7/22/26 14:11, Carl Malamud via Internet-history wrote:
>> :) thanks Brian. Here?s a pointer to the full collection:
>>
>> https://archive.org/details/RT-FM?sort=date&and%5B%5D=subject%3A%22Publications%22 
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 1:55?PM Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <
>> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I just realised what a fantastic historical resource Carl Malamud 
>>> created:
>>>
>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>> Subject: Re: the dangers of April Fool's RFCs....
>>> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 08:53:28 +1200
>>> From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>
>>> To: Craig Partridge <craig at tereschau.net>, IETF discussion list <
>>> ietf at ietf.org>
>>>
>>> Craig,
>>>
>>> BTW, it was probably about a year after April 1, 1992 that Carl Malamud
>>> started Internet Talk Radio and Geek of the Week. Milo Medin was the 
>>> first
>>> geek, interview published May 7, 1993. Carl interviewed quite a 
>>> number of
>>> geeks during IETF 27 (Amsterdam, July 1983).
>>>
>>> See 
>>> https://archive.org/search?query=creator%3A%22Internet+Talk+Radio%22
>>>
>>> The point is: things move fast on the Internet.
>>>
>>> Regards/Ng? mihi
>>> ????? Brian Carpenter
>>>
>>> On 23-Jul-26 07:23, Craig Partridge wrote:
>>>> Dan Harkin wrote:
>>>> ? > You know, I wrote an April Fools I-D suggesting this sort of thing
>>>> to ensure diversity and I got in trouble!
>>>>
>>>> And I wrote an April Fools RFC (1313) that posited the notion of a 
>>>> radio
>>> station broadcasting audio over the Internet, an outlandish idea we now
>>> call podcasting!
>>>> We should, perhaps, compose an (?April Fools?) RFC on the hazards of
>>> April Fools RFCs becoming reality.
>>>> Craig
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> *****
>>>> Craig Partridge's email account for professional society activities 
>>>> and
>>> mailing lists.
>>> -- 
>>> 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 
>>>
>>>
>
>

From karl at iwl.com  Wed Jul 22 18:58:56 2026
From: karl at iwl.com (Karl Auerbach)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 18:58:56 -0700
Subject: [ih] Internet Talk Radio
In-Reply-To: <a887e7d3-03b0-4b68-86aa-c9cdadcf8bdb@3kitty.org>
References: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
 <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>
 <CAFr-4gi_4gOxunptsZh9zR-jsk0jVvq8XzMWVKfamhL_iNru7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <da81f821-d780-4d18-b00d-51fa77563761@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ggdwT5TiJWhVzkHS24cBF5tYTKQbaoF3xB+2Bn_fhh40w@mail.gmail.com>
 <a887e7d3-03b0-4b68-86aa-c9cdadcf8bdb@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <f23822af-03ab-4db7-bdbb-13f4d4436257@iwl.com>

As one of the principal members of the Interop show net team from 
roughly 1988 through the early 2000's I can attest that we did not 
approach the show net as a marketing vehicle.

For us it was very much a "can we make this stuff work" event.

We began in 1988 (or 1987 if you count the Wollongong event in Santa 
Clara) with a mad dash to get into the convention center, get it wired, 
get out of the way of the teamsters, attach the machines, and turn it 
all on - in a span of about 8 hours.

We quickly learned to rent a warehouse and pre-stage the entire network 
infrastructure (everything except the stuff in the vendor's booths).? We 
typically spent several months prepping for a show.? I remember that for 
one show (in Atlanta) that it took 46 18-wheel truck/trailers to haul 
our infrastructure gear.? That was just our stuff - no vendor booth stuff.

Many vendors did not interoperate.? We let them know they were not 
interoperating.? We rarely disconnected a vendor - although I do 
remember cutting off D-link when they had a router that was spewing 
garbage and harming a lot of others.? ?And I remember HP cutting 
themselves off by adopting IEEE 802 Ethernet SNAP framing rather than 
DIX.? We also found problems in various standards - such as when a flaw 
was discovered in the FDDI specifications and vendors spent a pre-show 
night re-blowing PROMs with new firmware.

We pushed things hard.? And that is from the very physical sense (Alex 
Latzko and I once used sledges to pound the beejeebers out of a cabinet 
to enlarge a cable passage, to clambering through the unseen innards of 
building, hotels, parking lots, and railroad tunnels) to pushing things 
like twisted pair ethernet to its physical limits or cooking equipment 
in a 105F convention center (the centers do not turn on the air 
conditioning until the trucks are gone from the floor.)

I remember once when Carl M. and I were setting a bank of public X11 
terminals in San Jose when someone from the outside discovered them and 
began projecting windows onto them.? I think that was my first 
experience with an Internet carried attack.

We also pushed in other directions - we had early VoIP gear that 
surprised many a telco when we placed an outgoing call tags.

Circa 1997 I created a mobile MBONE camera/microphone setup on a hardhat 
from which I participated from the show floor in one of the conferences 
with NTIA about the yet-to-be created ICANN - for many in DC it was the 
first time they had participated in an Internet hosted conference call.? 
My setup also concerned some people - with the battery pack I kinda 
looked like a mad bomber walking the show floor - and because the camera 
was on my hard hat my wife was able to see every booth babe my eyes 
landed on.)

We actually tied to make ISO/OSI work and we had IPv6 from rather early on.

It helped a lot that a lot of the iETF leaders who knew specific 
protocols and implementations inside and out were there on the show floor.

One of our innovations that has rarely been discussed is how we managed 
that stuff.? We built an entirely physically distinct network, using 
steerable fiber optics (mirrors on piezo-electric steering crystals), 
and two-way fiber taps (people did not believe such things existed) so 
we could tune into any segment of the entire convention center to 
monitor traffic or inject traffic.? I built the first Internet "Butt 
Set" so we could get working on problems within seconds.

We also quite stressed external packet carriers - we were always dual 
homed with our IPv4 45.x.x.x/8 network.? When we were coming up we 
bounced up and down a lot - so we really stressed out the route flap 
damping of our external providers (many of them did not know how to 
reset their gear to deal with this - but they got a quick lesson.)? And 
we moved that 45/8 block around the world often with a span of a couple 
of weeks.

I think we also engendered a new world view among the union electricians 
at the various venues - many of them were quite unfamiliar with network 
wiring (once one person folded our yellow hose ethernet and another cut 
it and tried to solder it back together) and learned that fiber optics 
did not carry electrical signals.? (We eventually brought a couple of 
San Francisco based union electricians into the team - that helped 
smooth the waters in other cities.)

We also played a lot - I built my machine to inject words into VoIP 
streams (my ultimate goal was to elide the words 'no" and "not" from 
VoIP conversations).? And we built a RAID array out of USB flash drives 
controlled by I-SCSI over Wi-Fi.? We pushed IP multicast quite hard (and 
got it to work acceptably well.)? We also set the carpet in the lobby of 
the Las Vegas convention center on fire - not our fault.

I claim that we were the world's best commando network team - about 20 
to 40 of us all told - we got it in, got it running, kept it running, 
and got it out - within hours.? (We all worked pretty much 24x7 - the 
Interop company had to pour food and coffee into us - and we survived on 
short crashes of sleep, alcohol, late night movies in unwitting vendor 
booths, and other kinds of social interactions not to be described in 
polite company.)

It was hard work. But it was also fun.? And perhaps most importantly, we 
showed the world that Internet style networking worked and could be used 
by people and companies.? In that sense I feel that we were an important 
part of building acceptance for the then nascent Internet.

 ? ? ? ? --karl--

On 7/22/26 4:44 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> Interesting, another part of Internet History.? ?I didn't know about 
> the Paris show, but I did later help with a show (probably Oracle's 
> "User Group" annual event) at Place de la Defense.? ?A bunch of us 
> almost got lost trying to take public transportation from there to 
> visit the Louvre, and with only high-school French in our group we 
> came very close to ending up in Louvre, France, which is a town quite 
> a distance from the Museum.
>
> I've always thought of Interop as the "marketing department" of The 
> Internet.? I knew Dan from his previous career when he ran the 
> datacenter at USC, where lots of ARPA work was carried out.? At one 
> point I recall that Interop started using a catchphrase of "I know it 
> works; I saw it at Interop!"? Then at the shows I saw that working in 
> real time on the show floor.? A horde of people would descend on a 
> booth, consisting of the VPs (in suits) and the techies (in jeans and 
> sweatshirts).? The Suits would listen to the pitch, and turn to their 
> techies to get confirmation that whatever was being sold was a good 
> idea for their company.? The Suits had an environment being deluged 
> with personal computers, workstations, and LANs, and still had their 
> mainframes too.? The Internet tied it all together, and could be 
> observed actually working on the Interop floor.? ?Everyone was tired 
> of single-vendor designs and waiting for OSI to make it all 
> wonderful.? ?TCP worked, you could see it, you could buy it, and all 
> your new hires likely had experience with it already. ?Interop brought 
> all that together and connected the techies to the suits to the 
> vendors - i.e., the Marketing Department.
>
> After I left BBN and joined Oracle in 1990, I was local to Silicon 
> Valley, and Dan recruited me to be on some Interop committee ("Program 
> Committee?" can't remember).? The committee got involved in figuring 
> out what sessions and tutorials would be selected, and our vetting 
> focussed on presenters that were techies rather than marketers.? I 
> think that made a difference in the attendance, encouraging techies to 
> come to learn, and bring their suits as well to "see it working at 
> Interop".? ?I recall going with Dan to meet the people who ran Moscone 
> and being disappointed when they said Interop wasn't big enough to 
> book Moscone.? Several years later I recall another meeting with the 
> Moscone management to inform them that the next Interop would be too 
> big for Moscone and would be held in Las Vegas instead.? The Internet 
> was growing explosively and so was Interop.
>
> Fun times.? ?The history of Interop is an important part of the 
> History of The Internet.
>
> /Jack Haverty
>
>
> On 7/22/26 15:48, Carl Malamud wrote:
>> The?Paris show was scheduled to be announced and the marketing people 
>> decided they had to have a video so they could show the people of 
>> france what this was all about. Ole hired a camera crew in San 
>> Francisco and we stalked the halls with the video camera looking for 
>> people like you. :) I got to play a role in the subsequent show, 
>> which was held at La Defence (near the arch!). We were, as was the 
>> usually case in those days, the first network ever held in that 
>> convention center (we did the same thing at Moscone center). French 
>> was my maternal language and I also spoke geek fluently, so I 
>> remember helping defuse a big showdown between NOC team members and 
>> the convention center security team. I wasn't Interop staff or 
>> anything official, wasn't even a member of the noc team, was actually 
>> just a freelance writer at the time but there weren't a lot of other 
>> press following this, so I had great access.
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 2:44?PM Jack Haverty via Internet-history 
>> <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>
>> ??? Wow, Thanks Carl!? ?Just out of curiousity, I found the "Interop
>> ??? Movie"
>> ??? that was filmed at Interop in San Francisco in 1992, but I guess was
>> ??? shown later at Interop France.? I had never seen that movie until
>> ??? just
>> ??? now, and was surprised to find that I'm in it!
>>
>> ??? That was the year that Oracle took the MazeWars game to Interop
>> ??? and it
>> ??? seems at some point someone stuck a video camera in my face to hear
>> ??? about what we were doing at Oracle.? ?I don't remember that, and
>> ??? didn't
>> ??? even recognize myself at first -- until my name appeared on the
>> ??? screen.
>> ??? The memories of that show are a bit fuzzy.? But I seemed to be 
>> fairly
>> ??? articulate, even after spending my first and only 96-hour period
>> ??? with no
>> ??? sleep, working before the show opened on getting everything to work
>> ??? (along with a bunch of other sleep-deprived Oracle engineers).
>>
>> ??? A true historical resource at archive.org <http://archive.org>!
>>
>> ??? /Jack Haverty
>>
>>
>> ??? On 7/22/26 14:11, Carl Malamud via Internet-history wrote:
>> ??? > :) thanks Brian. Here?s a pointer to the full collection:
>> ??? >
>> ??? >
>> https://archive.org/details/RT-FM?sort=date&and%5B%5D=subject%3A%22Publications%22
>> <https://archive.org/details/RT-FM?sort=date&and%5B%5D=subject%3A%22Publications%22>
>> ??? >
>> ??? > On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 1:55?PM Brian E Carpenter via
>> ??? Internet-history <
>> ??? > internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>> ??? >
>> ??? >> I just realised what a fantastic historical resource Carl
>> ??? Malamud created:
>> ??? >>
>> ??? >> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> ??? >> Subject: Re: the dangers of April Fool's RFCs....
>> ??? >> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 08:53:28 +1200
>> ??? >> From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>
>> ??? >> To: Craig Partridge <craig at tereschau.net>, IETF discussion list <
>> ??? >> ietf at ietf.org>
>> ??? >>
>> ??? >> Craig,
>> ??? >>
>> ??? >> BTW, it was probably about a year after April 1, 1992 that Carl
>> ??? Malamud
>> ??? >> started Internet Talk Radio and Geek of the Week. Milo Medin
>> ??? was the first
>> ??? >> geek, interview published May 7, 1993. Carl interviewed quite a
>> ??? number of
>> ??? >> geeks during IETF 27 (Amsterdam, July 1983).
>> ??? >>
>> ??? >> See
>> https://archive.org/search?query=creator%3A%22Internet+Talk+Radio%22
>> ??? >>
>> ??? >> The point is: things move fast on the Internet.
>> ??? >>
>> ??? >> Regards/Ng? mihi
>> ??? >>? ? ? ?Brian Carpenter
>> ??? >>
>> ??? >> On 23-Jul-26 07:23, Craig Partridge wrote:
>> ??? >>> Dan Harkin wrote:
>> ??? >>>? ?> You know, I wrote an April Fools I-D suggesting this sort
>> ??? of thing
>> ??? >>> to ensure diversity and I got in trouble!
>> ??? >>>
>> ??? >>> And I wrote an April Fools RFC (1313) that posited the notion
>> ??? of a radio
>> ??? >> station broadcasting audio over the Internet, an outlandish
>> ??? idea we now
>> ??? >> call podcasting!
>> ??? >>> We should, perhaps, compose an (?April Fools?) RFC on the
>> ??? hazards of
>> ??? >> April Fools RFCs becoming reality.
>> ??? >>> Craig
>> ??? >>>
>> ??? >>>
>> ??? >>>
>> ??? >>> --
>> ??? >>> *****
>> ??? >>> Craig Partridge's email account for professional society
>> ??? activities and
>> ??? >> mailing lists.
>> ??? >> --
>> ??? >> 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
>> ??? >>
>>
>> ??? -- ??? 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
>>
>
>


From jack at 3kitty.org  Wed Jul 22 23:17:36 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 23:17:36 -0700
Subject: [ih] Internet Talk Radio
In-Reply-To: <404d72b3-5660-46b8-a790-89368c8747f4@iwl.com>
References: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
 <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>
 <CAFr-4gi_4gOxunptsZh9zR-jsk0jVvq8XzMWVKfamhL_iNru7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <da81f821-d780-4d18-b00d-51fa77563761@3kitty.org>
 <404d72b3-5660-46b8-a790-89368c8747f4@iwl.com>
Message-ID: <bfa3060f-d920-4801-b072-71bc1943dddf@3kitty.org>

On 7/22/26 18:10, Karl Auerbach wrote:
> I'm not sure which "Interop Movie" you mean.
This one:

https://archive.org/details/interop_france_1992

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260722/b9a95d7e/attachment.asc>

From karl at iwl.com  Thu Jul 23 01:06:17 2026
From: karl at iwl.com (Karl Auerbach)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 01:06:17 -0700
Subject: [ih] Internet Talk Radio
In-Reply-To: <bfa3060f-d920-4801-b072-71bc1943dddf@3kitty.org>
References: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
 <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>
 <CAFr-4gi_4gOxunptsZh9zR-jsk0jVvq8XzMWVKfamhL_iNru7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <da81f821-d780-4d18-b00d-51fa77563761@3kitty.org>
 <404d72b3-5660-46b8-a790-89368c8747f4@iwl.com>
 <bfa3060f-d920-4801-b072-71bc1943dddf@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <b6720758-b4b2-4dae-8c49-d3824521e605@iwl.com>

Ah I have not seen that video before.? (I missed most of the Paris shows 
because I was busy trying to figure out how to redeploy an existing 
constellation of Russian low earth orbit satellites with newer 
satellites with on-board, hardened Sun SPARC processors routing IP 
packets between the satellites. I can't say whether I was bothered or 
whether I was pleased by not going to a launch in the middle of the 
desert in Kazakhstan.)

About all I remember about the Paris shows that I did go to were that 
the convention space had really low ceilings and that we bought a 
hundred kilos of really high end chocolates - it was something like 
$10,000 - in 1990's dollars - of magnificent chocolate.)

I notice Simon Hackett in the video with the internet juke box - we had 
that thing in the carriage house of the Victorian house occupied by TGV 
in Santa Cruz (and later my company's office spaces.)? It was very 
annoying when Simon, in Adelaide, changed what we were listening to in 
Santa Cruz as well as the sound level.

I think we used that carriage house to do some testing of Simon's 
Internet toaster.

Here's a link to a photo of Simon from that era... 
https://www.cavebear.com/archive/interop/simon.gif

(My SNMP code was used in both the John Romkey and the Hackett Internet 
toasters.? By-the-way, John R. mentioned that he still has that toaster 
[but not the control unit].)? Both Internet toasters used Sunbeam 
Radiant toasters (because they would lower the bread into the slots when 
power was applied and lift the bread out when power was discontinued.)

By-the-way, Simon (and I think perhaps Stuart Vance) built the first 
portable Internet telephones in that same carriage house in Santa Cruz.? 
We called 'em Etherphones and they made it onto one of Epilogue 
Technology's cool T-shirts, I'll have to take a photograph and post it.

Simon had a story of how he got into the telco business.....? He was 
running a radio based ISP service from the top of the highest building 
in Adelaide.? But he wanted to run a cable across the city street at the 
base of the building.? The authorities said "no, you must be a telco to 
have the right to rip up streets and run cables."? So Simon went through 
the paperwork to become an official, government recognized telco - so he 
could run some cable under the street.? Thus the start, I believe, of 
Internode.

 ? ? ? ? --karl--

On 7/22/26 11:17 PM, Jack Haverty wrote:
> On 7/22/26 18:10, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>> I'm not sure which "Interop Movie" you mean.
> This one:
>
> https://archive.org/details/interop_france_1992
>


From vgcerf at gmail.com  Thu Jul 23 01:55:12 2026
From: vgcerf at gmail.com (vinton cerf)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 04:55:12 -0400
Subject: [ih] Internet Talk Radio
In-Reply-To: <bfa3060f-d920-4801-b072-71bc1943dddf@3kitty.org>
References: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
 <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>
 <CAFr-4gi_4gOxunptsZh9zR-jsk0jVvq8XzMWVKfamhL_iNru7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <da81f821-d780-4d18-b00d-51fa77563761@3kitty.org>
 <404d72b3-5660-46b8-a790-89368c8747f4@iwl.com>
 <bfa3060f-d920-4801-b072-71bc1943dddf@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <CAAFtm_UTF0-WYuakqk1gwK+=aRxnsTBjyqOviTSpag+LfjgqAQ@mail.gmail.com>

speaking of videos, does anyone know whether the video of the "IP on
Everything" striptease from 1992 is still around? It would have been after
IETF Kobe, I think.

v


On Thu, Jul 23, 2026 at 2:17?AM Jack Haverty via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> On 7/22/26 18:10, Karl Auerbach wrote:
> > I'm not sure which "Interop Movie" you mean.
> This one:
>
> https://archive.org/details/interop_france_1992
>
> --
> 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
>


From sob at sobco.com  Thu Jul 23 05:45:48 2026
From: sob at sobco.com (Scott Bradner)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2026 08:45:48 -0400
Subject: [ih] Internet Talk Radio
In-Reply-To: <CAAFtm_UTF0-WYuakqk1gwK+=aRxnsTBjyqOviTSpag+LfjgqAQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
 <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>
 <CAFr-4gi_4gOxunptsZh9zR-jsk0jVvq8XzMWVKfamhL_iNru7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <da81f821-d780-4d18-b00d-51fa77563761@3kitty.org>
 <404d72b3-5660-46b8-a790-89368c8747f4@iwl.com>
 <bfa3060f-d920-4801-b072-71bc1943dddf@3kitty.org>
 <CAAFtm_UTF0-WYuakqk1gwK+=aRxnsTBjyqOviTSpag+LfjgqAQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <68D97314-AC03-4F81-A4A4-FD21FFDA0558@sobco.com>

it was at the Cambridge / MIT IETF meeting July 13-17 1992

(post Kobe - your dance was to counter the response to the Kobe IAB pronouncement)

Scott

> On Jul 23, 2026, at 4:55?AM, vinton cerf via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> speaking of videos, does anyone know whether the video of the "IP on
> Everything" striptease from 1992 is still around? It would have been after
> IETF Kobe, I think.
> 
> v
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2026 at 2:17?AM Jack Haverty via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 7/22/26 18:10, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>>> I'm not sure which "Interop Movie" you mean.
>> This one:
>> 
>> https://archive.org/details/interop_france_1992
>> 
>> --
>> 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
>> 
> -- 
> 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



From romkey at romkey.com  Sat Jul 25 07:37:07 2026
From: romkey at romkey.com (John Romkey)
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2026 07:37:07 -0700
Subject: [ih] Internet Talk Radio
In-Reply-To: <b6720758-b4b2-4dae-8c49-d3824521e605@iwl.com>
References: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
 <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>
 <CAFr-4gi_4gOxunptsZh9zR-jsk0jVvq8XzMWVKfamhL_iNru7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <da81f821-d780-4d18-b00d-51fa77563761@3kitty.org>
 <404d72b3-5660-46b8-a790-89368c8747f4@iwl.com>
 <bfa3060f-d920-4801-b072-71bc1943dddf@3kitty.org>
 <b6720758-b4b2-4dae-8c49-d3824521e605@iwl.com>
Message-ID: <86896AB0-7979-4581-B359-CCC843AECE04@romkey.com>

I do still have the toaster. It spends most of its time on a shelf in our storage room. It still work though it has a slightly concerning aroma when it toasts.

The controller was basically just a relay controlled from a parallel port on a computer and who has parallel ports anymore?

(Hi Karl :))
	- john

-------------- next part --------------


> On Jul 23, 2026, at 1:06?AM, Karl Auerbach via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> Ah I have not seen that video before.  (I missed most of the Paris shows because I was busy trying to figure out how to redeploy an existing constellation of Russian low earth orbit satellites with newer satellites with on-board, hardened Sun SPARC processors routing IP packets between the satellites. I can't say whether I was bothered or whether I was pleased by not going to a launch in the middle of the desert in Kazakhstan.)
> 
> About all I remember about the Paris shows that I did go to were that the convention space had really low ceilings and that we bought a hundred kilos of really high end chocolates - it was something like $10,000 - in 1990's dollars - of magnificent chocolate.)
> 
> I notice Simon Hackett in the video with the internet juke box - we had that thing in the carriage house of the Victorian house occupied by TGV in Santa Cruz (and later my company's office spaces.)  It was very annoying when Simon, in Adelaide, changed what we were listening to in Santa Cruz as well as the sound level.
> 
> I think we used that carriage house to do some testing of Simon's Internet toaster.
> 
> Here's a link to a photo of Simon from that era... https://www.cavebear.com/archive/interop/simon.gif
> 
> (My SNMP code was used in both the John Romkey and the Hackett Internet toasters.  By-the-way, John R. mentioned that he still has that toaster [but not the control unit].)  Both Internet toasters used Sunbeam Radiant toasters (because they would lower the bread into the slots when power was applied and lift the bread out when power was discontinued.)
> 
> By-the-way, Simon (and I think perhaps Stuart Vance) built the first portable Internet telephones in that same carriage house in Santa Cruz.  We called 'em Etherphones and they made it onto one of Epilogue Technology's cool T-shirts, I'll have to take a photograph and post it.
> 
> Simon had a story of how he got into the telco business.....  He was running a radio based ISP service from the top of the highest building in Adelaide.  But he wanted to run a cable across the city street at the base of the building.  The authorities said "no, you must be a telco to have the right to rip up streets and run cables."  So Simon went through the paperwork to become an official, government recognized telco - so he could run some cable under the street.  Thus the start, I believe, of Internode.
> 
>         --karl--
> 
> On 7/22/26 11:17 PM, Jack Haverty wrote:
>> On 7/22/26 18:10, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>>> I'm not sure which "Interop Movie" you mean.
>> This one:
>> 
>> https://archive.org/details/interop_france_1992
>> 
> -- 
> 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


From crypto at glassblower.info  Sat Jul 25 08:48:21 2026
From: crypto at glassblower.info (Tony Patti)
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2026 11:48:21 -0400
Subject: [ih] Internet Talk Radio
In-Reply-To: <86896AB0-7979-4581-B359-CCC843AECE04@romkey.com>
References: <a5152eab-cfc4-4fa1-ae40-5bb662fc2045@gmail.com>
 <bdc2023a-6f94-4766-a500-6e1bc1a468b9@gmail.com>
 <CAFr-4gi_4gOxunptsZh9zR-jsk0jVvq8XzMWVKfamhL_iNru7g@mail.gmail.com>
 <da81f821-d780-4d18-b00d-51fa77563761@3kitty.org>
 <404d72b3-5660-46b8-a790-89368c8747f4@iwl.com>
 <bfa3060f-d920-4801-b072-71bc1943dddf@3kitty.org>
 <b6720758-b4b2-4dae-8c49-d3824521e605@iwl.com>
 <86896AB0-7979-4581-B359-CCC843AECE04@romkey.com>
Message-ID: <157201dd1c4d$052f7a40$0f8e6ec0$@glassblower.info>

John, your "controlled from a parallel port" brings back fond memories of
Jan Axelson's landmark book "Parallel Port Complete" from 1996,
and the hardware random number generators that I built for cryptography,
interfacing via the parallel port, 
various designs published starting in 1989, during the first crypto war.

Tony Patti
(ARPAnet NIC IDENT "TP4")
https://cryptosystemsjournal.com/ 

-----Original Message-----
From: Internet-history <internet-history-bounces at elists.isoc.org> On Behalf
Of John Romkey via Internet-history
Sent: Saturday, July 25, 2026 10:37 AM
To: Karl Auerbach <karl at iwl.com>; Karl Auerbach via Internet-history
<internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
Subject: Re: [ih] Internet Talk Radio

I do still have the toaster. It spends most of its time on a shelf in our
storage room. It still work though it has a slightly concerning aroma when
it toasts.

The controller was basically just a relay controlled from a parallel port on
a computer and who has parallel ports anymore?

(Hi Karl :))
	- john




From cos at aaaaa.org  Sat Jul 25 15:39:38 2026
From: cos at aaaaa.org (Ofer Inbar)
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2026 18:39:38 -0400
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>

On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51:04PM -0700,
Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to
> several ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email
> by serving as a prominent example of "how to do email right".? ?That
> of course might require policies to possibly be changed, technical
> flaws to be addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps
> governments' actions.
> 
> Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
> attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that
> make email untrustworthy in their views.? ?Most of the Internet
> users have no idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.
> ?Most regulatory and government authorities seem to have no idea
> what, if anything, they can do about it.

A majority of younger Internet users (at least in the English speaking
world I'm familiar with) - perhaps not an overwhelming majority, but
quite certainly a majority - simply do not use email to communicate.
They use it to verify their address for accounts, they use it to check
for a specific thing that they know is going to be sent to them by
email and that they know they want to see, and most of the rest of the
time, they let their email pile up and they ignore nearly all of it.

To actually stay in touch with friends, family, coworkers, groups
they're part of, etc. - all the things email used to be for - they
use messaging apps.  Discord, Facebook, Slack Instagram, and more
like that.  Or SMS/RCS phone texts.

All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
spam.  This includes both scattershot scam-oriented spam, but also
lots of lists that sign you up without asking permission.  You donate
to a political candidate, and some sleazy "grassroots" database starts
selling your address to loads of other campaigns of the same party.
You pay for a meal at a restaurant with your phone, enter the email
address for your receipt, and now not only are you on the email list
for that restaurant, but also the next cafe or ice cream place or
whatever where the payment system recognizes your card and offers
to email your receipt and you didn't notice the small checkbox to
opt out of signing up.  You RSVP to an event on some sleazy site like
eventbrite, and now you're on several mailing lists for similar events.

The majority of email is assumed to be spam or otherwise irrelevant,
by people whose experience of email started after the explosion of
spam that I described above.  They never knew what it was like for
email to be relevant and worth checking, so they don't think of it
as relevant or worth checking.  Knowing this, they also don't think
it's a useful way to communicate with anyone they know.
  -- Cos


From jack at 3kitty.org  Tue Jul 28 13:39:35 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2026 13:39:35 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
Message-ID: <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>

On 7/25/26 15:39, Ofer Inbar via Internet-history wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51:04PM -0700,
> Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>> Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to
>> several ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email
>> by serving as a prominent example of "how to do email right".? ?That
>> of course might require policies to possibly be changed, technical
>> flaws to be addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps
>> governments' actions.
>>
>> Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
>> attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that
>> make email untrustworthy in their views.? ?Most of the Internet
>> users have no idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.
>>  ?Most regulatory and government authorities seem to have no idea
>> what, if anything, they can do about it.
> A majority of younger Internet users (at least in the English speaking
> world I'm familiar with) - perhaps not an overwhelming majority, but
> quite certainly a majority - simply do not use email to communicate.
> They use it to verify their address for accounts, they use it to check
> for a specific thing that they know is going to be sent to them by
> email and that they know they want to see, and most of the rest of the
> time, they let their email pile up and they ignore nearly all of it.
>
> To actually stay in touch with friends, family, coworkers, groups
> they're part of, etc. - all the things email used to be for - they
> use messaging apps.  Discord, Facebook, Slack Instagram, and more
> like that.  Or SMS/RCS phone texts.
>
> All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
> listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
> spam.  This includes both scattershot scam-oriented spam, but also
> lots of lists that sign you up without asking permission.  You donate
> to a political candidate, and some sleazy "grassroots" database starts
> selling your address to loads of other campaigns of the same party.
> You pay for a meal at a restaurant with your phone, enter the email
> address for your receipt, and now not only are you on the email list
> for that restaurant, but also the next cafe or ice cream place or
> whatever where the payment system recognizes your card and offers
> to email your receipt and you didn't notice the small checkbox to
> opt out of signing up.  You RSVP to an event on some sleazy site like
> eventbrite, and now you're on several mailing lists for similar events.
>
> The majority of email is assumed to be spam or otherwise irrelevant,
> by people whose experience of email started after the explosion of
> spam that I described above.  They never knew what it was like for
> email to be relevant and worth checking, so they don't think of it
> as relevant or worth checking.  Knowing this, they also don't think
> it's a useful way to communicate with anyone they know.
>    -- Cos

You're absolutely right.? The email world has fragmented into a gaggle 
of separate "messaging" services.? In the beginning, email was a 
universal service, and even "being on the 'net" meant that you had an 
ARPANET email address.? Even when other mail services were in use, e.g., 
UUCP or even MCIMail, there were sometimes arcane ways to interoperate, 
using %, !, and the like to glue two messaging worlds together.? ?Today, 
there are lots of ways for people to communicate, and I've found few 
ways to make them work together.? ?The history of that evolution might 
be an interesting topic for some historian.

Spam is certainly an issue.? For history's benefit, spam was well known 
as an issue even in the early 1970s when email started on the ARPANET.? 
Licklider at MIT pointed out (to me at least while we were implementing 
email) that every system needs some kind of "negative feedback" to be 
stable.? ?Engineers know this, whether they're building electronic stuff 
or steam engines a century ago.

Use of some resource, such as email, must have some "cost" associated 
with its use, to prevent rampant overuse.? ?We actually tried to 
introduce the notion of "stamps" to the develolping email standards in 
the 1970s to provide a form of negative feedback.? Even just a limit on 
the number of emails that one address could send over some time period 
would exert back pressure.

All such proposals were soundly rejected by the research community. ?So 
no backpressure scheme was created and today it costs virtually nothing 
to send out hundreds or thousands of emails.? ?So corporations, 
politicians, charities, and entrepreneurs send them. Same with 
advertising, which does have a cost to the advertiser but little cost to 
the company injecting ads into web pages.? Most of such stuff would be 
considered spam by the recipients, to be scrolled past as quickly as you 
can.

This is all just one part of a larger History of Internet Economics, and 
it goes far beyond just email.? Yesterday I saw an article about the 
"dead internet theory" which characterizes the recent emergence of AI 
agents as disrupting the economics of the Internet as we've known it.? 
See 
https://www.fastcompany.com/91579817/dead-internet-theory-is-real-web-agents 
if you're interested.? ?The economics of the Internet are now breaking 
again and no one knows what comes next.

For example, I recall hearing presentations at some conference in the 
early 1990s about "micropayments" and the technical ideas and progress 
which were currently being tested.? Yet today, we are all barraged with 
content that we can't access unless we subscribe to something.? Everyone 
wants a subscription and the continuous revenue stream it would bring - 
similar to the "all you can eat" philosophy sometimes used by 
restaurants if only for special events. Micropayments were touted as 
alternatives to subscriptions, so an Internet user could pay for one 
"meal" (article) at a time instead of committing to weeks or months of 
all-you-can-eat content.

What happened to micropayments?

Any economists out there?? Perhaps someone can relate the history and 
timeline of how the Internet Economy has evolved over the decades?? ?Is 
The Internet dying?

/Jack Haverty



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260728/e15c716c/attachment.asc>

From gregskinner0 at icloud.com  Tue Jul 28 16:03:27 2026
From: gregskinner0 at icloud.com (Greg Skinner)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2026 16:03:27 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <0F2A90D5-42D1-42E7-97BE-451D3BDA5ABA@icloud.com>

On Jul 28, 2026, at 1:39?PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> For example, I recall hearing presentations at some conference in the early 1990s about "micropayments" and the technical ideas and progress which were currently being tested.  Yet today, we are all barraged with content that we can't access unless we subscribe to something.  Everyone wants a subscription and the continuous revenue stream it would bring - similar to the "all you can eat" philosophy sometimes used by restaurants if only for special events. Micropayments were touted as alternatives to subscriptions, so an Internet user could pay for one "meal" (article) at a time instead of committing to weeks or months of all-you-can-eat content.
> 
> What happened to micropayments?
> 
> Any economists out there?  Perhaps someone can relate the history and timeline of how the Internet Economy has evolved over the decades?   Is The Internet dying?
> 
> /Jack Haverty
> 

Mark Manasse of Severe Tire Damage <https://www.std.org/index.html> (the band mentioned here earlier that was the first to livestream over the MBone) invented Millicent <https://web.archive.org/web/19970601153143/http://www.millicent.digital.com/>, one micropayment system, while he was at DEC (Digital) SRC.  There are many other sources of information about him and Millicent online.

--gregbo



From karl at cavebear.com  Tue Jul 28 16:21:30 2026
From: karl at cavebear.com (Karl Auerbach)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2026 16:21:30 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <0F2A90D5-42D1-42E7-97BE-451D3BDA5ABA@icloud.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <0F2A90D5-42D1-42E7-97BE-451D3BDA5ABA@icloud.com>
Message-ID: <1bd32ec6-85e7-4eff-bf52-65317ebc73d8@cavebear.com>

By-the-way, about a decade and a half ago we did a video about Severe 
Tire Damage - and please pardon the video and sound quality, we were 
just learning back then...

https://www.history-of-the-internet.org/videos/std/

 ? ? ? ? ? ? --karl--

On 7/28/26 4:03 PM, Greg Skinner via Internet-history wrote:
> On Jul 28, 2026, at 1:39?PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>> For example, I recall hearing presentations at some conference in the early 1990s about "micropayments" and the technical ideas and progress which were currently being tested.  Yet today, we are all barraged with content that we can't access unless we subscribe to something.  Everyone wants a subscription and the continuous revenue stream it would bring - similar to the "all you can eat" philosophy sometimes used by restaurants if only for special events. Micropayments were touted as alternatives to subscriptions, so an Internet user could pay for one "meal" (article) at a time instead of committing to weeks or months of all-you-can-eat content.
>>
>> What happened to micropayments?
>>
>> Any economists out there?  Perhaps someone can relate the history and timeline of how the Internet Economy has evolved over the decades?   Is The Internet dying?
>>
>> /Jack Haverty
>>
> Mark Manasse of Severe Tire Damage <https://www.std.org/index.html> (the band mentioned here earlier that was the first to livestream over the MBone) invented Millicent <https://web.archive.org/web/19970601153143/http://www.millicent.digital.com/>, one micropayment system, while he was at DEC (Digital) SRC.  There are many other sources of information about him and Millicent online.
>
> --gregbo
>


From steve at shinkuro.com  Tue Jul 28 16:44:02 2026
From: steve at shinkuro.com (Steve Crocker)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2026 19:44:02 -0400
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <0F2A90D5-42D1-42E7-97BE-451D3BDA5ABA@icloud.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <0F2A90D5-42D1-42E7-97BE-451D3BDA5ABA@icloud.com>
Message-ID: <CABf5zv+=D2rN6_Gy5bHf2gZSN++B1dG_TDvQi8o3pnXXK1aAFg@mail.gmail.com>

Around 1995 at CyberCash, we designed a micropayment system.  It was
included in our patent.  It featured highly efficient currency conversion
-- this was before the Euro -- with a rapid trigger to adjust our online
rates if bank rates shifted substantially.

We didn't get much uptake.  Attached is my "wound-licking" retrospective.

Cheers,

Steve


On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 7:04?PM Greg Skinner via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> On Jul 28, 2026, at 1:39?PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> >
> > For example, I recall hearing presentations at some conference in the
> early 1990s about "micropayments" and the technical ideas and progress
> which were currently being tested.  Yet today, we are all barraged with
> content that we can't access unless we subscribe to something.  Everyone
> wants a subscription and the continuous revenue stream it would bring -
> similar to the "all you can eat" philosophy sometimes used by restaurants
> if only for special events. Micropayments were touted as alternatives to
> subscriptions, so an Internet user could pay for one "meal" (article) at a
> time instead of committing to weeks or months of all-you-can-eat content.
> >
> > What happened to micropayments?
> >
> > Any economists out there?  Perhaps someone can relate the history and
> timeline of how the Internet Economy has evolved over the decades?   Is The
> Internet dying?
> >
> > /Jack Haverty
> >
>
> Mark Manasse of Severe Tire Damage <https://www.std.org/index.html> (the
> band mentioned here earlier that was the first to livestream over the
> MBone) invented Millicent <
> https://web.archive.org/web/19970601153143/http://www.millicent.digital.com/>,
> one micropayment system, while he was at DEC (Digital) SRC.  There are many
> other sources of information about him and Millicent online.
>
> --gregbo
>
> --
> 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


From johnl at iecc.com  Tue Jul 28 17:14:09 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 28 Jul 2026 20:14:09 -0400
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
References: <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <20260729001410.5FFEE1177D3B1@ary.qy>

>> All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
>> listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
>> spam. 

Pretty much, although these days spam is mixed in with phishing and malware
so it's one big blended threat.

>Use of some resource, such as email, must have some "cost" associated 
>with its use, to prevent rampant overuse.? ?We actually tried to 
>introduce the notion of "stamps" to the develolping email standards in 
>the 1970s to provide a form of negative feedback.? Even just a limit on 
>the number of emails that one address could send over some time period 
>would exert back pressure.

E-postage is one of those superficially appealing bad ideas that just won't go away.

I wrote this white paper about it in 2003.  I'd add a few zeros to some of the numbers,
but other than that not much has changed:

https://www.taugh.com/epostage.pdf

R's
John


From dhc at dcrocker.net  Tue Jul 28 17:24:59 2026
From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 00:24:59 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <cf2d4f0b-b34a-4a78-81f8-b0fb131a9b7f@dcrocker.net>

On 7/28/2026 1:39 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> We actually tried to introduce the notion of "stamps" to the 
> develolping email standards in the 1970s to provide a form of negative 
> feedback. 


I don't recall this.? Especially since the first (and I believe only) 
spam in the 1970s, was the DEC one in 1978.

Can you provide any details (or even better a citation)?

As for schemes to try to prevent or counter email abuse, there have been 
enough over the years to prompt Cory Doctorow, many years ago, to create 
a template for responding to such proposals. I think it was intended for 
humor, but he did such a good job, some of us have used it seriously:

    http://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker

dhc at dcrocker.net
bluesky: @dcrocker.bsky.social
mast: @dcrocker at mastodon.social
+1.408.329.0791

Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
Northern California Coastal Region
Information & Planning Coordinator
American Red Cross
dave.crocker2 at redcross.org


From johnl at iecc.com  Tue Jul 28 17:30:10 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 28 Jul 2026 20:30:10 -0400
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
References: <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <20260729003011.3FDC91177DA66@ary.qy>

It appears that Jack Haverty via Internet-history <jack at 3kitty.org> said:
>What happened to micropayments?

tl;dr people hate them

Andy Odzlyzko gave a talk on "The case against micropayments" at the 2003
Financial Cryptography conference:

https://www-users.cse.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/case.against.micropayments.txt

R's,
John


From brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com  Tue Jul 28 17:35:30 2026
From: brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 12:35:30 +1200
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>

I think there are some really interesting economic questions, such as:

- why did advertising, and charging for domain names, become major factors in Internet economics?
- how has the design of BGP4 affected carrier economics (competition vs collaboration)?
- why did flat-rate charging become the dominant model for ISPs?
- what fractions of application layer revenue come from advertising, subscriptions, pay-per-view, etc?
- why does anyone trust cryptocurrency?
- how will AI change Internet economics?

I think email and spam are actually minor, economically speaking.

Regards/Ng? mihi
    Brian Carpenter

On 29-Jul-26 08:39, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> On 7/25/26 15:39, Ofer Inbar via Internet-history wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51:04PM -0700,
>> Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>> Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to
>>> several ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email
>>> by serving as a prominent example of "how to do email right".? ?That
>>> of course might require policies to possibly be changed, technical
>>> flaws to be addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps
>>> governments' actions.
>>>
>>> Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
>>> attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that
>>> make email untrustworthy in their views.? ?Most of the Internet
>>> users have no idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.
>>>   ?Most regulatory and government authorities seem to have no idea
>>> what, if anything, they can do about it.
>> A majority of younger Internet users (at least in the English speaking
>> world I'm familiar with) - perhaps not an overwhelming majority, but
>> quite certainly a majority - simply do not use email to communicate.
>> They use it to verify their address for accounts, they use it to check
>> for a specific thing that they know is going to be sent to them by
>> email and that they know they want to see, and most of the rest of the
>> time, they let their email pile up and they ignore nearly all of it.
>>
>> To actually stay in touch with friends, family, coworkers, groups
>> they're part of, etc. - all the things email used to be for - they
>> use messaging apps.  Discord, Facebook, Slack Instagram, and more
>> like that.  Or SMS/RCS phone texts.
>>
>> All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
>> listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
>> spam.  This includes both scattershot scam-oriented spam, but also
>> lots of lists that sign you up without asking permission.  You donate
>> to a political candidate, and some sleazy "grassroots" database starts
>> selling your address to loads of other campaigns of the same party.
>> You pay for a meal at a restaurant with your phone, enter the email
>> address for your receipt, and now not only are you on the email list
>> for that restaurant, but also the next cafe or ice cream place or
>> whatever where the payment system recognizes your card and offers
>> to email your receipt and you didn't notice the small checkbox to
>> opt out of signing up.  You RSVP to an event on some sleazy site like
>> eventbrite, and now you're on several mailing lists for similar events.
>>
>> The majority of email is assumed to be spam or otherwise irrelevant,
>> by people whose experience of email started after the explosion of
>> spam that I described above.  They never knew what it was like for
>> email to be relevant and worth checking, so they don't think of it
>> as relevant or worth checking.  Knowing this, they also don't think
>> it's a useful way to communicate with anyone they know.
>>     -- Cos
> 
> You're absolutely right.? The email world has fragmented into a gaggle
> of separate "messaging" services.? In the beginning, email was a
> universal service, and even "being on the 'net" meant that you had an
> ARPANET email address.? Even when other mail services were in use, e.g.,
> UUCP or even MCIMail, there were sometimes arcane ways to interoperate,
> using %, !, and the like to glue two messaging worlds together.? ?Today,
> there are lots of ways for people to communicate, and I've found few
> ways to make them work together.? ?The history of that evolution might
> be an interesting topic for some historian.
> 
> Spam is certainly an issue.? For history's benefit, spam was well known
> as an issue even in the early 1970s when email started on the ARPANET.
> Licklider at MIT pointed out (to me at least while we were implementing
> email) that every system needs some kind of "negative feedback" to be
> stable.? ?Engineers know this, whether they're building electronic stuff
> or steam engines a century ago.
> 
> Use of some resource, such as email, must have some "cost" associated
> with its use, to prevent rampant overuse.? ?We actually tried to
> introduce the notion of "stamps" to the develolping email standards in
> the 1970s to provide a form of negative feedback.? Even just a limit on
> the number of emails that one address could send over some time period
> would exert back pressure.
> 
> All such proposals were soundly rejected by the research community. ?So
> no backpressure scheme was created and today it costs virtually nothing
> to send out hundreds or thousands of emails.? ?So corporations,
> politicians, charities, and entrepreneurs send them. Same with
> advertising, which does have a cost to the advertiser but little cost to
> the company injecting ads into web pages.? Most of such stuff would be
> considered spam by the recipients, to be scrolled past as quickly as you
> can.
> 
> This is all just one part of a larger History of Internet Economics, and
> it goes far beyond just email.? Yesterday I saw an article about the
> "dead internet theory" which characterizes the recent emergence of AI
> agents as disrupting the economics of the Internet as we've known it.
> See
> https://www.fastcompany.com/91579817/dead-internet-theory-is-real-web-agents
> if you're interested.? ?The economics of the Internet are now breaking
> again and no one knows what comes next.
> 
> For example, I recall hearing presentations at some conference in the
> early 1990s about "micropayments" and the technical ideas and progress
> which were currently being tested.? Yet today, we are all barraged with
> content that we can't access unless we subscribe to something.? Everyone
> wants a subscription and the continuous revenue stream it would bring -
> similar to the "all you can eat" philosophy sometimes used by
> restaurants if only for special events. Micropayments were touted as
> alternatives to subscriptions, so an Internet user could pay for one
> "meal" (article) at a time instead of committing to weeks or months of
> all-you-can-eat content.
> 
> What happened to micropayments?
> 
> Any economists out there?? Perhaps someone can relate the history and
> timeline of how the Internet Economy has evolved over the decades?? ?Is
> The Internet dying?
> 
> /Jack Haverty
> 
> 
> 
> 

From jack at 3kitty.org  Tue Jul 28 21:48:42 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2026 21:48:42 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <cf2d4f0b-b34a-4a78-81f8-b0fb131a9b7f@dcrocker.net>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <cf2d4f0b-b34a-4a78-81f8-b0fb131a9b7f@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <6a6af4e7-496b-4746-9806-85e3a1a05335@3kitty.org>

Sorry, it's just something I remember.? No references that I know 
about.? The 1970s were a time when email was the new toy and it was used 
for everything that used to be done by letters or journal and conference 
papers.? Most of that early 1970s email has probably not survived (I 
have none of mine), except for some popular mailing lists of the era 
such as HEADER-PEOPLE.

As I recall, most of the debate was between Lick and whoever was at ARPA 
in the early 1970s.? ?Lick's vision was broad and deep, envisioning a 
future "intergalactic network" where computers were somehow able to 
communicate with each other to help humans do everything humans do - 
like communicating by email.

In contrast, ARPA was understandably focussed on the new ARPANET they 
had just built.? ?At the time, users of the ARPANET were restricted to 
people who were working on some ARPA project.? That restriction provided 
a form of backpressure to prevent widespread spam.? ?So other mechanisms 
such as "stamps" were deemed unnecessary.? Backpressure dosn't have to 
be monetary.

Lick's vision was anticipating the rise of The Internet where spam has 
become a real issue.? ?ARPA had a much shorter vision which didn't need 
such mechanisms.

Some economic issues were introduced when NSF entered the Internet 
project later in the 1980s.? NSF funded startup ISPs, but explicitly 
made it clear that each had to become self-sufficient in a short time 
(perhaps 2 years?? I forget...)

While I was later doing Internet projects at BBN in the 1980s, I asked 
one of the people reporting to me (Cyndi Mills) to start up a research 
topic (may have been an IETF working group?) focussed on Accounting for 
the Internet.? ?If we could gather data about usage of the Internet, 
that would be a precursor to introducing some kind of payments for 
usage.? That effort didn't get much interest either.

I guess there weren't enough economists in the research community. ?I 
wasn't an economist, but I did take several undergraduate courses in 
Economics so I at least knew the basics.

/Jack Haverty

On 7/28/26 17:24, Dave Crocker wrote:
> On 7/28/2026 1:39 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
>> We actually tried to introduce the notion of "stamps" to the 
>> develolping email standards in the 1970s to provide a form of 
>> negative feedback. 
>
>
> I don't recall this.? Especially since the first (and I believe only) 
> spam in the 1970s, was the DEC one in 1978.
>
> Can you provide any details (or even better a citation)?
>
> As for schemes to try to prevent or counter email abuse, there have 
> been enough over the years to prompt Cory Doctorow, many years ago, to 
> create a template for responding to such proposals.? I think it was 
> intended for humor, but he did such a good job, some of us have used 
> it seriously:
>
>     http://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt
>
> d/
>
> -- 
> Dave Crocker
>
> dhc at dcrocker.net
> bluesky: @dcrocker.bsky.social
> mast: @dcrocker at mastodon.social
> +1.408.329.0791
>
> Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
> Northern California Coastal Region
> Information & Planning Coordinator
> American Red Cross
> dave.crocker2 at redcross.org

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260728/7e052eb7/attachment.asc>

From jack at 3kitty.org  Tue Jul 28 22:16:44 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2026 22:16:44 -0700
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
Message-ID: <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>

It's not just email that has deteriorated.? Lots of other pioneering 
services introduced on the Internet have similarly grown to involve 
large populations of users today.? But like email, that growth has 
occurred by a fragmentation of the initial "universal" connectivity 
introduced to the Internet into a plethora of separate and 
non-interoperable but functionally similar services.

Mbone is one example.? ?Also IRC (Internet Relay Chat).? Network news 
(NNTP).? rec.whatever forums.? Perhaps Gopher?? Even FTP, from ARPANET 
days.? There are probably others.? ?All of those may still be used, but 
none of them have evolved into a common standard that many 
implementations can deploy and interoperate with all the others.

Why did IP succeed as the substrate of The Internet, but so much else 
failed to do so?

/Jack Haverty

On 7/25/26 15:39, Ofer Inbar via Internet-history wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51:04PM -0700,
> Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>> Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to
>> several ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email
>> by serving as a prominent example of "how to do email right".? ?That
>> of course might require policies to possibly be changed, technical
>> flaws to be addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps
>> governments' actions.
>>
>> Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
>> attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that
>> make email untrustworthy in their views.? ?Most of the Internet
>> users have no idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.
>>  ?Most regulatory and government authorities seem to have no idea
>> what, if anything, they can do about it.
> A majority of younger Internet users (at least in the English speaking
> world I'm familiar with) - perhaps not an overwhelming majority, but
> quite certainly a majority - simply do not use email to communicate.
> They use it to verify their address for accounts, they use it to check
> for a specific thing that they know is going to be sent to them by
> email and that they know they want to see, and most of the rest of the
> time, they let their email pile up and they ignore nearly all of it.
>
> To actually stay in touch with friends, family, coworkers, groups
> they're part of, etc. - all the things email used to be for - they
> use messaging apps.  Discord, Facebook, Slack Instagram, and more
> like that.  Or SMS/RCS phone texts.
>
> All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
> listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
> spam.  This includes both scattershot scam-oriented spam, but also
> lots of lists that sign you up without asking permission.  You donate
> to a political candidate, and some sleazy "grassroots" database starts
> selling your address to loads of other campaigns of the same party.
> You pay for a meal at a restaurant with your phone, enter the email
> address for your receipt, and now not only are you on the email list
> for that restaurant, but also the next cafe or ice cream place or
> whatever where the payment system recognizes your card and offers
> to email your receipt and you didn't notice the small checkbox to
> opt out of signing up.  You RSVP to an event on some sleazy site like
> eventbrite, and now you're on several mailing lists for similar events.
>
> The majority of email is assumed to be spam or otherwise irrelevant,
> by people whose experience of email started after the explosion of
> spam that I described above.  They never knew what it was like for
> email to be relevant and worth checking, so they don't think of it
> as relevant or worth checking.  Knowing this, they also don't think
> it's a useful way to communicate with anyone they know.
>    -- Cos

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260728/dab7be74/attachment.asc>

From vgcerf at gmail.com  Wed Jul 29 02:22:20 2026
From: vgcerf at gmail.com (vinton cerf)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 05:22:20 -0400
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <CAAFtm_UiYQKtA+14__syXV+jqG33Jpygkmijyxhy7Y8iq+G9bQ@mail.gmail.com>

it was probably the least demanding of the protocols and pretty simple to
implement at the edges (not counting how hard it has been to develop
routers that glue the network together).

v


On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 1:24?AM Jack Haverty via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> It's not just email that has deteriorated.  Lots of other pioneering
> services introduced on the Internet have similarly grown to involve
> large populations of users today.  But like email, that growth has
> occurred by a fragmentation of the initial "universal" connectivity
> introduced to the Internet into a plethora of separate and
> non-interoperable but functionally similar services.
>
> Mbone is one example.   Also IRC (Internet Relay Chat).  Network news
> (NNTP).  rec.whatever forums.  Perhaps Gopher?  Even FTP, from ARPANET
> days.  There are probably others.   All of those may still be used, but
> none of them have evolved into a common standard that many
> implementations can deploy and interoperate with all the others.
>
> Why did IP succeed as the substrate of The Internet, but so much else
> failed to do so?
>
> /Jack Haverty
>
> On 7/25/26 15:39, Ofer Inbar via Internet-history wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51:04PM -0700,
> > Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
> wrote:
> >> Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to
> >> several ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email
> >> by serving as a prominent example of "how to do email right".   That
> >> of course might require policies to possibly be changed, technical
> >> flaws to be addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps
> >> governments' actions.
> >>
> >> Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
> >> attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that
> >> make email untrustworthy in their views.   Most of the Internet
> >> users have no idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.
> >>   Most regulatory and government authorities seem to have no idea
> >> what, if anything, they can do about it.
> > A majority of younger Internet users (at least in the English speaking
> > world I'm familiar with) - perhaps not an overwhelming majority, but
> > quite certainly a majority - simply do not use email to communicate.
> > They use it to verify their address for accounts, they use it to check
> > for a specific thing that they know is going to be sent to them by
> > email and that they know they want to see, and most of the rest of the
> > time, they let their email pile up and they ignore nearly all of it.
> >
> > To actually stay in touch with friends, family, coworkers, groups
> > they're part of, etc. - all the things email used to be for - they
> > use messaging apps.  Discord, Facebook, Slack Instagram, and more
> > like that.  Or SMS/RCS phone texts.
> >
> > All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
> > listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
> > spam.  This includes both scattershot scam-oriented spam, but also
> > lots of lists that sign you up without asking permission.  You donate
> > to a political candidate, and some sleazy "grassroots" database starts
> > selling your address to loads of other campaigns of the same party.
> > You pay for a meal at a restaurant with your phone, enter the email
> > address for your receipt, and now not only are you on the email list
> > for that restaurant, but also the next cafe or ice cream place or
> > whatever where the payment system recognizes your card and offers
> > to email your receipt and you didn't notice the small checkbox to
> > opt out of signing up.  You RSVP to an event on some sleazy site like
> > eventbrite, and now you're on several mailing lists for similar events.
> >
> > The majority of email is assumed to be spam or otherwise irrelevant,
> > by people whose experience of email started after the explosion of
> > spam that I described above.  They never knew what it was like for
> > email to be relevant and worth checking, so they don't think of it
> > as relevant or worth checking.  Knowing this, they also don't think
> > it's a useful way to communicate with anyone they know.
> >    -- Cos
>
> --
> 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
>


From romkey at romkey.com  Wed Jul 29 06:34:15 2026
From: romkey at romkey.com (John Romkey)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 06:34:15 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CE12488A-F38C-4B98-8C1D-7F235B1AB0BE@romkey.com>


> On Jul 28, 2026, at 5:35?PM, Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> I think there are some really interesting economic questions, such as:
> 
> - why did advertising, and charging for domain names, become major factors in Internet economics?

For domain names, scarcity. This was unintentionally encoded in the system by having only a handful of TLDs at the start, with .com the most recognized and therefore most valuable. Even if businesses hadn?t come online ?smith.com? or ?sex.com? would have had a lot of competition for them and therefore value.

Advertising was the existing dominant model in broadcast publishing already, and ?the Internet? fit that model quite well.

What were the viable alternatives?

Subscriptions are hard to bootstrap and would have been especially difficult when the Internet was new. There also wasn?t the infrastructure to support them back then as there is now. And they suffer in the face of ?free? services although obviously several models survive along side one another today.

> - how has the design of BGP4 affected carrier economics (competition vs collaboration)?
> - why did flat-rate charging become the dominant model for ISPs?

I remember John Curran predicting this in the early 90s (I think it was the early 90s anyway), basically it can cost more to meter than it?s worth. At some point the cost per bit becomes noise.

> - what fractions of application layer revenue come from advertising, subscriptions, pay-per-view, etc?
> - why does anyone trust cryptocurrency?

I?m sure you could write a PhD thesis in psychology about this one? but at this point it?s along the lines of why does anyone trust the stock market? Most coins are essentially gambling these days. Libertarian and anarchist philosophies, distrust of the government, cult of personality, gold rush fever.  Not to be too dour but the general population hasn?t really demonstrated that it?s great at critical thinking.

> - how will AI change Internet economics?

There are some obvious things, like undermining advertising by vomiting up so much content that its value approaches zero and further pollutes the ability to actually find anything.

I?m looking forward to the completely unobvious, surprising outcomes. At least I think I am? if it?s on the enjoyable side of ?no one ever anticipated that? rather than the ?oh shit? side.
	- john romkey


> 
> I think email and spam are actually minor, economically speaking.
> 
> Regards/Ng? mihi
>   Brian Carpenter
> 
> On 29-Jul-26 08:39, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
>> On 7/25/26 15:39, Ofer Inbar via Internet-history wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51:04PM -0700,
>>> Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>>> Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to
>>>> several ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email
>>>> by serving as a prominent example of "how to do email right".   That
>>>> of course might require policies to possibly be changed, technical
>>>> flaws to be addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps
>>>> governments' actions.
>>>> 
>>>> Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
>>>> attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that
>>>> make email untrustworthy in their views.   Most of the Internet
>>>> users have no idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.
>>>>   Most regulatory and government authorities seem to have no idea
>>>> what, if anything, they can do about it.
>>> A majority of younger Internet users (at least in the English speaking
>>> world I'm familiar with) - perhaps not an overwhelming majority, but
>>> quite certainly a majority - simply do not use email to communicate.
>>> They use it to verify their address for accounts, they use it to check
>>> for a specific thing that they know is going to be sent to them by
>>> email and that they know they want to see, and most of the rest of the
>>> time, they let their email pile up and they ignore nearly all of it.
>>> 
>>> To actually stay in touch with friends, family, coworkers, groups
>>> they're part of, etc. - all the things email used to be for - they
>>> use messaging apps.  Discord, Facebook, Slack Instagram, and more
>>> like that.  Or SMS/RCS phone texts.
>>> 
>>> All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
>>> listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
>>> spam.  This includes both scattershot scam-oriented spam, but also
>>> lots of lists that sign you up without asking permission.  You donate
>>> to a political candidate, and some sleazy "grassroots" database starts
>>> selling your address to loads of other campaigns of the same party.
>>> You pay for a meal at a restaurant with your phone, enter the email
>>> address for your receipt, and now not only are you on the email list
>>> for that restaurant, but also the next cafe or ice cream place or
>>> whatever where the payment system recognizes your card and offers
>>> to email your receipt and you didn't notice the small checkbox to
>>> opt out of signing up.  You RSVP to an event on some sleazy site like
>>> eventbrite, and now you're on several mailing lists for similar events.
>>> 
>>> The majority of email is assumed to be spam or otherwise irrelevant,
>>> by people whose experience of email started after the explosion of
>>> spam that I described above.  They never knew what it was like for
>>> email to be relevant and worth checking, so they don't think of it
>>> as relevant or worth checking.  Knowing this, they also don't think
>>> it's a useful way to communicate with anyone they know.
>>>    -- Cos
>> You're absolutely right.  The email world has fragmented into a gaggle
>> of separate "messaging" services.  In the beginning, email was a
>> universal service, and even "being on the 'net" meant that you had an
>> ARPANET email address.  Even when other mail services were in use, e.g.,
>> UUCP or even MCIMail, there were sometimes arcane ways to interoperate,
>> using %, !, and the like to glue two messaging worlds together.   Today,
>> there are lots of ways for people to communicate, and I've found few
>> ways to make them work together.   The history of that evolution might
>> be an interesting topic for some historian.
>> Spam is certainly an issue.  For history's benefit, spam was well known
>> as an issue even in the early 1970s when email started on the ARPANET.
>> Licklider at MIT pointed out (to me at least while we were implementing
>> email) that every system needs some kind of "negative feedback" to be
>> stable.   Engineers know this, whether they're building electronic stuff
>> or steam engines a century ago.
>> Use of some resource, such as email, must have some "cost" associated
>> with its use, to prevent rampant overuse.   We actually tried to
>> introduce the notion of "stamps" to the develolping email standards in
>> the 1970s to provide a form of negative feedback.  Even just a limit on
>> the number of emails that one address could send over some time period
>> would exert back pressure.
>> All such proposals were soundly rejected by the research community.  So
>> no backpressure scheme was created and today it costs virtually nothing
>> to send out hundreds or thousands of emails.   So corporations,
>> politicians, charities, and entrepreneurs send them. Same with
>> advertising, which does have a cost to the advertiser but little cost to
>> the company injecting ads into web pages.  Most of such stuff would be
>> considered spam by the recipients, to be scrolled past as quickly as you
>> can.
>> This is all just one part of a larger History of Internet Economics, and
>> it goes far beyond just email.  Yesterday I saw an article about the
>> "dead internet theory" which characterizes the recent emergence of AI
>> agents as disrupting the economics of the Internet as we've known it.
>> See
>> https://www.fastcompany.com/91579817/dead-internet-theory-is-real-web-agents
>> if you're interested.   The economics of the Internet are now breaking
>> again and no one knows what comes next.
>> For example, I recall hearing presentations at some conference in the
>> early 1990s about "micropayments" and the technical ideas and progress
>> which were currently being tested.  Yet today, we are all barraged with
>> content that we can't access unless we subscribe to something.  Everyone
>> wants a subscription and the continuous revenue stream it would bring -
>> similar to the "all you can eat" philosophy sometimes used by
>> restaurants if only for special events. Micropayments were touted as
>> alternatives to subscriptions, so an Internet user could pay for one
>> "meal" (article) at a time instead of committing to weeks or months of
>> all-you-can-eat content.
>> What happened to micropayments?
>> Any economists out there?  Perhaps someone can relate the history and
>> timeline of how the Internet Economy has evolved over the decades?   Is
>> The Internet dying?
>> /Jack Haverty
> -- 
> 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



From jtk at dataplane.org  Wed Jul 29 07:49:19 2026
From: jtk at dataplane.org (John Kristoff)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 09:49:19 -0500
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <cf2d4f0b-b34a-4a78-81f8-b0fb131a9b7f@dcrocker.net>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <cf2d4f0b-b34a-4a78-81f8-b0fb131a9b7f@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <20260729094919.0d0b0078@dataplane.org>

On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 00:24:59 +0000 (UTC)
Dave Crocker via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
wrote:

> As for schemes to try to prevent or counter email abuse, there have
> been enough over the years to prompt Cory Doctorow, many years ago,
> to create a template for responding to such proposals. I think it was
[...]

I think this may be an even earlier, but similar sort of response to
spam mitigation proposals:

  <https://www.rhyolite.com/anti-spam/you-might-be.html>

John


From julf at Julf.com  Wed Jul 29 07:51:04 2026
From: julf at Julf.com (Johan Helsingius)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 16:51:04 +0200
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <a49efdb1-8946-4ad5-8c1e-50e8106fbe79@Julf.com>

On 28/07/2026 10:39 pm, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> What happened to micropayments?

We (EUnet Finland) did an e-cash micropayment pilot with Chaum's
Digicash. It was resisted by traditional banks, and both users
and content owners/producers found it too much of a hassle, as
advertisement-paid content was much easier.

	Julf



From geoff at iconia.com  Wed Jul 29 08:16:52 2026
From: geoff at iconia.com (the keyboard of geoff goodfellow)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 08:16:52 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <6a6af4e7-496b-4746-9806-85e3a1a05335@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <cf2d4f0b-b34a-4a78-81f8-b0fb131a9b7f@dcrocker.net>
 <6a6af4e7-496b-4746-9806-85e3a1a05335@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <CAEf-zrgVngPn1mTCR7kK5o=oTTkSN-Fu7K+zR8W8cCQVfj_iPQ@mail.gmail.com>

in furtherance of "Lick's vision was broad and deep, envisioning a
future "intergalactic network" where computers were somehow able to
communicate with each other to help humans do everything humans do -
like communicating by email."

of note, there is/was the late Mark Weiser's vision of "Ubiquitous
Computing" whereby
EXCERPTing from Mark Weiser's article, "The Computer for the Twenty-First
Century," Scientific American, pp. 94-10, September 1991 [link below]:

The most profound technologies are those that disappear. They weave
themselves into the fabric of everyday life until they are
indistinguishable from it.

Consider writing, perhaps the first information technology: The ability to
capture a symbolic representation of spoken language for long-term storage
freed information from the limits of individual memory. Today this
technology is ubiquitous in industrialized countries. Not only do books,
magazines and newspapers convey written information, but so do street
signs, billboards, shop signs and even graffiti. Candy wrappers are covered
in writing. The constant background presence of these products of "literacy
technology" does not require active attention, but the information to be
conveyed is ready for use at a glance. It is difficult to imagine modern
life otherwise.

Silicon-based information technology, in contrast, is far from having
become part of the environment. More than 50 million personal computers
have been sold, and nonetheless the computer remains largely in a world of
its own. It is approachable only through complex jargon that has nothing to
do with the tasks for which which people actually use computers. The state
of the art is perhaps analogous to the period when scribes had to know as
much about making ink or baking clay as they did about writing.

The arcane aura that surrounds personal computers is not just a "user
interface" problem. My colleagues and I at PARC think that the idea of a
"personal" computer itself is misplaced, and that the vision of laptop
machines, dynabooks and "knowledge navigators" is only a transitional step
toward achieving the real potential of information technology. Such
machines cannot truly make computing an integral, invisible part of the way
people live their lives. Therefore we are trying to conceive a new way of
thinking about computers in the world, one that takes into account the
natural human environment and allows the computers themselves to vanish
into the background.

Such a disappearance is a fundamental consequence not of technology, but of
human psychology. Whenever people learn something sufficiently well, they
cease to be aware of it. When you look at a street sign, for example, you
absorb its information without consciously performing the act of reading..
Computer scientist, economist, and Nobelist Herb Simon calls this
phenomenon "compiling"; philosopher Michael Polanyi calls it the "tacit
dimension"; psychologist TK Gibson calls it "visual invariants";
philosophers Georg Gadamer and Martin Heidegger call it "the horizon" and
the "ready-to-hand", John Seely Brown at PARC calls it the "periphery". All
say, in essence, that only when things disappear in this way are we freed
to use them without thinking and so to focus beyond them on new goals.

The idea of integrating computers seamlessly into the world at large runs
counter to a number of present-day trends. "Ubiquitous computing" in this
context does not just mean computers that can be carried to the beach,
jungle or airport. Even the most powerful notebook computer, with access to
a worldwide information network, still focuses attention on a single box.
By analogy to writing, carrying a super-laptop is like owning just one very
important book. Customizing this book, even writing millions of other
books, does not begin to capture the real power of literacy.

Furthermore, although ubiquitous computers may employ sound and video in
addition to text and graphics, that does not make them "multimedia
computers." Today's multimedia machine makes the computer screen into a
demanding focus of attention rather than allowing it to fade into the
background.

Perhaps most diametrically opposed to our vision is the notion of "virtual
reality," which attempts to make a world inside the computer. Users don
special goggles that project an artificial scene on their eyes; they wear
gloves or even body suits that sense their motions and gestures so that
they can move about and manipulate virtual objects. Although it may have
its purpose in allowing people to explore realms otherwise inaccessible --
the insides of cells, the surfaces of distant planets, the information web
of complex databases -- virtual reality is only a map, not a territory. It
excludes desks, offices, other people not wearing goggles and body suits,
weather, grass, trees, walks, chance encounters and in general the infinite
richness of the universe. Virtual reality focuses an enormous apparatus on
simulating the world rather than on invisibly enhancing the world that
already exists.

Indeed, the opposition between the notion of virtual reality and
ubiquitous, invisible computing is so strong that some of us use the term
"embodied virtuality" to refer to the process of drawing computers out of
their electronic shells. The "virtuality" of computer-readable data -- all
the different ways in which it can be altered, processed and analyzed -- is
brought into the physical world.

How do technologies disappear into the background? The vanishing of
electric motors may serve as an instructive example: At the turn of the
century, a typical workshop or factory contained a single engine that drove
dozens or hundreds of different machines through a system of shafts and
pulleys. Cheap, small, efficient electric motors made it possible first to
give each machine or tool its own source of motive force, then to put many
motors into a single machine..."


https://web.archive.org/web/20180624201034/http://www.ubiq.com/weiser/
*https://web.archive.org/web/20180602090007/http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/UbiHome.html
<https://web.archive.org/web/20180602090007/http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/UbiHome.html>*

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/512616/how-smart-watches-and-phablets-fulfill-a-20-year-old-prophecy-about-ubiquitous-computing/
Papers

Other writeups by Weiser on different aspects of Ubicomp can be found in
the following references:

   - Mark Weiser. "The world is not a desktop
   <https://web.archive.org/web/20180602072606/http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/ACMInteractions2.html>
   ". *Interactions*; January 1994; pp. 7-8.
   - Mark Weiser, "Hot Topics: Ubiquitous Computing
   <https://web.archive.org/web/20180602102125/http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/UbiCompHotTopics.html>
   " *IEEE Computer*, October 1993.
   - Mark Weiser, "Some Computer Science Problems in Ubiquitous Computing
   <https://web.archive.org/web/20180329233244/http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/UbiCACM.html>
   ," *Communications of the ACM,* July 1993. (reprinted as "Ubiquitous
   Computing". *Nikkei Electronics*; December 6, 1993; pp. 137-143.)
   - *Mark Weiser, "The Computer for the Twenty-First Century
   <https://web.archive.org/web/20180602101331/http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/SciAmDraft3.html>,"
Scientific
   American, pp. 94-10, September 1991*


On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 9:48?PM Jack Haverty via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> Sorry, it's just something I remember.  No references that I know
> about.  The 1970s were a time when email was the new toy and it was used
> for everything that used to be done by letters or journal and conference
> papers.  Most of that early 1970s email has probably not survived (I
> have none of mine), except for some popular mailing lists of the era
> such as HEADER-PEOPLE.
>
> As I recall, most of the debate was between Lick and whoever was at ARPA
> in the early 1970s.   Lick's vision was broad and deep, envisioning a
> future "intergalactic network" where computers were somehow able to
> communicate with each other to help humans do everything humans do -
> like communicating by email.
>
> In contrast, ARPA was understandably focussed on the new ARPANET they
> had just built.   At the time, users of the ARPANET were restricted to
> people who were working on some ARPA project.  That restriction provided
> a form of backpressure to prevent widespread spam.   So other mechanisms
> such as "stamps" were deemed unnecessary.  Backpressure dosn't have to
> be monetary.
>
> Lick's vision was anticipating the rise of The Internet where spam has
> become a real issue.   ARPA had a much shorter vision which didn't need
> such mechanisms.
>
> Some economic issues were introduced when NSF entered the Internet
> project later in the 1980s.  NSF funded startup ISPs, but explicitly
> made it clear that each had to become self-sufficient in a short time
> (perhaps 2 years?  I forget...)
>
> While I was later doing Internet projects at BBN in the 1980s, I asked
> one of the people reporting to me (Cyndi Mills) to start up a research
> topic (may have been an IETF working group?) focussed on Accounting for
> the Internet.   If we could gather data about usage of the Internet,
> that would be a precursor to introducing some kind of payments for
> usage.  That effort didn't get much interest either.
>
> I guess there weren't enough economists in the research community.  I
> wasn't an economist, but I did take several undergraduate courses in
> Economics so I at least knew the basics.
>
> /Jack Haverty
>
> On 7/28/26 17:24, Dave Crocker wrote:
> > On 7/28/2026 1:39 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> >> We actually tried to introduce the notion of "stamps" to the
> >> develolping email standards in the 1970s to provide a form of
> >> negative feedback.
> >
> >
> > I don't recall this.  Especially since the first (and I believe only)
> > spam in the 1970s, was the DEC one in 1978.
> >
> > Can you provide any details (or even better a citation)?
> >
> > As for schemes to try to prevent or counter email abuse, there have
> > been enough over the years to prompt Cory Doctorow, many years ago, to
> > create a template for responding to such proposals.  I think it was
> > intended for humor, but he did such a good job, some of us have used
> > it seriously:
> >
> >     http://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt
> >
> > d/
> >
> > --
> > Dave Crocker
> >
> > dhc at dcrocker.net
> > bluesky: @dcrocker.bsky.social
> > mast: @dcrocker at mastodon.social
> > +1.408.329.0791
> >
> > Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
> > Northern California Coastal Region
> > Information & Planning Coordinator
> > American Red Cross
> > dave.crocker2 at redcross.org
>
> --
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>
>

-- 
Geoff.Goodfellow at iconia.com
living as The Truth is True


From geoff at iconia.com  Wed Jul 29 08:35:13 2026
From: geoff at iconia.com (the keyboard of geoff goodfellow)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 08:35:13 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <CE12488A-F38C-4B98-8C1D-7F235B1AB0BE@romkey.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <CE12488A-F38C-4B98-8C1D-7F235B1AB0BE@romkey.com>
Message-ID: <CAEf-zrhUHHA1Zzn8=psEMJe1dNOwzn2kQUUQj16toD4eVQYq-Q@mail.gmail.com>

vis-a-vis "... looking forward to the completely unobvious, surprising
outcomes. At least I think I am? if it?s on the enjoyable side of ?no one
ever anticipated that? rather than the ?oh shit? side."

IIRC, Bob Kahn (then as the director of ARPA-IPTO) once gave a talk about
the ARPANET and the budding Internet R&D of the day in which he stated that
the ?no one ever anticipated" things were the most interesting outcome of
the ARPANET... and that one of the no one ever anticipated, completely
unobvious, surprising outcomes things was email.

g

On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 6:34?AM John Romkey via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

>
> > On Jul 28, 2026, at 5:35?PM, Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> >
> > I think there are some really interesting economic questions, such as:
> >
> > - why did advertising, and charging for domain names, become major
> factors in Internet economics?
>
> For domain names, scarcity. This was unintentionally encoded in the system
> by having only a handful of TLDs at the start, with .com the most
> recognized and therefore most valuable. Even if businesses hadn?t come
> online ?smith.com? or ?sex.com? would have had a lot of competition for
> them and therefore value.
>
> Advertising was the existing dominant model in broadcast publishing
> already, and ?the Internet? fit that model quite well.
>
> What were the viable alternatives?
>
> Subscriptions are hard to bootstrap and would have been especially
> difficult when the Internet was new. There also wasn?t the infrastructure
> to support them back then as there is now. And they suffer in the face of
> ?free? services although obviously several models survive along side one
> another today.
>
> > - how has the design of BGP4 affected carrier economics (competition vs
> collaboration)?
> > - why did flat-rate charging become the dominant model for ISPs?
>
> I remember John Curran predicting this in the early 90s (I think it was
> the early 90s anyway), basically it can cost more to meter than it?s worth.
> At some point the cost per bit becomes noise.
>
> > - what fractions of application layer revenue come from advertising,
> subscriptions, pay-per-view, etc?
> > - why does anyone trust cryptocurrency?
>
> I?m sure you could write a PhD thesis in psychology about this one? but at
> this point it?s along the lines of why does anyone trust the stock market?
> Most coins are essentially gambling these days. Libertarian and anarchist
> philosophies, distrust of the government, cult of personality, gold rush
> fever.  Not to be too dour but the general population hasn?t really
> demonstrated that it?s great at critical thinking.
>
> > - how will AI change Internet economics?
>
> There are some obvious things, like undermining advertising by vomiting up
> so much content that its value approaches zero and further pollutes the
> ability to actually find anything.
>
> I?m looking forward to the completely unobvious, surprising outcomes. At
> least I think I am? if it?s on the enjoyable side of ?no one ever
> anticipated that? rather than the ?oh shit? side.
>         - john romkey
>
>
> >
> > I think email and spam are actually minor, economically speaking.
> >
> > Regards/Ng? mihi
> >   Brian Carpenter
> >
> > On 29-Jul-26 08:39, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> >> On 7/25/26 15:39, Ofer Inbar via Internet-history wrote:
> >>> On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51:04PM -0700,
> >>> Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
> wrote:
> >>>> Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to
> >>>> several ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email
> >>>> by serving as a prominent example of "how to do email right".   That
> >>>> of course might require policies to possibly be changed, technical
> >>>> flaws to be addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps
> >>>> governments' actions.
> >>>>
> >>>> Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
> >>>> attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that
> >>>> make email untrustworthy in their views.   Most of the Internet
> >>>> users have no idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.
> >>>>   Most regulatory and government authorities seem to have no idea
> >>>> what, if anything, they can do about it.
> >>> A majority of younger Internet users (at least in the English speaking
> >>> world I'm familiar with) - perhaps not an overwhelming majority, but
> >>> quite certainly a majority - simply do not use email to communicate.
> >>> They use it to verify their address for accounts, they use it to check
> >>> for a specific thing that they know is going to be sent to them by
> >>> email and that they know they want to see, and most of the rest of the
> >>> time, they let their email pile up and they ignore nearly all of it.
> >>>
> >>> To actually stay in touch with friends, family, coworkers, groups
> >>> they're part of, etc. - all the things email used to be for - they
> >>> use messaging apps.  Discord, Facebook, Slack Instagram, and more
> >>> like that.  Or SMS/RCS phone texts.
> >>>
> >>> All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
> >>> listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
> >>> spam.  This includes both scattershot scam-oriented spam, but also
> >>> lots of lists that sign you up without asking permission.  You donate
> >>> to a political candidate, and some sleazy "grassroots" database starts
> >>> selling your address to loads of other campaigns of the same party.
> >>> You pay for a meal at a restaurant with your phone, enter the email
> >>> address for your receipt, and now not only are you on the email list
> >>> for that restaurant, but also the next cafe or ice cream place or
> >>> whatever where the payment system recognizes your card and offers
> >>> to email your receipt and you didn't notice the small checkbox to
> >>> opt out of signing up.  You RSVP to an event on some sleazy site like
> >>> eventbrite, and now you're on several mailing lists for similar events.
> >>>
> >>> The majority of email is assumed to be spam or otherwise irrelevant,
> >>> by people whose experience of email started after the explosion of
> >>> spam that I described above.  They never knew what it was like for
> >>> email to be relevant and worth checking, so they don't think of it
> >>> as relevant or worth checking.  Knowing this, they also don't think
> >>> it's a useful way to communicate with anyone they know.
> >>>    -- Cos
> >> You're absolutely right.  The email world has fragmented into a gaggle
> >> of separate "messaging" services.  In the beginning, email was a
> >> universal service, and even "being on the 'net" meant that you had an
> >> ARPANET email address.  Even when other mail services were in use, e.g.,
> >> UUCP or even MCIMail, there were sometimes arcane ways to interoperate,
> >> using %, !, and the like to glue two messaging worlds together.   Today,
> >> there are lots of ways for people to communicate, and I've found few
> >> ways to make them work together.   The history of that evolution might
> >> be an interesting topic for some historian.
> >> Spam is certainly an issue.  For history's benefit, spam was well known
> >> as an issue even in the early 1970s when email started on the ARPANET.
> >> Licklider at MIT pointed out (to me at least while we were implementing
> >> email) that every system needs some kind of "negative feedback" to be
> >> stable.   Engineers know this, whether they're building electronic stuff
> >> or steam engines a century ago.
> >> Use of some resource, such as email, must have some "cost" associated
> >> with its use, to prevent rampant overuse.   We actually tried to
> >> introduce the notion of "stamps" to the develolping email standards in
> >> the 1970s to provide a form of negative feedback.  Even just a limit on
> >> the number of emails that one address could send over some time period
> >> would exert back pressure.
> >> All such proposals were soundly rejected by the research community.  So
> >> no backpressure scheme was created and today it costs virtually nothing
> >> to send out hundreds or thousands of emails.   So corporations,
> >> politicians, charities, and entrepreneurs send them. Same with
> >> advertising, which does have a cost to the advertiser but little cost to
> >> the company injecting ads into web pages.  Most of such stuff would be
> >> considered spam by the recipients, to be scrolled past as quickly as you
> >> can.
> >> This is all just one part of a larger History of Internet Economics, and
> >> it goes far beyond just email.  Yesterday I saw an article about the
> >> "dead internet theory" which characterizes the recent emergence of AI
> >> agents as disrupting the economics of the Internet as we've known it.
> >> See
> >>
> https://www.fastcompany.com/91579817/dead-internet-theory-is-real-web-agents
> >> if you're interested.   The economics of the Internet are now breaking
> >> again and no one knows what comes next.
> >> For example, I recall hearing presentations at some conference in the
> >> early 1990s about "micropayments" and the technical ideas and progress
> >> which were currently being tested.  Yet today, we are all barraged with
> >> content that we can't access unless we subscribe to something.  Everyone
> >> wants a subscription and the continuous revenue stream it would bring -
> >> similar to the "all you can eat" philosophy sometimes used by
> >> restaurants if only for special events. Micropayments were touted as
> >> alternatives to subscriptions, so an Internet user could pay for one
> >> "meal" (article) at a time instead of committing to weeks or months of
> >> all-you-can-eat content.
> >> What happened to micropayments?
> >> Any economists out there?  Perhaps someone can relate the history and
> >> timeline of how the Internet Economy has evolved over the decades?   Is
> >> The Internet dying?
> >> /Jack Haverty
> > --
> > 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
>
> --
> 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
>
>

-- 
Geoff.Goodfellow at iconia.com
living as The Truth is True


From jack at 3kitty.org  Wed Jul 29 09:55:49 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 09:55:49 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <CAEf-zrgVngPn1mTCR7kK5o=oTTkSN-Fu7K+zR8W8cCQVfj_iPQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <cf2d4f0b-b34a-4a78-81f8-b0fb131a9b7f@dcrocker.net>
 <6a6af4e7-496b-4746-9806-85e3a1a05335@3kitty.org>
 <CAEf-zrgVngPn1mTCR7kK5o=oTTkSN-Fu7K+zR8W8cCQVfj_iPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1c4fc8ce-e715-49ce-9235-fe226ce025d3@3kitty.org>

FYI, there's a short but reasonable summary of the history around the 
"INTERgalactic NETwork" here:

https://historyofcomputercommunications.info/section/4.1/The-Intergalactic-Network-1962-1964/

and Lick's original 1963 memo is here:

https://www.thekurzweillibrary.com/memorandum-for-members-and-affiliates-of-the-intergalactic-computer-network

But that doesn't really explain much of the concept, it just opened the 
discussion in subsequent meetings and proposals that in a few years 
resulted in the ARPANET.

Working with and for Lick through much of the 1970s, as a newly minted 
graduate I was thoroughly brought into the cult and didn't realize until 
recently that virtually all of my professional life had something to do 
with implementing Lick's vision.? ?It was fun too.

/Jack

On 7/29/26 08:16, the keyboard of geoff goodfellow wrote:
> in furtherance of "Lick's vision was broad and deep, envisioning a
> future "intergalactic network" where computers were somehow able to
> communicate with each other to help humans do everything humans do -
> like communicating by email."
>
> of note, there is/was the late Mark Weiser's vision of "Ubiquitous 
> Computing" whereby
> EXCERPTing from Mark Weiser's article, "The Computer for the 
> Twenty-First Century," Scientific American, pp. 94-10, September 1991 
> [link below]:
>
>     The most profound technologies are those that disappear. They
>     weave themselves into the fabric of everyday life until they are
>     indistinguishable from it.
>
>     Consider writing, perhaps the first information technology: The
>     ability to capture a symbolic representation of spoken language
>     for long-term storage freed information from the limits of
>     individual memory. Today this technology is ubiquitous in
>     industrialized countries. Not only do books, magazines and
>     newspapers convey written information, but so do street signs,
>     billboards, shop signs and even graffiti. Candy wrappers are
>     covered in writing. The constant background presence of these
>     products of "literacy technology" does not require active
>     attention, but the information to be conveyed is ready for use at
>     a glance. It is difficult to imagine modern life otherwise.
>
>     Silicon-based information technology, in contrast, is far from
>     having become part of the environment. More than 50 million
>     personal computers have been sold, and nonetheless the computer
>     remains largely in a world of its own. It is approachable only
>     through complex jargon that has nothing to do with the tasks for
>     which which people actually use computers. The state of the art is
>     perhaps analogous to the period when scribes had to know as much
>     about making ink or baking clay as they did about writing.
>
>     The arcane aura that surrounds personal computers is not just a
>     "user interface" problem. My colleagues and I at PARC think that
>     the idea of a "personal" computer itself is misplaced, and that
>     the vision of laptop machines, dynabooks and "knowledge
>     navigators" is only a transitional step toward achieving the real
>     potential of information technology. Such machines cannot truly
>     make computing an integral, invisible part of the way people live
>     their lives. Therefore we are trying to conceive a new way of
>     thinking about computers in the world, one that takes into account
>     the natural human environment and allows the computers themselves
>     to vanish into the background.
>
>     Such a disappearance is a fundamental consequence not of
>     technology, but of human psychology. Whenever people learn
>     something sufficiently well, they cease to be aware of it. When
>     you look at a street sign, for example, you absorb its information
>     without consciously performing the act of reading.. Computer
>     scientist, economist, and Nobelist Herb Simon calls this
>     phenomenon "compiling"; philosopher Michael Polanyi calls it the
>     "tacit dimension"; psychologist TK Gibson calls it "visual
>     invariants"; philosophers Georg Gadamer and Martin Heidegger call
>     it "the horizon" and the "ready-to-hand", John Seely Brown at PARC
>     calls it the "periphery". All say, in essence, that only when
>     things disappear in this way are we freed to use them without
>     thinking and so to focus beyond them on new goals.
>
>     The idea of integrating computers seamlessly into the world at
>     large runs counter to a number of present-day trends. "Ubiquitous
>     computing" in this context does not just mean computers that can
>     be carried to the beach, jungle or airport. Even the most powerful
>     notebook computer, with access to a worldwide information network,
>     still focuses attention on a single box. By analogy to writing,
>     carrying a super-laptop is like owning just one very important
>     book. Customizing this book, even writing millions of other books,
>     does not begin to capture the real power of literacy.
>
>     Furthermore, although ubiquitous computers may employ sound and
>     video in addition to text and graphics, that does not make them
>     "multimedia computers." Today's multimedia machine makes the
>     computer screen into a demanding focus of attention rather than
>     allowing it to fade into the background.
>
>     Perhaps most diametrically opposed to our vision is the notion of
>     "virtual reality," which attempts to make a world inside the
>     computer. Users don special goggles that project an artificial
>     scene on their eyes; they wear gloves or even body suits that
>     sense their motions and gestures so that they can move about and
>     manipulate virtual objects. Although it may have its purpose in
>     allowing people to explore realms otherwise inaccessible -- the
>     insides of cells, the surfaces of distant planets, the information
>     web of complex databases -- virtual reality is only a map, not a
>     territory. It excludes desks, offices, other people not wearing
>     goggles and body suits, weather, grass, trees, walks, chance
>     encounters and in general the infinite richness of the universe.
>     Virtual reality focuses an enormous apparatus on simulating the
>     world rather than on invisibly enhancing the world that already
>     exists.
>
>     Indeed, the opposition between the notion of virtual reality and
>     ubiquitous, invisible computing is so strong that some of us use
>     the term "embodied virtuality" to refer to the process of drawing
>     computers out of their electronic shells. The "virtuality" of
>     computer-readable data -- all the different ways in which it can
>     be altered, processed and analyzed -- is brought into the physical
>     world.
>
>     How do technologies disappear into the background? The vanishing
>     of electric motors may serve as an instructive example: At the
>     turn of the century, a typical workshop or factory contained a
>     single engine that drove dozens or hundreds of different machines
>     through a system of shafts and pulleys. Cheap, small, efficient
>     electric motors made it possible first to give each machine or
>     tool its own source of motive force, then to put many motors into
>     a single machine..."
>
>
> https://web.archive.org/web/20180624201034/http://www.ubiq.com/weiser/
> <https://web.archive.org/web/20180624201034/http://www.ubiq.com/weiser/>
> _https://web.archive.org/web/20180602090007/http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/UbiHome.html_
>
> https://www.technologyreview.com/s/512616/how-smart-watches-and-phablets-fulfill-a-20-year-old-prophecy-about-ubiquitous-computing/ 
> <https://www.technologyreview.com/s/512616/how-smart-watches-and-phablets-fulfill-a-20-year-old-prophecy-about-ubiquitous-computing/>
>
>
>     Papers
>
> Other writeups by Weiser on different aspects of Ubicomp can be found 
> in the following references:
>
>   * Mark Weiser. "The world is not a desktop
>     <https://web.archive.org/web/20180602072606/http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/ACMInteractions2.html>".
>     /Interactions/; January 1994; pp. 7-8.
>   * Mark Weiser, "Hot Topics: Ubiquitous Computing
>     <https://web.archive.org/web/20180602102125/http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/UbiCompHotTopics.html>"
>     /IEEE Computer/, October 1993.
>   * Mark Weiser, "Some Computer Science Problems in Ubiquitous
>     Computing
>     <https://web.archive.org/web/20180329233244/http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/UbiCACM.html>,"
>     /Communications of the ACM,/?July 1993. (reprinted as "Ubiquitous
>     Computing". /Nikkei Electronics/; December 6, 1993; pp. 137-143.)
>   * *_Mark Weiser, "The Computer for the Twenty-First Century
>     <https://web.archive.org/web/20180602101331/http://www.ubiq.com/hypertext/weiser/SciAmDraft3.html>,"
>     /Scientific American,/?pp. 94-10, September 1991_*
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 9:48?PM Jack Haverty via Internet-history 
> <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
>     Sorry, it's just something I remember.? No references that I know
>     about.? The 1970s were a time when email was the new toy and it
>     was used
>     for everything that used to be done by letters or journal and
>     conference
>     papers.? Most of that early 1970s email has probably not survived (I
>     have none of mine), except for some popular mailing lists of the era
>     such as HEADER-PEOPLE.
>
>     As I recall, most of the debate was between Lick and whoever was
>     at ARPA
>     in the early 1970s.? ?Lick's vision was broad and deep, envisioning a
>     future "intergalactic network" where computers were somehow able to
>     communicate with each other to help humans do everything humans do -
>     like communicating by email.
>
>     In contrast, ARPA was understandably focussed on the new ARPANET they
>     had just built.? ?At the time, users of the ARPANET were
>     restricted to
>     people who were working on some ARPA project.? That restriction
>     provided
>     a form of backpressure to prevent widespread spam.? ?So other
>     mechanisms
>     such as "stamps" were deemed unnecessary.? Backpressure dosn't
>     have to
>     be monetary.
>
>     Lick's vision was anticipating the rise of The Internet where spam
>     has
>     become a real issue.? ?ARPA had a much shorter vision which didn't
>     need
>     such mechanisms.
>
>     Some economic issues were introduced when NSF entered the Internet
>     project later in the 1980s.? NSF funded startup ISPs, but explicitly
>     made it clear that each had to become self-sufficient in a short time
>     (perhaps 2 years?? I forget...)
>
>     While I was later doing Internet projects at BBN in the 1980s, I
>     asked
>     one of the people reporting to me (Cyndi Mills) to start up a
>     research
>     topic (may have been an IETF working group?) focussed on
>     Accounting for
>     the Internet.? ?If we could gather data about usage of the Internet,
>     that would be a precursor to introducing some kind of payments for
>     usage.? That effort didn't get much interest either.
>
>     I guess there weren't enough economists in the research community.? I
>     wasn't an economist, but I did take several undergraduate courses in
>     Economics so I at least knew the basics.
>
>     /Jack Haverty
>
>     On 7/28/26 17:24, Dave Crocker wrote:
>     > On 7/28/2026 1:39 PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
>     >> We actually tried to introduce the notion of "stamps" to the
>     >> develolping email standards in the 1970s to provide a form of
>     >> negative feedback.
>     >
>     >
>     > I don't recall this.? Especially since the first (and I believe
>     only)
>     > spam in the 1970s, was the DEC one in 1978.
>     >
>     > Can you provide any details (or even better a citation)?
>     >
>     > As for schemes to try to prevent or counter email abuse, there have
>     > been enough over the years to prompt Cory Doctorow, many years
>     ago, to
>     > create a template for responding to such proposals.? I think it was
>     > intended for humor, but he did such a good job, some of us have
>     used
>     > it seriously:
>     >
>     > http://craphound.com/spamsolutions.txt
>     >
>     > d/
>     >
>     > --
>     > Dave Crocker
>     >
>     > dhc at dcrocker.net
>     > bluesky: @dcrocker.bsky.social
>     > mast: @dcrocker at mastodon.social
>     > +1.408.329.0791
>     >
>     > Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
>     > Northern California Coastal Region
>     > Information & Planning Coordinator
>     > American Red Cross
>     > dave.crocker2 at redcross.org
>
>     -- 
>     Internet-history mailing list
>     Internet-history at elists.isoc.org
>     https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/internet-history
>
>
>
> -- 
> Geoff.Goodfellow at iconia.com
> living as The Truth is True
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260729/9db11e8d/attachment.asc>

From johnl at iecc.com  Wed Jul 29 10:23:16 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 29 Jul 2026 13:23:16 -0400
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>

It appears that Jack Haverty via Internet-history <jack at 3kitty.org> said:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>It's not just email that has deteriorated.? Lots of other pioneering 
>services introduced on the Internet have similarly grown to involve 
>large populations of users today.? But like email, that growth has 
>occurred by a fragmentation of the initial "universal" connectivity 

Are you saying that email doesn't interoperate any more, or that people 
are fragmenting into other communication systems?

The first is clearly not the case, while the second is.

R's,
John


From johnl at johnlabovitz.com  Wed Jul 29 10:27:45 2026
From: johnl at johnlabovitz.com (John Labovitz)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 13:27:45 -0400
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <9FEB0E2B-5606-4AFB-8AD6-A715FFE8E76E@johnlabovitz.com>

I disagree that those protocols haven?t evolved ? though they may have done so more conceptually or by inspiration than direct improvement. I?m sure that Mbone influenced later media protocols; FTP?s verbs, plus email?s header/body model, plus Gopher?s browsing mode seem to be a direct model for HTTP and the web; IRC begat many, many later chat protocols (and cultural usage); NetNews/NNTP certainly inspired forums, Reddit, and Facebook?s groups; TELNET led to SSH and others.

But I think protocols/standards fragmented because the standards process failed to produce things that were practical to implement. I was in the industry in the late 90s and early 00s, and it was striking how complex so many standards became ? IPSec, or SIP/VoIP, or the email standards (IMAPv4, DMARC/DKIM/SPF). That complexity may have been technically justified, but it made interoperability expensive ? and made it more likely that companies like Facebook would just build their own silos.

In my experience, HTTP caused a sea-change of the structure of the internet in the early 90s, flushing away earlier work that was no longer fit for purpose. Like IP before it, HTTP ?won? in part because it was deliberately simpler, and it led to a whole new flowering of services: HTML/JavaScript, REST/JSON, Atom/RSS. Those succeeded because they were lightweight enough that people actually implemented them.

?John

PS: I don?t often post here, so a short bio: first online in 1982 as a teenager dialing up to a DOD TAC to MIT-AI; produced the ?e-zine-list,? a pre-search engine directory of electronic publications; technical director for GNN, the first commercial website; wrote the application proxies for WatchGuard?s firewalls.


> On Jul 29, 2026, at 01:16, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> It's not just email that has deteriorated.  Lots of other pioneering services introduced on the Internet have similarly grown to involve large populations of users today.  But like email, that growth has occurred by a fragmentation of the initial "universal" connectivity introduced to the Internet into a plethora of separate and non-interoperable but functionally similar services.
> 
> Mbone is one example.   Also IRC (Internet Relay Chat).  Network news (NNTP).  rec.whatever forums.  Perhaps Gopher?  Even FTP, from ARPANET days.  There are probably others.   All of those may still be used, but none of them have evolved into a common standard that many implementations can deploy and interoperate with all the others.
> 
> Why did IP succeed as the substrate of The Internet, but so much else failed to do so?
> 
> /Jack Haverty
> 
> On 7/25/26 15:39, Ofer Inbar via Internet-history wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51:04PM -0700,
>> Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>> Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to
>>> several ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email
>>> by serving as a prominent example of "how to do email right".   That
>>> of course might require policies to possibly be changed, technical
>>> flaws to be addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps
>>> governments' actions.
>>> 
>>> Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
>>> attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that
>>> make email untrustworthy in their views.   Most of the Internet
>>> users have no idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.
>>>  Most regulatory and government authorities seem to have no idea
>>> what, if anything, they can do about it.
>> A majority of younger Internet users (at least in the English speaking
>> world I'm familiar with) - perhaps not an overwhelming majority, but
>> quite certainly a majority - simply do not use email to communicate.
>> They use it to verify their address for accounts, they use it to check
>> for a specific thing that they know is going to be sent to them by
>> email and that they know they want to see, and most of the rest of the
>> time, they let their email pile up and they ignore nearly all of it.
>> 
>> To actually stay in touch with friends, family, coworkers, groups
>> they're part of, etc. - all the things email used to be for - they
>> use messaging apps.  Discord, Facebook, Slack Instagram, and more
>> like that.  Or SMS/RCS phone texts.
>> 
>> All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
>> listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
>> spam.  This includes both scattershot scam-oriented spam, but also
>> lots of lists that sign you up without asking permission.  You donate
>> to a political candidate, and some sleazy "grassroots" database starts
>> selling your address to loads of other campaigns of the same party.
>> You pay for a meal at a restaurant with your phone, enter the email
>> address for your receipt, and now not only are you on the email list
>> for that restaurant, but also the next cafe or ice cream place or
>> whatever where the payment system recognizes your card and offers
>> to email your receipt and you didn't notice the small checkbox to
>> opt out of signing up.  You RSVP to an event on some sleazy site like
>> eventbrite, and now you're on several mailing lists for similar events.
>> 
>> The majority of email is assumed to be spam or otherwise irrelevant,
>> by people whose experience of email started after the explosion of
>> spam that I described above.  They never knew what it was like for
>> email to be relevant and worth checking, so they don't think of it
>> as relevant or worth checking.  Knowing this, they also don't think
>> it's a useful way to communicate with anyone they know.
>>   -- Cos
> 
> -- 
> 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



From jack at 3kitty.org  Wed Jul 29 11:08:49 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 11:08:49 -0700
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>
Message-ID: <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>

If by "email" you mean ARPA's system using addresses with @s, there is 
still interoperability across many ISPs and applications.

But for many, perhaps most, people "email" now means whatever they now 
use to communicate with their friends.? ?It might be Facebook, or 
Instagram, or Telegram, or Facetime, or SMS texting, or many other 
options.? ?Corporations, such as banks or other financial and 
governmental players have their own mail systems and use @email only to 
notify you that there is a message waiting for you inside.

Some of my relatives use Facebook or SMS exclusively.? They usually have 
an @email address but rarely check it.??We haven't found any way to, for 
example, send an @mail which includes some kind of address that ends up 
in a Facebook message.? ?Or vice versa.

Such interoperability may exist but if so it's not easy to find. ?In 
contrast, in the early days of email ~1980s there were multiple systems 
but they were often somehow interconnected.

Like email, many of the other early Internet communications mechanisms, 
such as MBone, IRC, etc., have similarly fragmented into multiple walled 
gardens that are not interoperable but compete in hope of being the winner.

/Jack

On 7/29/26 10:23, John Levine wrote:
> It appears that Jack Haverty via Internet-history <jack at 3kitty.org> said:
>> -=-=-=-=-=-
>> -=-=-=-=-=-
>> -=-=-=-=-=-
>> -=-=-=-=-=-
>> It's not just email that has deteriorated.? Lots of other pioneering
>> services introduced on the Internet have similarly grown to involve
>> large populations of users today.? But like email, that growth has
>> occurred by a fragmentation of the initial "universal" connectivity
> Are you saying that email doesn't interoperate any more, or that people
> are fragmenting into other communication systems?
>
> The first is clearly not the case, while the second is.
>
> R's,
> John

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260729/4d8435b9/attachment.asc>

From johnl at iecc.com  Wed Jul 29 11:28:17 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Date: 29 Jul 2026 14:28:17 -0400
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>
 <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <378db8b7-13dd-c4df-9e9c-35c1660fd5e4@iecc.com>

> If by "email" you mean ARPA's system using addresses with @s, there is still 
> interoperability across many ISPs and applications.

Well, it's evolved quite a lot but I think we mean the same thing.

> But for many, perhaps most, people "email" now means whatever they now use to 
> communicate with their friends.? ?It might be Facebook, or Instagram, or 
> Telegram, or Facetime, or SMS texting, or many other options.? ...

Huh, never heard anyone use "email" to mean that.

> Such interoperability may exist but if so it's not easy to find. ?In 
> contrast, in the early days of email ~1980s there were multiple systems but 
> they were often somehow interconnected.

If we use e-mail to mean what most people mean, store and forward messages 
with user at domain addressing, it's still the Internet's great success in 
federated interoperation.  For all that people moan and groan about 
Google, Outlook, and Yahoo, it's still quite possible to set up your own 
small mail server and exchange mail with them and everyone else.

Here's some scripts I wrote for ICANN that mostly automates installing and 
setting up a mail server on a linux VPS.

https://github.com/icann/eaiselfhost

> Like email, many of the other early Internet communications mechanisms, such 
> as MBone, IRC, etc., have similarly fragmented into multiple walled gardens 
> that are not interoperable but compete in hope of being the winner.

The EU has required instant messaging systems to interconnect, and the 
IETF MIMI working group is developing standard ways for IM systems to talk 
to each other.  It's a hard problem, partly because the existing systems 
weren't designed to interoperate, partly because of, sigh, spam.  It's a 
lot easier to keep spam under control on a closed system where you can see 
who all the users are and block or eject misbehaving ones.  If a system 
has to connect to anyone who asks, you're in the same situation as mail 
and you can expect the same problems.

You can see the drafts here:

https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/mimi/documents/

R's,
John


From jack at 3kitty.org  Wed Jul 29 11:32:15 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 11:32:15 -0700
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <9FEB0E2B-5606-4AFB-8AD6-A715FFE8E76E@johnlabovitz.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <9FEB0E2B-5606-4AFB-8AD6-A715FFE8E76E@johnlabovitz.com>
Message-ID: <e7c88855-2f8d-49fe-9815-8e672c4a0472@3kitty.org>

I agree that complexity made it more difficult, and expensive, for 
companies to use the Internet's innovations.

But I think there was another related change that mattered as well. ?In 
the early Internet era, circa late 1970s, ARPA funded a wide range of 
implementations of TCP/IP on a bunch of different types of computers.? 
(I implemented the first TCP on Unix in 1977)? ?Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn 
also decided to make the code and specs free and available to anyone who 
wanted them.

As a result, courses in schools used TCP/IP as a vehicle for teaching 
networking concepts, leading to a stream of graduates that already had 
experience with the technology.? ? Entrepreneurs could create startups, 
building stuff around the base that ARPA provided for free.? ?End-users 
could buy things that worked, and hire people who already knew how to 
use them.? ?All the other networking technologies disappeared rather 
rapidly.

A similar process happened with the Web.? Open-source or free web 
servers and browsers established a similar environment.? ?It was simpler 
than other schemes.? First implementations were proprietary, but 
eventually software became freely available, both in code and 
specifications.? ?There were competitors.? Lotus Notes comes to mind.? 
Notes was pretty simple, but not free or open.

Simplicity and low-cost availability went hand-in-hand.

/Jack

On 7/29/26 10:27, John Labovitz wrote:
> I disagree that those protocols haven?t evolved ? though they may have done so more conceptually or by inspiration than direct improvement. I?m sure that Mbone influenced later media protocols; FTP?s verbs, plus email?s header/body model, plus Gopher?s browsing mode seem to be a direct model for HTTP and the web; IRC begat many, many later chat protocols (and cultural usage); NetNews/NNTP certainly inspired forums, Reddit, and Facebook?s groups; TELNET led to SSH and others.
>
> But I think protocols/standards fragmented because the standards process failed to produce things that were practical to implement. I was in the industry in the late 90s and early 00s, and it was striking how complex so many standards became ? IPSec, or SIP/VoIP, or the email standards (IMAPv4, DMARC/DKIM/SPF). That complexity may have been technically justified, but it made interoperability expensive ? and made it more likely that companies like Facebook would just build their own silos.
>
> In my experience, HTTP caused a sea-change of the structure of the internet in the early 90s, flushing away earlier work that was no longer fit for purpose. Like IP before it, HTTP ?won? in part because it was deliberately simpler, and it led to a whole new flowering of services: HTML/JavaScript, REST/JSON, Atom/RSS. Those succeeded because they were lightweight enough that people actually implemented them.
>
> ?John
>
> PS: I don?t often post here, so a short bio: first online in 1982 as a teenager dialing up to a DOD TAC to MIT-AI; produced the ?e-zine-list,? a pre-search engine directory of electronic publications; technical director for GNN, the first commercial website; wrote the application proxies for WatchGuard?s firewalls.
>
>
>> On Jul 29, 2026, at 01:16, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>
>> It's not just email that has deteriorated.  Lots of other pioneering services introduced on the Internet have similarly grown to involve large populations of users today.  But like email, that growth has occurred by a fragmentation of the initial "universal" connectivity introduced to the Internet into a plethora of separate and non-interoperable but functionally similar services.
>>
>> Mbone is one example.   Also IRC (Internet Relay Chat).  Network news (NNTP).  rec.whatever forums.  Perhaps Gopher?  Even FTP, from ARPANET days.  There are probably others.   All of those may still be used, but none of them have evolved into a common standard that many implementations can deploy and interoperate with all the others.
>>
>> Why did IP succeed as the substrate of The Internet, but so much else failed to do so?
>>
>> /Jack Haverty
>>
>> On 7/25/26 15:39, Ofer Inbar via Internet-history wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51:04PM -0700,
>>> Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>>> Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to
>>>> several ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email
>>>> by serving as a prominent example of "how to do email right".   That
>>>> of course might require policies to possibly be changed, technical
>>>> flaws to be addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps
>>>> governments' actions.
>>>>
>>>> Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
>>>> attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that
>>>> make email untrustworthy in their views.   Most of the Internet
>>>> users have no idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.
>>>>   Most regulatory and government authorities seem to have no idea
>>>> what, if anything, they can do about it.
>>> A majority of younger Internet users (at least in the English speaking
>>> world I'm familiar with) - perhaps not an overwhelming majority, but
>>> quite certainly a majority - simply do not use email to communicate.
>>> They use it to verify their address for accounts, they use it to check
>>> for a specific thing that they know is going to be sent to them by
>>> email and that they know they want to see, and most of the rest of the
>>> time, they let their email pile up and they ignore nearly all of it.
>>>
>>> To actually stay in touch with friends, family, coworkers, groups
>>> they're part of, etc. - all the things email used to be for - they
>>> use messaging apps.  Discord, Facebook, Slack Instagram, and more
>>> like that.  Or SMS/RCS phone texts.
>>>
>>> All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
>>> listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
>>> spam.  This includes both scattershot scam-oriented spam, but also
>>> lots of lists that sign you up without asking permission.  You donate
>>> to a political candidate, and some sleazy "grassroots" database starts
>>> selling your address to loads of other campaigns of the same party.
>>> You pay for a meal at a restaurant with your phone, enter the email
>>> address for your receipt, and now not only are you on the email list
>>> for that restaurant, but also the next cafe or ice cream place or
>>> whatever where the payment system recognizes your card and offers
>>> to email your receipt and you didn't notice the small checkbox to
>>> opt out of signing up.  You RSVP to an event on some sleazy site like
>>> eventbrite, and now you're on several mailing lists for similar events.
>>>
>>> The majority of email is assumed to be spam or otherwise irrelevant,
>>> by people whose experience of email started after the explosion of
>>> spam that I described above.  They never knew what it was like for
>>> email to be relevant and worth checking, so they don't think of it
>>> as relevant or worth checking.  Knowing this, they also don't think
>>> it's a useful way to communicate with anyone they know.
>>>    -- Cos
>> -- 
>> 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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260729/b69b8d4b/attachment.asc>

From jack at 3kitty.org  Wed Jul 29 11:37:30 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 11:37:30 -0700
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <378db8b7-13dd-c4df-9e9c-35c1660fd5e4@iecc.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>
 <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>
 <378db8b7-13dd-c4df-9e9c-35c1660fd5e4@iecc.com>
Message-ID: <985924c2-2a1d-4f8f-b0e1-c71cbd03b10b@3kitty.org>

On 7/29/26 11:28, John R. Levine wrote:
> Huh, never heard anyone use "email" to mean that.
There's new jargon.? It took me a while to realize that "DM me!" meant 
the same as "send me an email", but required using the recipient's 
chosen system for communicating with others.
/Jack
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260729/6474ef13/attachment.asc>

From york at isoc.org  Wed Jul 29 11:39:52 2026
From: york at isoc.org (Dan York)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 18:39:52 +0000
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>
 <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <5DE37783-403E-4000-97BA-8A054BA816DE@isoc.org>

Jack,

On Jul 29, 2026, at 2:08?PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

But for many, perhaps most, people "email" now means whatever they now use to communicate with their friends.

My 17yo daughter would disagree with you on the use of the term. ?Email? is what old people use, and she only looks at her email when she is forced to in order to get a confirmation message or something. (Or when her father *texts* her to tell her that I?ve sent her something in email! ????)  Even the term ?email? (as a noun or a verb) is dropping out of the vocabulary of her and her high school friends. They ?message? someone instead? or ?text? or ?send a snap? (if Snapchat).

Such interoperability may exist but if so it's not easy to find.  In contrast, in the early days of email ~1980s there were multiple systems but they were often somehow interconnected.

Yes, that interoperability was so powerful!

Like email, many of the other early Internet communications mechanisms, such as MBone, IRC, etc., have similarly fragmented into multiple walled gardens that are not interoperable but compete in hope of being the winner.

I don?t know that the early mechanisms are competing as much as fading away. I think as more and more people came online, people wanted better user experiences that ?just worked?. I still remember when Skype came along and it was so incredibly simple and easy to use. Almost immediately people started switching from other VoIP and messaging software that was harder to use. You could find someone easily? and connecting was simple and ?just worked?.

Ditto with messaging? why bother with different IRC clients and waiting for connections when you could just use Slack and it ?just worked?! (Plus it had persistent messages, a big win.)

I think the power of a good user experience / UX is what has pulled people inside of so many walled gardens!

My 2 cents,
Dan


From gregskinner0 at icloud.com  Wed Jul 29 11:52:29 2026
From: gregskinner0 at icloud.com (Greg Skinner)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 11:52:29 -0700
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <985924c2-2a1d-4f8f-b0e1-c71cbd03b10b@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>
 <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>
 <378db8b7-13dd-c4df-9e9c-35c1660fd5e4@iecc.com>
 <985924c2-2a1d-4f8f-b0e1-c71cbd03b10b@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <457CCF95-3BB4-44C6-9A96-456F7AD59DED@icloud.com>


On Jul 29, 2026, at 11:37?AM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> On 7/29/26 11:28, John R. Levine wrote:
>> Huh, never heard anyone use "email" to mean that.
> There's new jargon.  It took me a while to realize that "DM me!" meant the same as "send me an email", but required using the recipient's chosen system for communicating with others.
> /Jack
> 

Odd.  I have never heard or seen this.  When I see or hear ?DM?, ?PM?, or the like, the ?M? refers to messaging, not email.  Some people use ?inbox? as a synonym for ?message?.

Out of curiosity, where do you see or hear this?

--gregbo




From mgrant at grant.org  Wed Jul 29 11:57:48 2026
From: mgrant at grant.org (Michael Grant)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 18:57:48 +0000
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <5DE37783-403E-4000-97BA-8A054BA816DE@isoc.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>
 <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>
 <5DE37783-403E-4000-97BA-8A054BA816DE@isoc.org>
Message-ID: <em4c4d70ad-28be-458a-a317-c4467ca29a8d@grant.org>

I have had several conversations with younger folks.  Email to them is 
as you say, not something they look at every day, only when they are 
expecting something like a 2FA or confirmation or something.

What's even more disturbing is many young people I have talked to do not 
understand the distinction between gmail and email often using the term 
interchangeably.  I have often asked "who do you think owns email?" and 
the answer I get is almost invariably something like "google, right?"

I do not like it that I have to be on 3 or 4 different chat systems to 
keep in touch with people I know.  I so wish there was a standardized 
interoperable chat system.  Early smtp had the SEND command which I 
never saw used and seems to be unsupported now.  I was hoping it might 
be XMPP, then Matrix but those seems to have fizzled out.  Someone here 
I am sure can provide an exhaustive list...



From johnl at iecc.com  Wed Jul 29 12:00:46 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 29 Jul 2026 19:00:46 -0000
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <e7c88855-2f8d-49fe-9815-8e672c4a0472@3kitty.org>
References: <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <e7c88855-2f8d-49fe-9815-8e672c4a0472@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <114diku$24st$1@gal.iecc.com>

According to Jack Haverty via Internet-history <jack at 3kitty.org>:
>As a result, courses in schools used TCP/IP as a vehicle for teaching 
>networking concepts, leading to a stream of graduates that already had 
>experience with the technology.? ...

Agreed.

>A similar process happened with the Web.? Open-source or free web 
>servers and browsers established a similar environment.? ?It was simpler 
>than other schemes.? First implementations were proprietary, but 
>eventually software became freely available, both in code and 
>specifications.? ...

Uh, what? Tim got CERN to give away his original software in 1993, UC
Berkeley gave away Viola, SLAC gave away Midas, and most importantly
NCSA gave away Mosaic and HTTPd.

>There were competitors.? Lotus Notes comes to mind.? 
>Notes was pretty simple, but not free or open.

Lotus Notes was more a competitor to Usenet, with threads of
messages, but no hypertext I can recall.

The great missed opportunity was Gopher, which had interlinked sites
and limited media support and was much lighter weight than the web
so you could run servers on much smaller machines.  (I did.)  Then
some genius at the U of Minnesota tried to charge license fees for
it and that was that.

R's,
John
-- 
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



From craig at tereschau.net  Wed Jul 29 12:22:08 2026
From: craig at tereschau.net (Craig Partridge)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 13:22:08 -0600
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <CE12488A-F38C-4B98-8C1D-7F235B1AB0BE@romkey.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <CE12488A-F38C-4B98-8C1D-7F235B1AB0BE@romkey.com>
Message-ID: <CAHQj4CfjzVn0eAcqXexfLhKV1_EkaS4HGdjPkhj-vXuQJvkzvA@mail.gmail.com>

Adding perspective on two points in this excellent note.


On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 7:34?AM John Romkey via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

>
> > On Jul 28, 2026, at 5:35?PM, Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> >
> > I think there are some really interesting economic questions, such as:
> >
> > - why did advertising, and charging for domain names, become major
> factors in Internet economics?
>
> For domain names, scarcity. This was unintentionally encoded in the system
> by having only a handful of TLDs at the start, with .com the most
> recognized and therefore most valuable. Even if businesses hadn?t come
> online ?smith.com? or ?sex.com? would have had a lot of competition for
> them and therefore value.
>
>
Which was ironic, as one of the major motivations for domain names was to
solve the problems of a flat namespace. In a flat space, there could only
be one "frodo" and domain names meant every sub-domain could have its own
"frodo".

Dredging my memory from discussions of the period, I would say the
expectation was that everyone was thinking in terms of universities (so
subdomains hanging off example.edu) and not enough about corporate names.
DNS also came well before the Web.


> > - how has the design of BGP4 affected carrier economics (competition vs
> collaboration)?
> > - why did flat-rate charging become the dominant model for ISPs?
>
> I remember John Curran predicting this in the early 90s (I think it was
> the early 90s anyway), basically it can cost more to meter than it?s worth.
> At some point the cost per bit becomes noise.
>
>
While I'm quite sure my buddy John said this, there were several prophets
of flat rate charging at the time.  I think all the NSFNET regional
networks used it.  Steve Deering strongly pushed back against people who
suggested usage charging led to efficiency and would point out the effort
they put into metering wasn't worth it (and it shaped some of his IPv6
thinking).

Craig

-- 
*****
Craig Partridge's email account for professional society activities and
mailing lists.


From gregskinner0 at icloud.com  Wed Jul 29 13:44:21 2026
From: gregskinner0 at icloud.com (Greg Skinner)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 13:44:21 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <6a6af4e7-496b-4746-9806-85e3a1a05335@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <cf2d4f0b-b34a-4a78-81f8-b0fb131a9b7f@dcrocker.net>
 <6a6af4e7-496b-4746-9806-85e3a1a05335@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <5F69BC3A-7B42-441E-92E3-065C1676AA24@icloud.com>

On Jul 28, 2026, at 9:48?PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> While I was later doing Internet projects at BBN in the 1980s, I asked one of the people reporting to me (Cyndi Mills) to start up a research topic (may have been an IETF working group?) focussed on Accounting for the Internet.   If we could gather data about usage of the Internet, that would be a precursor to introducing some kind of payments for usage.  That effort didn't get much interest either.
> 
> I guess there weren't enough economists in the research community.  I wasn't an economist, but I did take several undergraduate courses in Economics so I at least knew the basics.
> 
> /Jack Haverty
> 

Yep, there was an Internet Accounting IETF working group <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/acct/about/>.  There is an archive <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/acct/> available.  Also see Internet Accounting 2 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/acct2/about/>.

--gregbo 



From johnl at iecc.com  Wed Jul 29 13:55:09 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 29 Jul 2026 16:55:09 -0400
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <CAHQj4CfjzVn0eAcqXexfLhKV1_EkaS4HGdjPkhj-vXuQJvkzvA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CE12488A-F38C-4B98-8C1D-7F235B1AB0BE@romkey.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <CAHQj4CfjzVn0eAcqXexfLhKV1_EkaS4HGdjPkhj-vXuQJvkzvA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20260729205509.DE9FF117B95D4@ary.qy>

According to Craig Partridge via Internet-history <craig at tereschau.net>:
>> For domain names, scarcity. ...

>Which was ironic, as one of the major motivations for domain names was to
>solve the problems of a flat namespace. In a flat space, there could only
>be one "frodo" and domain names meant every sub-domain could have its own
>"frodo".
>
>Dredging my memory from discussions of the period, I would say the
>expectation was that everyone was thinking in terms of universities (so
>subdomains hanging off example.edu) and not enough about corporate names.
>DNS also came well before the Web.

I recall domain parks, which provided both hosting and a subdomain of the
park's domain.  My first domain names in the 1990s cost $100 for two years,
and involved several rounds of e-mail and sending NetSol a check.  Using
a subdomain of someone else's domain park was a lot easier and cheaper.

I'm not sure who persuaded businesses that they all need their own second
level domain but I assume it was Verisign, since it has made them very very
rich.

R's,
John


From b_a_denny at yahoo.com  Wed Jul 29 14:13:44 2026
From: b_a_denny at yahoo.com (Barbara Denny)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 21:13:44 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <5F69BC3A-7B42-441E-92E3-065C1676AA24@icloud.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <cf2d4f0b-b34a-4a78-81f8-b0fb131a9b7f@dcrocker.net>
 <6a6af4e7-496b-4746-9806-85e3a1a05335@3kitty.org>
 <5F69BC3A-7B42-441E-92E3-065C1676AA24@icloud.com>
Message-ID: <1438424349.3529151.1785359624302@mail.yahoo.com>

 I have a vague recollection of Cyndi Mills and this effort.? I also think it didn't seem to progress very far when she was looking at it.?
barbara
    On Wednesday, July 29, 2026 at 01:44:42 PM PDT, Greg Skinner via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:  
 
 On Jul 28, 2026, at 9:48?PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> While I was later doing Internet projects at BBN in the 1980s, I asked one of the people reporting to me (Cyndi Mills) to start up a research topic (may have been an IETF working group?) focussed on Accounting for the Internet.? If we could gather data about usage of the Internet, that would be a precursor to introducing some kind of payments for usage.? That effort didn't get much interest either.
> 
> I guess there weren't enough economists in the research community.? I wasn't an economist, but I did take several undergraduate courses in Economics so I at least knew the basics.
> 
> /Jack Haverty
> 

Yep, there was an Internet Accounting IETF working group <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/acct/about/>.? There is an archive <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/acct/> available.? Also see Internet Accounting 2 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/acct2/about/>.

--gregbo 

-- 
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
  

From jack at 3kitty.org  Wed Jul 29 15:34:05 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 15:34:05 -0700
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <457CCF95-3BB4-44C6-9A96-456F7AD59DED@icloud.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>
 <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>
 <378db8b7-13dd-c4df-9e9c-35c1660fd5e4@iecc.com>
 <985924c2-2a1d-4f8f-b0e1-c71cbd03b10b@3kitty.org>
 <457CCF95-3BB4-44C6-9A96-456F7AD59DED@icloud.com>
Message-ID: <376ea18e-72b9-4591-b722-9ffdea56cb45@3kitty.org>

I have accounts on a few social media sites and saw "DM" on one of 
them.? Probably Facebook.? I think it is jargon for Direct Message, 
which is a private communication between two people -- just like 
traditional email.

On 7/29/26 11:52, Greg Skinner wrote:
> On Jul 29, 2026, at 11:37?AM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>> On 7/29/26 11:28, John R. Levine wrote:
>>> Huh, never heard anyone use "email" to mean that.
>> There's new jargon.  It took me a while to realize that "DM me!" meant the same as "send me an email", but required using the recipient's chosen system for communicating with others.
>> /Jack
>>
> Odd.  I have never heard or seen this.  When I see or hear ?DM?, ?PM?, or the like, the ?M? refers to messaging, not email.  Some people use ?inbox? as a synonym for ?message?.
>
> Out of curiosity, where do you see or hear this?
>
> --gregbo
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260729/07babae6/attachment.asc>

From mfidelman at protocoltechnologiesgroup.com  Wed Jul 29 15:43:06 2026
From: mfidelman at protocoltechnologiesgroup.com (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 22:43:06 +0000
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <376ea18e-72b9-4591-b722-9ffdea56cb45@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>
 <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>
 <378db8b7-13dd-c4df-9e9c-35c1660fd5e4@iecc.com>
 <985924c2-2a1d-4f8f-b0e1-c71cbd03b10b@3kitty.org>
 <457CCF95-3BB4-44C6-9A96-456F7AD59DED@icloud.com>
 <376ea18e-72b9-4591-b722-9ffdea56cb45@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <SA1PR12MB7038A43CD2DA2E3C34A9BA9DB1CA2@SA1PR12MB7038.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>

Ahh for the days of news-mail gateways & mmdf - everything in 622 format, different channels, your choice of interface tool

And then we had people fracture the net, to capture markets, and others duplicate irc & txt msgs in umpteen different ways, to escape corporate control and all that

Yet the business world, the IETF, and open source projects still rely on basic email and lists, and most social media platforms will send an email to let you know to come look T a new post

Sent from Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
________________________________
From: Internet-history <internet-history-bounces at elists.isoc.org> on behalf of Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
Sent: Wednesday, 29 July 2026 18:34:05
To: Greg Skinner <gregskinner0 at icloud.com>
Cc: internet-history at elists.isoc.org <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
Subject: Re: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)

I have accounts on a few social media sites and saw "DM" on one of
them.  Probably Facebook.  I think it is jargon for Direct Message,
which is a private communication between two people -- just like
traditional email.

On 7/29/26 11:52, Greg Skinner wrote:
> On Jul 29, 2026, at 11:37?AM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>> On 7/29/26 11:28, John R. Levine wrote:
>>> Huh, never heard anyone use "email" to mean that.
>> There's new jargon.  It took me a while to realize that "DM me!" meant the same as "send me an email", but required using the recipient's chosen system for communicating with others.
>> /Jack
>>
> Odd.  I have never heard or seen this.  When I see or hear ?DM?, ?PM?, or the like, the ?M? refers to messaging, not email.  Some people use ?inbox? as a synonym for ?message?.
>
> Out of curiosity, where do you see or hear this?
>
> --gregbo
>
>


From jack at 3kitty.org  Wed Jul 29 16:01:05 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 16:01:05 -0700
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <114diku$24st$1@gal.iecc.com>
References: <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <e7c88855-2f8d-49fe-9815-8e672c4a0472@3kitty.org>
 <114diku$24st$1@gal.iecc.com>
Message-ID: <f480534b-7a67-4299-913d-3466c616a47e@3kitty.org>

When I was at Oracle and first heard about the Web in the early 90s, I 
remember paying someone a nominal amount ($50?) for a software license, 
probably for a browser on a PC, to learn what this new Web thing was all 
about.? A bit later lots of free software became available, but very 
early on you had to buy it or build your own.

We then created a linkage between Oracle databases and browsers using 
the CGI API of the early web servers.? Even got a patent for it, 
primarily for defensive use.? Then we taught customers how to use the 
Web as a client front-end instead of requiring clients to install 
proprietary client GUI software.? That made all sorts of things 
possible.? A popular tag line at the time was "Where do you want to go 
today?"? We created a variant -- "What do you want to DO today?"

Curiously, Licklider's connection appeared again.? Lick had left us, but 
his "chief of staff" was still at MIT and recruited Tim Berners-Lee to 
join them and form the W3C to drive web evolution. My old boss contacted 
me and easily convinced me that Oracle should join W3C as a "founding 
member".? ?I spent a few years as Oracle's rep to W3C.

/Jack

On 7/29/26 12:00, John Levine via Internet-history wrote:
> According to Jack Haverty via Internet-history <jack at 3kitty.org>:
>> As a result, courses in schools used TCP/IP as a vehicle for teaching
>> networking concepts, leading to a stream of graduates that already had
>> experience with the technology.? ...
> Agreed.
>
>> A similar process happened with the Web.? Open-source or free web
>> servers and browsers established a similar environment.? ?It was simpler
>> than other schemes.? First implementations were proprietary, but
>> eventually software became freely available, both in code and
>> specifications.? ...
> Uh, what? Tim got CERN to give away his original software in 1993, UC
> Berkeley gave away Viola, SLAC gave away Midas, and most importantly
> NCSA gave away Mosaic and HTTPd.
>
>> There were competitors.? Lotus Notes comes to mind.
>> Notes was pretty simple, but not free or open.
> Lotus Notes was more a competitor to Usenet, with threads of
> messages, but no hypertext I can recall.
>
> The great missed opportunity was Gopher, which had interlinked sites
> and limited media support and was much lighter weight than the web
> so you could run servers on much smaller machines.  (I did.)  Then
> some genius at the U of Minnesota tried to charge license fees for
> it and that was that.
>
> R's,
> John

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260729/ddb045f5/attachment.asc>

From johnl at iecc.com  Wed Jul 29 16:26:26 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Date: 29 Jul 2026 19:26:26 -0400
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <376ea18e-72b9-4591-b722-9ffdea56cb45@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>
 <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>
 <378db8b7-13dd-c4df-9e9c-35c1660fd5e4@iecc.com>
 <985924c2-2a1d-4f8f-b0e1-c71cbd03b10b@3kitty.org>
 <457CCF95-3BB4-44C6-9A96-456F7AD59DED@icloud.com>
 <376ea18e-72b9-4591-b722-9ffdea56cb45@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <4bed4717-411e-4c4a-4c34-f60c8f45ff2d@iecc.com>

> I have accounts on a few social media sites and saw "DM" on one of them. 
> Probably Facebook.? I think it is jargon for Direct Message, ...

I know lots of people who use DM for direct message, i.e., instant message 
like WhatsApp or or iMessage or Signal or Facebook Messenger or the 
similar feature in Slack.

I have never, ever, heard anyone use DM to refer to e-mail.

R's,
John

> On 7/29/26 11:52, Greg Skinner wrote:
>> On Jul 29, 2026, at 11:37?AM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history 
>> <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>> On 7/29/26 11:28, John R. Levine wrote:
>>>> Huh, never heard anyone use "email" to mean that.
>>> There's new jargon.  It took me a while to realize that "DM me!" meant the 
>>> same as "send me an email", but required using the recipient's chosen 
>>> system for communicating with others.
>>> /Jack
>>> 
>> Odd.  I have never heard or seen this.  When I see or hear ?DM?, ?PM?, or 
>> the like, the ?M? refers to messaging, not email.  Some people use ?inbox? 
>> as a synonym for ?message?.
>> 
>> Out of curiosity, where do you see or hear this?


From johnl at iecc.com  Wed Jul 29 16:40:39 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 29 Jul 2026 19:40:39 -0400
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <f480534b-7a67-4299-913d-3466c616a47e@3kitty.org>
References: <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <e7c88855-2f8d-49fe-9815-8e672c4a0472@3kitty.org>
 <114diku$24st$1@gal.iecc.com>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <f480534b-7a67-4299-913d-3466c616a47e@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <20260729234039.3ABC1117BC702@ary.qy>

It appears that Jack Haverty via Internet-history <jack at 3kitty.org> said:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>When I was at Oracle and first heard about the Web in the early 90s, I 
>remember paying someone a nominal amount ($50?) for a software license, 
>probably for a browser on a PC, to learn what this new Web thing was all 
>about.? A bit later lots of free software became available, but very 
>early on you had to buy it or build your own.

That sounds like Cello, which Tom Bruce wrote for the Cornell Legal
Institute.  It was as far as I know the first PC browser, and since
it was owned by a bunch of lawyers, they did lawyer stuff and charged
for the source code.

There was at the time plenty of free web software that ran on X Window
and Tim's which ran on Next.

R's,
John

>> Uh, what? Tim got CERN to give away his original software in 1993, UC
>> Berkeley gave away Viola, SLAC gave away Midas, and most importantly
>> NCSA gave away Mosaic and HTTPd.



From dhc at dcrocker.net  Wed Jul 29 17:22:52 2026
From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 00:22:52 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [ih] Meta: attachment policy (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8b253af3-a92e-41cc-bc79-419abc1cde23@dcrocker.net>

On 7/2/2026 9:19 PM, Carl Malamud via Internet-history wrote:
> Well, if we?re going to walk the walk and do Internet History the right way
> we should go totally 7-bit.  I vote that in addition to attachments, we ban
> Unicode.


For email:? Only if that history stops after about 22 years, when MIME 
was added to the mix.? (This ignores the ad hoc methods of encoding 
binary email content that were common prior to that.

FTP had binary from the start.

Telnet had it by at least 1983 (RFC 856)


d/

-- 
Dave Crocker

dhc at dcrocker.net
bluesky: @dcrocker.bsky.social
mast: @dcrocker at mastodon.social
+1.408.329.0791

Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
Northern California Coastal Region
Information & Planning Coordinator
American Red Cross
dave.crocker2 at redcross.org



From karl at iwl.com  Wed Jul 29 17:27:24 2026
From: karl at iwl.com (Karl Auerbach)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 17:27:24 -0700
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <f480534b-7a67-4299-913d-3466c616a47e@3kitty.org>
References: <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <e7c88855-2f8d-49fe-9815-8e672c4a0472@3kitty.org>
 <114diku$24st$1@gal.iecc.com>
 <f480534b-7a67-4299-913d-3466c616a47e@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <be070264-8366-4003-8987-37092861bc21@iwl.com>

I was reading this thread while I was at a car dealership waiting for 
new software to be loaded into some ECUs.

I decided to comment on one of the items in the thread.

When I hit "send" I got bounced.? Turns out that the dealer's wifi 
intercepts TLS connections at a proxy.? Grrrrr.? And the email tools did 
a validity check of the TLS certificates and did not like the 
authority-chain of the one inserted by the proxy.

The point is that the net is eroding in some places - things that used 
to work no longer work.

(I really got clobbered on this with some of my old and expensive lab 
equipment.? That gear was old, but useful, and still worth a few hundred 
$k.? But it did not have means to update the software, even if the 
vendor had created updates.? The old software did TLS but used a digest 
algorithm that the IETF had "deprecated". Because of the IETF's actions 
browser makers dropped that algorithm.? That left me with the only way 
to operate this gear was to preserve a laptop (or VM) with Windows 2000 
and Internet Exploder from that era.? It sure would have been nice had 
the browser makers not panic-removed that digest algorithm but, instead 
had a pop-up that asked "do you want to use this?")

Back when I was at Interactive Systems (first Unix company) we created a 
story line that seems relevant to some of what is happening on the 
Internet.? The story begins with a message received from an unknown 
source out in deep space.? That message says:

 ? ?"Life version 1.0 has been found to have a fatal, but uncorrectable 
flaw.? Therefore we are replacing Life version 1.0 with version 2.0.? 
Version 2.0 is not compatible with Life Version 1.0, therefore all users 
of Life 1.0 are required to discontinue all use of Life 1.0 and to 
destroy all instances."

 ? ? ? ? --karl--



From vgcerf at gmail.com  Wed Jul 29 18:04:26 2026
From: vgcerf at gmail.com (vinton cerf)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 21:04:26 -0400
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <be070264-8366-4003-8987-37092861bc21@iwl.com>
References: <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <e7c88855-2f8d-49fe-9815-8e672c4a0472@3kitty.org>
 <114diku$24st$1@gal.iecc.com>
 <f480534b-7a67-4299-913d-3466c616a47e@3kitty.org>
 <be070264-8366-4003-8987-37092861bc21@iwl.com>
Message-ID: <CAAFtm_U53OeKtEWfy1pNwmPhMSC-iUTRhxCHaABp=0m-8d-xDw@mail.gmail.com>

recent linked in message:
"Hello, if you're an ultra exceptional AI researcher/engineer and want to
work with me and my legendary team in Google DeepMind
<https://www.linkedin.com/company/googledeepmind/> "?? Gemini core team,
please send me a DM. We may be hiring."

note use of "DM" vs "email" or "text" or....

vint


On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 8:27?PM Karl Auerbach via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> I was reading this thread while I was at a car dealership waiting for
> new software to be loaded into some ECUs.
>
> I decided to comment on one of the items in the thread.
>
> When I hit "send" I got bounced.  Turns out that the dealer's wifi
> intercepts TLS connections at a proxy.  Grrrrr.  And the email tools did
> a validity check of the TLS certificates and did not like the
> authority-chain of the one inserted by the proxy.
>
> The point is that the net is eroding in some places - things that used
> to work no longer work.
>
> (I really got clobbered on this with some of my old and expensive lab
> equipment.  That gear was old, but useful, and still worth a few hundred
> $k.  But it did not have means to update the software, even if the
> vendor had created updates.  The old software did TLS but used a digest
> algorithm that the IETF had "deprecated". Because of the IETF's actions
> browser makers dropped that algorithm.  That left me with the only way
> to operate this gear was to preserve a laptop (or VM) with Windows 2000
> and Internet Exploder from that era.  It sure would have been nice had
> the browser makers not panic-removed that digest algorithm but, instead
> had a pop-up that asked "do you want to use this?")
>
> Back when I was at Interactive Systems (first Unix company) we created a
> story line that seems relevant to some of what is happening on the
> Internet.  The story begins with a message received from an unknown
> source out in deep space.  That message says:
>
>     "Life version 1.0 has been found to have a fatal, but uncorrectable
> flaw.  Therefore we are replacing Life version 1.0 with version 2.0.
> Version 2.0 is not compatible with Life Version 1.0, therefore all users
> of Life 1.0 are required to discontinue all use of Life 1.0 and to
> destroy all instances."
>
>          --karl--
>
> --
> 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
>


From gbuday.irtf at gmail.com  Wed Jul 29 18:36:20 2026
From: gbuday.irtf at gmail.com (Gergely Buday)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 03:36:20 +0200
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
Message-ID: <CA+HOLVAKvG_-38j_o9et22=cmGAOonkDa=ra5ONoTXohrzJJtg@mail.gmail.com>

A domingo, 26/07/2026, 00:40, Ofer Inbar via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> escreveu:

> On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51:04PM -0700,
> Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
> wrote:
> > Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to
> > several ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email
> > by serving as a prominent example of "how to do email right".   That
> > of course might require policies to possibly be changed, technical
> > flaws to be addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps
> > governments' actions.
> >
> > Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
> > attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that
> > make email untrustworthy in their views.   Most of the Internet
> > users have no idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.
> >  Most regulatory and government authorities seem to have no idea
> > what, if anything, they can do about it.
>
> A majority of younger Internet users (at least in the English speaking
> world I'm familiar with) - perhaps not an overwhelming majority, but
> quite certainly a majority - simply do not use email to communicate.
> They use it to verify their address for accounts, they use it to check
> for a specific thing that they know is going to be sent to them by
> email and that they know they want to see, and most of the rest of the
> time, they let their email pile up and they ignore nearly all of it.
>

Do these young people have a job? In a job, searching through your e-mails
is a pro feature. Instant messaging is good for your buddies but not for
serious stuff. In many countries e-mail is a legal document, no wonder that
many want to avoid it.

- Gergely

>
> To actually stay in touch with friends, family, coworkers, groups
> they're part of, etc. - all the things email used to be for - they
> use messaging apps.  Discord, Facebook, Slack Instagram, and more
> like that.  Or SMS/RCS phone texts.
>
> All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
> listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
> spam.  This includes both scattershot scam-oriented spam, but also
> lots of lists that sign you up without asking permission.  You donate
> to a political candidate, and some sleazy "grassroots" database starts
> selling your address to loads of other campaigns of the same party.
> You pay for a meal at a restaurant with your phone, enter the email
> address for your receipt, and now not only are you on the email list
> for that restaurant, but also the next cafe or ice cream place or
> whatever where the payment system recognizes your card and offers
> to email your receipt and you didn't notice the small checkbox to
> opt out of signing up.  You RSVP to an event on some sleazy site like
> eventbrite, and now you're on several mailing lists for similar events.
>
> The majority of email is assumed to be spam or otherwise irrelevant,
> by people whose experience of email started after the explosion of
> spam that I described above.  They never knew what it was like for
> email to be relevant and worth checking, so they don't think of it
> as relevant or worth checking.  Knowing this, they also don't think
> it's a useful way to communicate with anyone they know.
>   -- Cos
> --
> 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
>


From johnl at iecc.com  Wed Jul 29 18:53:29 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 29 Jul 2026 21:53:29 -0400
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <CA+HOLVAKvG_-38j_o9et22=cmGAOonkDa=ra5ONoTXohrzJJtg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CA+HOLVAKvG_-38j_o9et22=cmGAOonkDa=ra5ONoTXohrzJJtg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20260730015329.F39BB117BF616@ary.qy>

It appears that Gergely Buday via Internet-history <gbuday.irtf at gmail.com> said:
>Do these young people have a job? In a job, searching through your e-mails
>is a pro feature. Instant messaging is good for your buddies but not for
>serious stuff. In many countries e-mail is a legal document, no wonder that
>many want to avoid it.

Depends on the company.  I know several that do everything in Slack, of which I
am definitely not a fan.

R's,
John


From brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com  Wed Jul 29 21:20:53 2026
From: brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 16:20:53 +1200
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <CAHQj4CfjzVn0eAcqXexfLhKV1_EkaS4HGdjPkhj-vXuQJvkzvA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <CE12488A-F38C-4B98-8C1D-7F235B1AB0BE@romkey.com>
 <CAHQj4CfjzVn0eAcqXexfLhKV1_EkaS4HGdjPkhj-vXuQJvkzvA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <fe36af19-5d64-47be-a368-df2f6e149450@gmail.com>

On 30-Jul-26 07:22, Craig Partridge via Internet-history wrote:
> Adding perspective on two points in this excellent note.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 7:34?AM John Romkey via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
>>
>>> On Jul 28, 2026, at 5:35?PM, Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <
>> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think there are some really interesting economic questions, such as:
>>>
>>> - why did advertising, and charging for domain names, become major
>> factors in Internet economics?
>>
>> For domain names, scarcity. This was unintentionally encoded in the system
>> by having only a handful of TLDs at the start, with .com the most
>> recognized and therefore most valuable. Even if businesses hadn?t come
>> online ?smith.com? or ?sex.com? would have had a lot of competition for
>> them and therefore value.
>>
>>
> Which was ironic, as one of the major motivations for domain names was to
> solve the problems of a flat namespace. In a flat space, there could only
> be one "frodo" and domain names meant every sub-domain could have its own
> "frodo".
> 
> Dredging my memory from discussions of the period, I would say the
> expectation was that everyone was thinking in terms of universities (so
> subdomains hanging off example.edu) and not enough about corporate names.
> DNS also came well before the Web.
> 
> 
>>> - how has the design of BGP4 affected carrier economics (competition vs
>> collaboration)?
>>> - why did flat-rate charging become the dominant model for ISPs?
>>
>> I remember John Curran predicting this in the early 90s (I think it was
>> the early 90s anyway), basically it can cost more to meter than it?s worth.
>> At some point the cost per bit becomes noise.
>>
>>
> While I'm quite sure my buddy John said this, there were several prophets
> of flat rate charging at the time.  I think all the NSFNET regional
> networks used it.  Steve Deering strongly pushed back against people who
> suggested usage charging led to efficiency and would point out the effort
> they put into metering wasn't worth it (and it shaped some of his IPv6
> thinking).

Somewhat related (and also related to my question about BGP4 and carrier
economics), I posted "Metrics for Internet settlements" [1] in 1996, and was
taken out for lunch at the next IETF by a couple of ISP heavy-hitters, one
of whom was John Curran, to explain to me in no uncertain terms that if I
ever brought this draft up in an IETF session, they would conspicuously leave
the room on account of the Sherman Act. I thought they were over-reacting,
but this was clearly an aspect they were worried about.

Apart from the complexity and overhead of detailed accounting, I suspect
that avoiding anti-trust pitfalls also helped to lock in flat rate charging,
as well as the BGP4 peering model.

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-carpenter-metrics-00

    Brian

From gregskinner0 at icloud.com  Wed Jul 29 23:21:53 2026
From: gregskinner0 at icloud.com (Greg Skinner)
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 23:21:53 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <fe36af19-5d64-47be-a368-df2f6e149450@gmail.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <CE12488A-F38C-4B98-8C1D-7F235B1AB0BE@romkey.com>
 <CAHQj4CfjzVn0eAcqXexfLhKV1_EkaS4HGdjPkhj-vXuQJvkzvA@mail.gmail.com>
 <fe36af19-5d64-47be-a368-df2f6e149450@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1DBBD57A-4B01-47F5-BD93-DF57C8119A09@icloud.com>

On Jul 29, 2026, at 9:20?PM, Brian E Carpenter via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> Somewhat related (and also related to my question about BGP4 and carrier
> economics), I posted "Metrics for Internet settlements" [1] in 1996, and was
> taken out for lunch at the next IETF by a couple of ISP heavy-hitters, one
> of whom was John Curran, to explain to me in no uncertain terms that if I
> ever brought this draft up in an IETF session, they would conspicuously leave
> the room on account of the Sherman Act. I thought they were over-reacting,
> but this was clearly an aspect they were worried about.
> 
> Apart from the complexity and overhead of detailed accounting, I suspect
> that avoiding anti-trust pitfalls also helped to lock in flat rate charging,
> as well as the BGP4 peering model.
> 
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-carpenter-metrics-00
> 
>   Brian
> 


I only have time for a short reply, but I noticed that two of the authors cited in [RTFM] from this draft are Cyndi Mills and Greg Ruth, the acct wg chairs.  That draft eventually became RFC 2063.  A Realtime Traffic Flow Measurement wg <https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/rtfm/about/> was formed.  There?s only what looks to be spam in the rtfm IETF mailarchive, but there is some rtfm wg discussion in its ietf-ftp directory <https://www.ietf.org/ietf-ftp/ietf-mail-archive/rtfm/>.  From quickly scanning the IP Flow Information Export mail archive <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipfix/>, It looks like some accounting work continued in that wg.

--gregbo



From karl at iwl.com  Thu Jul 30 00:33:59 2026
From: karl at iwl.com (Karl Auerbach)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 00:33:59 -0700
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <CA+HOLVAKvG_-38j_o9et22=cmGAOonkDa=ra5ONoTXohrzJJtg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <CA+HOLVAKvG_-38j_o9et22=cmGAOonkDa=ra5ONoTXohrzJJtg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <a884a771-0272-40c6-96f5-c778fe35c622@iwl.com>


On 7/29/26 6:36 PM, Gergely Buday via Internet-history wrote:
> ... In many countries e-mail is a legal document, no wonder that
> many want to avoid it.

With my lawyer hat on...

I am presuming by "legal document" that you mean something that can be 
admitted as evidence in a legal dispute, such as a dispute about whether 
a contract exits or what are the terms of that contract.

Here in the US email can be admissible evidence in a legal case, as can 
any expressive or illustrative material, even oral or visual.

Whether email, a text message, or a parchment with a embossed wax seal, 
a writing (or oral statement) still needs to be authenticated, be the 
"best evidence", get past the evidentiary rules (such as the hearsay 
rules), and be relevant, etc.? (The rules of evidence are rational but 
extraordinary complex and have driven many people to verge of 
distraction, or beyond.)

Email, because in its most basic form it can be easily forged, can have 
a high authentication hurdle to overcome.

One also needs to be clear about what email evidence is being used to 
prove.? Is one trying to prove something based on the semantic content 
of the email?? Or is one trying to use an email to explain ambiguities 
in another document?? ?Or is one, perhaps, only trying to demonstrate 
that two people know one another or that the sender is alive enough to 
send an email?? An email may be used even for odd purposes having 
nothing to do with the content - such as to indicate that there was 
working network connectivity at the sender's office.

Like emails, text messages, instagrams, tweets, or tik-tok dances can 
all be evidentiary materials - and they all have to pass through the 
same kind of hoops to become admissible.

The headers/wrappers of email (and the rest of this stuff) are also 
potentially admissible as evidence.? For example, this is why providers 
sometimes get discovery requests to hand over records of what IP 
addresses were allocated to what user at what time.

The internet adds a lot of complexity to these evidence questions - for 
instance, DNSSEC can improve credibility of evidence (although 
explaining it to a jury can be hard) while rapid changes of DNS zone 
files and the presence of caching can reduce credibility of a DNS name 
at any given moment.

(All of this can get really "fun" when we begin to realize that people 
are now using non-human agents - such as AI tools - to generate emails 
or other materials.)

The bottom line of all of this is that a person who avoids email and 
prefers other forms may discover that all of those forms can be admissible.

 ? ? ? ? --karl--




From jack at 3kitty.org  Thu Jul 30 10:38:42 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 10:38:42 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>

Good questions!? Adding some more...

The Economics of The Internet seems to be pretty complicated.? In the 
ARPANET era, ARPA paid for everything.? ?When NSF joined in they created 
the notion of ISPs with their mandate to become self-sufficient or die.? 
I'm not sure it's true worldwide, but from what I've seen the "flat 
rate" model for ISPs is pretty common, with levels of service (and cost) 
perhaps tied to maximum speed rather than usage.? ?I'm not sure if 
satellite services still have "usage caps" to limit consumption.

But I think the economics are more complex than just the ISP payments.? 
If you think about the typical human sitting at a desktop or using a 
phone to do something on the Internet, the economics have become 
complicated over time.? That human does pay one or more ISPs to use the 
Internet.? But that's not the only monetary flow involved.

If you're the human, you use the Internet to get something you want, 
e.g., a document, email, news article, video, teleconference, etc. When 
the content you want arrives on your screen, you've paid someone, 
including the ISP, to get at that content.? Perhaps you needed to pay 
for the content or have a subscription to something in order to have it 
appear on your screen.

But in addition to whatever you wanted, part of your screen fills up 
with other stuff that you didn't ask for at all.? Someone else wants you 
to see that content, and they've also paid someone to create and deliver 
it to your screen.? That's the basis of the advertising industry on The 
Internet.

In effect, when you use the Internet, your screen real estate is used by 
multiple users.? You may think you're the user, paying to your ISP for 
Internet service.? ? But there are also possibly many other "users" 
paying someone for the use of some part of your screen for some period 
of time.

The Internet also seems to be stuck in a "subscription" mode of its 
economics.? Everyone wants you to pay every month for something. ISPs 
demand monthly payments, no matter how much you use the 'net. Web sites 
offering news articles demand monthly payments in order to see more than 
the headline.

This economic model of The Internet has evolved over its life, from the 
early days when ARPA paid for all to today.? That story would be the 
"History of the Economics of the Internet".

I fear the time if and when The Internet takes over the restaurant 
business.? Can you imagine restaurants with a subscription "all you can 
eat, all the time" business model?? ?Your favorite Italian restaurant 
will deliver as much great food as you want whenever you want it, as 
long as you pay them the monthly fee.? If you sometimes instead want 
Chinese, that's also available, but only if you also subscribe to the 
Chinese restaurant.? ?Same with Mexican, Fast Food, or all the other 
"content" that's available.

Over time, I think the economic model of the Internet has changed, with 
new monetary flows being introduced and new "users" present in every use 
of the 'net.? The "why", "when" and "how" of that evolution would be an 
interesting aspect of Internet History.? ?It will change in the future 
also, as that article I mentioned predicts ( 
https://www.fastcompany.com/91579817/dead-internet-theory-is-real-web-agents 
)? ?Understanding the history may be important.

/Jack Haverty



On 7/28/26 17:35, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> I think there are some really interesting economic questions, such as:
>
> - why did advertising, and charging for domain names, become major 
> factors in Internet economics?
> - how has the design of BGP4 affected carrier economics (competition 
> vs collaboration)?
> - why did flat-rate charging become the dominant model for ISPs?
> - what fractions of application layer revenue come from advertising, 
> subscriptions, pay-per-view, etc?
> - why does anyone trust cryptocurrency?
> - how will AI change Internet economics?
>
> I think email and spam are actually minor, economically speaking.
>
> Regards/Ng? mihi
> ?? Brian Carpenter
>
> On 29-Jul-26 08:39, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
>> On 7/25/26 15:39, Ofer Inbar via Internet-history wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51:04PM -0700,
>>> Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> 
>>> wrote:
>>>> Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to
>>>> several ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email
>>>> by serving as a prominent example of "how to do email right".? ?That
>>>> of course might require policies to possibly be changed, technical
>>>> flaws to be addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps
>>>> governments' actions.
>>>>
>>>> Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
>>>> attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that
>>>> make email untrustworthy in their views.? ?Most of the Internet
>>>> users have no idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.
>>>> ? ?Most regulatory and government authorities seem to have no idea
>>>> what, if anything, they can do about it.
>>> A majority of younger Internet users (at least in the English speaking
>>> world I'm familiar with) - perhaps not an overwhelming majority, but
>>> quite certainly a majority - simply do not use email to communicate.
>>> They use it to verify their address for accounts, they use it to check
>>> for a specific thing that they know is going to be sent to them by
>>> email and that they know they want to see, and most of the rest of the
>>> time, they let their email pile up and they ignore nearly all of it.
>>>
>>> To actually stay in touch with friends, family, coworkers, groups
>>> they're part of, etc. - all the things email used to be for - they
>>> use messaging apps.? Discord, Facebook, Slack Instagram, and more
>>> like that.? Or SMS/RCS phone texts.
>>>
>>> All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
>>> listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
>>> spam.? This includes both scattershot scam-oriented spam, but also
>>> lots of lists that sign you up without asking permission.? You donate
>>> to a political candidate, and some sleazy "grassroots" database starts
>>> selling your address to loads of other campaigns of the same party.
>>> You pay for a meal at a restaurant with your phone, enter the email
>>> address for your receipt, and now not only are you on the email list
>>> for that restaurant, but also the next cafe or ice cream place or
>>> whatever where the payment system recognizes your card and offers
>>> to email your receipt and you didn't notice the small checkbox to
>>> opt out of signing up.? You RSVP to an event on some sleazy site like
>>> eventbrite, and now you're on several mailing lists for similar events.
>>>
>>> The majority of email is assumed to be spam or otherwise irrelevant,
>>> by people whose experience of email started after the explosion of
>>> spam that I described above.? They never knew what it was like for
>>> email to be relevant and worth checking, so they don't think of it
>>> as relevant or worth checking.? Knowing this, they also don't think
>>> it's a useful way to communicate with anyone they know.
>>> ??? -- Cos
>>
>> You're absolutely right.? The email world has fragmented into a gaggle
>> of separate "messaging" services.? In the beginning, email was a
>> universal service, and even "being on the 'net" meant that you had an
>> ARPANET email address.? Even when other mail services were in use, e.g.,
>> UUCP or even MCIMail, there were sometimes arcane ways to interoperate,
>> using %, !, and the like to glue two messaging worlds together. ?Today,
>> there are lots of ways for people to communicate, and I've found few
>> ways to make them work together.? ?The history of that evolution might
>> be an interesting topic for some historian.
>>
>> Spam is certainly an issue.? For history's benefit, spam was well known
>> as an issue even in the early 1970s when email started on the ARPANET.
>> Licklider at MIT pointed out (to me at least while we were implementing
>> email) that every system needs some kind of "negative feedback" to be
>> stable.? ?Engineers know this, whether they're building electronic stuff
>> or steam engines a century ago.
>>
>> Use of some resource, such as email, must have some "cost" associated
>> with its use, to prevent rampant overuse.? ?We actually tried to
>> introduce the notion of "stamps" to the develolping email standards in
>> the 1970s to provide a form of negative feedback.? Even just a limit on
>> the number of emails that one address could send over some time period
>> would exert back pressure.
>>
>> All such proposals were soundly rejected by the research community. ?So
>> no backpressure scheme was created and today it costs virtually nothing
>> to send out hundreds or thousands of emails.? ?So corporations,
>> politicians, charities, and entrepreneurs send them. Same with
>> advertising, which does have a cost to the advertiser but little cost to
>> the company injecting ads into web pages.? Most of such stuff would be
>> considered spam by the recipients, to be scrolled past as quickly as you
>> can.
>>
>> This is all just one part of a larger History of Internet Economics, and
>> it goes far beyond just email.? Yesterday I saw an article about the
>> "dead internet theory" which characterizes the recent emergence of AI
>> agents as disrupting the economics of the Internet as we've known it.
>> See
>> https://www.fastcompany.com/91579817/dead-internet-theory-is-real-web-agents 
>>
>> if you're interested.? ?The economics of the Internet are now breaking
>> again and no one knows what comes next.
>>
>> For example, I recall hearing presentations at some conference in the
>> early 1990s about "micropayments" and the technical ideas and progress
>> which were currently being tested.? Yet today, we are all barraged with
>> content that we can't access unless we subscribe to something. Everyone
>> wants a subscription and the continuous revenue stream it would bring -
>> similar to the "all you can eat" philosophy sometimes used by
>> restaurants if only for special events. Micropayments were touted as
>> alternatives to subscriptions, so an Internet user could pay for one
>> "meal" (article) at a time instead of committing to weeks or months of
>> all-you-can-eat content.
>>
>> What happened to micropayments?
>>
>> Any economists out there?? Perhaps someone can relate the history and
>> timeline of how the Internet Economy has evolved over the decades?? ?Is
>> The Internet dying?
>>
>> /Jack Haverty
>>
>>
>>
>>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260730/66b65943/attachment.asc>

From sob at sobco.com  Thu Jul 30 10:57:45 2026
From: sob at sobco.com (Scott Bradner)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 13:57:45 -0400
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <F3BF0CEE-270C-4189-AB9F-BD19D6C47BFA@sobco.com>

this covers some of the current discussions over the Internet's economic model 
within the regulatory world (at least in the US)

https://isoclive.substack.com/p/fcc-ip-transition

Scott

> On Jul 30, 2026, at 1:38?PM, Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> Good questions!  Adding some more...
> 
> The Economics of The Internet seems to be pretty complicated.  In the ARPANET era, ARPA paid for everything.   When NSF joined in they created the notion of ISPs with their mandate to become self-sufficient or die.  I'm not sure it's true worldwide, but from what I've seen the "flat rate" model for ISPs is pretty common, with levels of service (and cost) perhaps tied to maximum speed rather than usage.   I'm not sure if satellite services still have "usage caps" to limit consumption.
> 
> But I think the economics are more complex than just the ISP payments.  If you think about the typical human sitting at a desktop or using a phone to do something on the Internet, the economics have become complicated over time.  That human does pay one or more ISPs to use the Internet.  But that's not the only monetary flow involved.
> 
> If you're the human, you use the Internet to get something you want, e.g., a document, email, news article, video, teleconference, etc. When the content you want arrives on your screen, you've paid someone, including the ISP, to get at that content.  Perhaps you needed to pay for the content or have a subscription to something in order to have it appear on your screen.
> 
> But in addition to whatever you wanted, part of your screen fills up with other stuff that you didn't ask for at all.  Someone else wants you to see that content, and they've also paid someone to create and deliver it to your screen.  That's the basis of the advertising industry on The Internet.
> 
> In effect, when you use the Internet, your screen real estate is used by multiple users.  You may think you're the user, paying to your ISP for Internet service.    But there are also possibly many other "users" paying someone for the use of some part of your screen for some period of time.
> 
> The Internet also seems to be stuck in a "subscription" mode of its economics.  Everyone wants you to pay every month for something. ISPs demand monthly payments, no matter how much you use the 'net. Web sites offering news articles demand monthly payments in order to see more than the headline.
> 
> This economic model of The Internet has evolved over its life, from the early days when ARPA paid for all to today.  That story would be the "History of the Economics of the Internet".
> 
> I fear the time if and when The Internet takes over the restaurant business.  Can you imagine restaurants with a subscription "all you can eat, all the time" business model?   Your favorite Italian restaurant will deliver as much great food as you want whenever you want it, as long as you pay them the monthly fee.  If you sometimes instead want Chinese, that's also available, but only if you also subscribe to the Chinese restaurant.   Same with Mexican, Fast Food, or all the other "content" that's available.
> 
> Over time, I think the economic model of the Internet has changed, with new monetary flows being introduced and new "users" present in every use of the 'net.  The "why", "when" and "how" of that evolution would be an interesting aspect of Internet History.   It will change in the future also, as that article I mentioned predicts ( https://www.fastcompany.com/91579817/dead-internet-theory-is-real-web-agents )   Understanding the history may be important.
> 
> /Jack Haverty
> 
> 
> 
> On 7/28/26 17:35, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> I think there are some really interesting economic questions, such as:
>> 
>> - why did advertising, and charging for domain names, become major factors in Internet economics?
>> - how has the design of BGP4 affected carrier economics (competition vs collaboration)?
>> - why did flat-rate charging become the dominant model for ISPs?
>> - what fractions of application layer revenue come from advertising, subscriptions, pay-per-view, etc?
>> - why does anyone trust cryptocurrency?
>> - how will AI change Internet economics?
>> 
>> I think email and spam are actually minor, economically speaking.
>> 
>> Regards/Ng? mihi
>>    Brian Carpenter
>> 
>> On 29-Jul-26 08:39, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
>>> On 7/25/26 15:39, Ofer Inbar via Internet-history wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51:04PM -0700,
>>>> Jack Haverty via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>>>> Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to
>>>>> several ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email
>>>>> by serving as a prominent example of "how to do email right".   That
>>>>> of course might require policies to possibly be changed, technical
>>>>> flaws to be addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps
>>>>> governments' actions.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
>>>>> attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that
>>>>> make email untrustworthy in their views.   Most of the Internet
>>>>> users have no idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.
>>>>>    Most regulatory and government authorities seem to have no idea
>>>>> what, if anything, they can do about it.
>>>> A majority of younger Internet users (at least in the English speaking
>>>> world I'm familiar with) - perhaps not an overwhelming majority, but
>>>> quite certainly a majority - simply do not use email to communicate.
>>>> They use it to verify their address for accounts, they use it to check
>>>> for a specific thing that they know is going to be sent to them by
>>>> email and that they know they want to see, and most of the rest of the
>>>> time, they let their email pile up and they ignore nearly all of it.
>>>> 
>>>> To actually stay in touch with friends, family, coworkers, groups
>>>> they're part of, etc. - all the things email used to be for - they
>>>> use messaging apps.  Discord, Facebook, Slack Instagram, and more
>>>> like that.  Or SMS/RCS phone texts.
>>>> 
>>>> All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
>>>> listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
>>>> spam.  This includes both scattershot scam-oriented spam, but also
>>>> lots of lists that sign you up without asking permission.  You donate
>>>> to a political candidate, and some sleazy "grassroots" database starts
>>>> selling your address to loads of other campaigns of the same party.
>>>> You pay for a meal at a restaurant with your phone, enter the email
>>>> address for your receipt, and now not only are you on the email list
>>>> for that restaurant, but also the next cafe or ice cream place or
>>>> whatever where the payment system recognizes your card and offers
>>>> to email your receipt and you didn't notice the small checkbox to
>>>> opt out of signing up.  You RSVP to an event on some sleazy site like
>>>> eventbrite, and now you're on several mailing lists for similar events.
>>>> 
>>>> The majority of email is assumed to be spam or otherwise irrelevant,
>>>> by people whose experience of email started after the explosion of
>>>> spam that I described above.  They never knew what it was like for
>>>> email to be relevant and worth checking, so they don't think of it
>>>> as relevant or worth checking.  Knowing this, they also don't think
>>>> it's a useful way to communicate with anyone they know.
>>>>     -- Cos
>>> 
>>> You're absolutely right.  The email world has fragmented into a gaggle
>>> of separate "messaging" services.  In the beginning, email was a
>>> universal service, and even "being on the 'net" meant that you had an
>>> ARPANET email address.  Even when other mail services were in use, e.g.,
>>> UUCP or even MCIMail, there were sometimes arcane ways to interoperate,
>>> using %, !, and the like to glue two messaging worlds together.  Today,
>>> there are lots of ways for people to communicate, and I've found few
>>> ways to make them work together.   The history of that evolution might
>>> be an interesting topic for some historian.
>>> 
>>> Spam is certainly an issue.  For history's benefit, spam was well known
>>> as an issue even in the early 1970s when email started on the ARPANET.
>>> Licklider at MIT pointed out (to me at least while we were implementing
>>> email) that every system needs some kind of "negative feedback" to be
>>> stable.   Engineers know this, whether they're building electronic stuff
>>> or steam engines a century ago.
>>> 
>>> Use of some resource, such as email, must have some "cost" associated
>>> with its use, to prevent rampant overuse.   We actually tried to
>>> introduce the notion of "stamps" to the develolping email standards in
>>> the 1970s to provide a form of negative feedback.  Even just a limit on
>>> the number of emails that one address could send over some time period
>>> would exert back pressure.
>>> 
>>> All such proposals were soundly rejected by the research community.  So
>>> no backpressure scheme was created and today it costs virtually nothing
>>> to send out hundreds or thousands of emails.   So corporations,
>>> politicians, charities, and entrepreneurs send them. Same with
>>> advertising, which does have a cost to the advertiser but little cost to
>>> the company injecting ads into web pages.  Most of such stuff would be
>>> considered spam by the recipients, to be scrolled past as quickly as you
>>> can.
>>> 
>>> This is all just one part of a larger History of Internet Economics, and
>>> it goes far beyond just email.  Yesterday I saw an article about the
>>> "dead internet theory" which characterizes the recent emergence of AI
>>> agents as disrupting the economics of the Internet as we've known it.
>>> See
>>> https://www.fastcompany.com/91579817/dead-internet-theory-is-real-web-agents 
>>> if you're interested.   The economics of the Internet are now breaking
>>> again and no one knows what comes next.
>>> 
>>> For example, I recall hearing presentations at some conference in the
>>> early 1990s about "micropayments" and the technical ideas and progress
>>> which were currently being tested.  Yet today, we are all barraged with
>>> content that we can't access unless we subscribe to something. Everyone
>>> wants a subscription and the continuous revenue stream it would bring -
>>> similar to the "all you can eat" philosophy sometimes used by
>>> restaurants if only for special events. Micropayments were touted as
>>> alternatives to subscriptions, so an Internet user could pay for one
>>> "meal" (article) at a time instead of committing to weeks or months of
>>> all-you-can-eat content.
>>> 
>>> What happened to micropayments?
>>> 
>>> Any economists out there?  Perhaps someone can relate the history and
>>> timeline of how the Internet Economy has evolved over the decades?   Is
>>> The Internet dying?
>>> 
>>> /Jack Haverty
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
> 
> -- 
> 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



From johnl at iecc.com  Thu Jul 30 13:48:40 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 30 Jul 2026 16:48:40 -0400
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <F3BF0CEE-270C-4189-AB9F-BD19D6C47BFA@sobco.com>
References: <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <F3BF0CEE-270C-4189-AB9F-BD19D6C47BFA@sobco.com>
Message-ID: <20260730204840.A30C3117E0D22@ary.qy>

It appears that Scott Bradner via Internet-history <sob at sobco.com> said:
>this covers some of the current discussions over the Internet's economic model 
>within the regulatory world (at least in the US)
>
>https://isoclive.substack.com/p/fcc-ip-transition

Not really. It's about moving the telephone system from legacy SS7 to IP
signalling, switching, and transport. It's the same technology as the Internet
but it's separate dedicated IP networks with privately negotiated
interconnections and occasionally still per-minute settlements.

There is also telephony that runs "over the top" of the public Internet, but
that's something else. That's VoIP, Voice over IP, while the former is VuIP,
Voice using IP. There are plenty of vendors that provide VoIP to VuIP gateways
so your VoIP terminals can make and receive calls to or from real phone numbers.

R's,
John


From karl at iwl.com  Thu Jul 30 13:52:35 2026
From: karl at iwl.com (Karl Auerbach)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 13:52:35 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <F3BF0CEE-270C-4189-AB9F-BD19D6C47BFA@sobco.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
 <F3BF0CEE-270C-4189-AB9F-BD19D6C47BFA@sobco.com>
Message-ID: <28b7e53f-4c96-4820-9682-1c5499b410a0@iwl.com>


On 7/30/26 10:57 AM, Scott Bradner via Internet-history wrote:
> this covers some of the current discussions over the Internet's economic model
> within the regulatory world (at least in the US)
>
> https://isoclive.substack.com/p/fcc-ip-transition

Thanks for posting that link.

I took a look and was quite disappointed to see that they are continuing 
what I believe is one of the greatest failures of our decades of efforts 
to create, implement, and deploy the Internet:

The failure to adequately create means to manage, diagnose, and repair 
network problems.

I come from a family of repair-minded people.? My grandfather repaired 
radios, my father TVs.? I repair networks.? So I am very sensitive to 
these issues.

I find that our tools for networks are rather primitive.? And even those 
that we have are becoming increasingly difficult to use or simply become 
unusable because of our ever taller, ever thicker walls of security.

I first spoke on this topic more than two decades ago.? My talk was 
titled " From Barnstorming to Boeing ?
Transforming the Internet Into a Lifeline Utility".? My proposed 
solutions were both technical, procedural (such as design rules), and 
non-technical (such as legal liability for various kinds of 
negligence.)? We have advanced very little on these fronts in the two+ 
intervening decades.

Here are the speakers notes and also the slide deck:

https://www.cavebear.com/archive/rw/Barnstorming-to-Boeing.pdf

https://www.cavebear.com/archive/rw/Barnstorming-to-Boeing-slides.pdf

 ? ? ? ? --karl--




From gregskinner0 at icloud.com  Thu Jul 30 13:52:46 2026
From: gregskinner0 at icloud.com (Greg Skinner)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 13:52:46 -0700
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <376ea18e-72b9-4591-b722-9ffdea56cb45@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>
 <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>
 <378db8b7-13dd-c4df-9e9c-35c1660fd5e4@iecc.com>
 <985924c2-2a1d-4f8f-b0e1-c71cbd03b10b@3kitty.org>
 <457CCF95-3BB4-44C6-9A96-456F7AD59DED@icloud.com>
 <376ea18e-72b9-4591-b722-9ffdea56cb45@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <6D3FC03D-6070-44BB-A934-4DDE26F551F0@icloud.com>

On Jul 29, 2026, at 3:34?PM, Jack Haverty <jack at 3kitty.org> wrote:
> 
> I have accounts on a few social media sites and saw "DM" on one of them.  Probably Facebook.  I think it is jargon for Direct Message, which is a private communication between two people -- just like traditional email.
> 

Hmmm ?

When I think of messaging, I think of short-form communication over short time periods.  On the other hand, I think of email as longer form over longer time periods that is also amenable to group communication.  That doesn?t mean they can?t be used interchangeably.

Possibly, my early experiences online (starting from 1980, having guest accounts that gave me access to groups like header-people) have shaped my thinking.  If I had started earlier, as you did, and had direct experience with Licklider, I might view messaging and email the same way you do.

--gregbo



From johnl at iecc.com  Thu Jul 30 13:59:35 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 30 Jul 2026 16:59:35 -0400
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
References: <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <20260730205935.B3F09117E11FE@ary.qy>

It appears that Jack Haverty via Internet-history <jack at 3kitty.org> said:
>The Internet also seems to be stuck in a "subscription" mode of its 
>economics.? Everyone wants you to pay every month for something. ...

Well, yeah.  My ISP which happens also to be my phone company has run
fiber to my house, and provides service capped at 500Mb each way.  Their
fixed costs are high, and don't vary much if I use more or less data,
for which they charge about $100/mo and they throw in a landline phone,
via the same fiber modem.*

How else are they supposed to charge than monthly?

For news and other content sources, see the recent discussions of micropayments.
People hate them, even if they are usually cheaper than a subscription.  I pay
subscriptions for newspapers and some freemium sites where the subscription gets
more content and/or fewer ads.

>I fear the time if and when The Internet takes over the restaurant 
>business.? Can you imagine restaurants with a subscription "all you can 
>eat, all the time" business model?? ?Your favorite Italian restaurant 
>will deliver as much great food as you want whenever you want it, as 
>long as you pay them the monthly fee.?

You probably thought you were kidding, but:

https://www.delish.com/food-news/a71899035/olive-garden-pasta-pass/

R's,
John

PS: Since they still think like a phone company, the modem has a backup battery
so that even if the power fails I still have phone service and can use the Internet
at least until the battery on my laptop runs out.


From sob at sobco.com  Thu Jul 30 15:17:25 2026
From: sob at sobco.com (Scott O. Bradner)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 18:17:25 -0400
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <20260730204840.A30C3117E0D22@ary.qy>
References: <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <F3BF0CEE-270C-4189-AB9F-BD19D6C47BFA@sobco.com>
 <20260730204840.A30C3117E0D22@ary.qy>
Message-ID: <52A17F1B-E004-4511-A273-D12919AA89A1@sobco.com>

it also touches on what the legacy telcos expect as to settlements etc


> On Jul 30, 2026, at 4:48?PM, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:
> 
> It appears that Scott Bradner via Internet-history <sob at sobco.com> said:
>> this covers some of the current discussions over the Internet's economic model 
>> within the regulatory world (at least in the US)
>> 
>> https://isoclive.substack.com/p/fcc-ip-transition
> 
> Not really. It's about moving the telephone system from legacy SS7 to IP
> signalling, switching, and transport. It's the same technology as the Internet
> but it's separate dedicated IP networks with privately negotiated
> interconnections and occasionally still per-minute settlements.
> 
> There is also telephony that runs "over the top" of the public Internet, but
> that's something else. That's VoIP, Voice over IP, while the former is VuIP,
> Voice using IP. There are plenty of vendors that provide VoIP to VuIP gateways
> so your VoIP terminals can make and receive calls to or from real phone numbers.
> 
> R's,
> John



From mfidelman at protocoltechnologiesgroup.com  Thu Jul 30 15:58:11 2026
From: mfidelman at protocoltechnologiesgroup.com (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 22:58:11 +0000
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <52A17F1B-E004-4511-A273-D12919AA89A1@sobco.com>
References: <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <F3BF0CEE-270C-4189-AB9F-BD19D6C47BFA@sobco.com>
 <20260730204840.A30C3117E0D22@ary.qy>
 <52A17F1B-E004-4511-A273-D12919AA89A1@sobco.com>
Message-ID: <SA1PR12MB7038DA2CB6FE6AAA5B4376B9B1C92@SA1PR12MB7038.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>

I seem to recall that institutions paid for their connection to the ARPANET - using funds that would otherwise pay for leased lines and other telecom costs.  Paid out of ARPA grants.  Money ARPA was paying anyway, with the ARPANET as a way to cut the costs.  Kind of like how the post office jump started the airlines & aerospace industry by paying for airmail.  Or the railroads by paying for mail transport.



Sent from Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
________________________________
From: Internet-history <internet-history-bounces at elists.isoc.org> on behalf of Scott O. Bradner via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
Sent: Thursday, 30 July 2026 18:17:25
To: John Levine <johnl at iecc.com>
Cc: internet-history at elists.isoc.org <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
Subject: Re: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?

it also touches on what the legacy telcos expect as to settlements etc


> On Jul 30, 2026, at 4:48?PM, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:
>
> It appears that Scott Bradner via Internet-history <sob at sobco.com> said:
>> this covers some of the current discussions over the Internet's economic model
>> within the regulatory world (at least in the US)
>>
>> https://isoclive.substack.com/p/fcc-ip-transition
>
> Not really. It's about moving the telephone system from legacy SS7 to IP
> signalling, switching, and transport. It's the same technology as the Internet
> but it's separate dedicated IP networks with privately negotiated
> interconnections and occasionally still per-minute settlements.
>
> There is also telephony that runs "over the top" of the public Internet, but
> that's something else. That's VoIP, Voice over IP, while the former is VuIP,
> Voice using IP. There are plenty of vendors that provide VoIP to VuIP gateways
> so your VoIP terminals can make and receive calls to or from real phone numbers.
>
> 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

From steve at shinkuro.com  Thu Jul 30 16:17:47 2026
From: steve at shinkuro.com (Steve Crocker)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 19:17:47 -0400
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <SA1PR12MB7038DA2CB6FE6AAA5B4376B9B1C92@SA1PR12MB7038.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
References: <SA1PR12MB7038DA2CB6FE6AAA5B4376B9B1C92@SA1PR12MB7038.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <81A8B36E-42C5-41B2-BA83-C8274A09773C@shinkuro.com>

The Arpanet leased lines and IMPs and the BBN network management were all paid via directly from (D)ARPA.  Each site paid for its own hardware interface to its IMP and was responsible for any software changes it needed.  There were no monthly charges or usage charges.

Steve Crocker
Former D(ARPA) program manager
1971-74

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 30, 2026, at 6:58?PM, Miles Fidelman via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> ?I seem to recall that institutions paid for their connection to the ARPANET - using funds that would otherwise pay for leased lines and other telecom costs.  Paid out of ARPA grants.  Money ARPA was paying anyway, with the ARPANET as a way to cut the costs.  Kind of like how the post office jump started the airlines & aerospace industry by paying for airmail.  Or the railroads by paying for mail transport.
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
> ________________________________
> From: Internet-history <internet-history-bounces at elists.isoc.org> on behalf of Scott O. Bradner via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
> Sent: Thursday, 30 July 2026 18:17:25
> To: John Levine <johnl at iecc.com>
> Cc: internet-history at elists.isoc.org <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
> Subject: Re: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
> 
> it also touches on what the legacy telcos expect as to settlements etc
> 
> 
>> On Jul 30, 2026, at 4:48?PM, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:
>> 
>> It appears that Scott Bradner via Internet-history <sob at sobco.com> said:
>>> this covers some of the current discussions over the Internet's economic model
>>> within the regulatory world (at least in the US)
>>> 
>>> https://isoclive.substack.com/p/fcc-ip-transition
>> 
>> Not really. It's about moving the telephone system from legacy SS7 to IP
>> signalling, switching, and transport. It's the same technology as the Internet
>> but it's separate dedicated IP networks with privately negotiated
>> interconnections and occasionally still per-minute settlements.
>> 
>> There is also telephony that runs "over the top" of the public Internet, but
>> that's something else. That's VoIP, Voice over IP, while the former is VuIP,
>> Voice using IP. There are plenty of vendors that provide VoIP to VuIP gateways
>> so your VoIP terminals can make and receive calls to or from real phone numbers.
>> 
>> 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
> --
> 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


From jack at 3kitty.org  Thu Jul 30 16:12:30 2026
From: jack at 3kitty.org (Jack Haverty)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 16:12:30 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <5c8ac1ef-dc77-4dbc-98c8-2bfb40ba81c0@3kitty.org>

There's another monetary flow in Internet Economics that I forgot to 
mention.

Data is valuable.? Whenever someone (human, advertiser, whatever) uses 
the Internet, there's all sorts of places along the paths where someone 
can see what you're doing.? ISPs know where your datagrams go and how 
often and long you stay there.? Your DNS service knows what places you 
interact with.? The websites you use can track all sorts of things about 
your behavior.? The emails you send, and who you're communicating with, 
are full of valuable information which can be gleaned along its path in 
a variety of places.? ?Even web archives, such as the one for this list, 
can be "harvested" to collect active email addresses and learn what 
people are talking about.? ?Techniques for tracking users have been 
developed, such as "web beacons".

That has led to the emergence of another monetary flow aspect of 
Internet Economics - in collecting, selling, and buying data about users 
behaviors and interests.? That data is valuable to someone, and they are 
willing to pay money to get it.

Of course, such data has been valuable since long before the Internet 
appeared.? Companies used to pay for "market surveys" to inform their 
business decisions.

The same needs exist in the new Internet world, but the costs of 
collecting and disseminating such data have been changed dramatically by 
the Internet.

I can't remember but maybe you can.? ?When was the first time you sent 
an email and casually mentioned some obscure item, and then suddenly 
started seeing ads for that item on web pages?? It's been happening for 
a long time, but history might be interested in when it started and who 
did it.

Similarly, I don't have any comprehensive data, but it seems to me that 
I'm getting more requests now, often by email, to participate in some 
kind of survey about something.? The surveyors have discovered that it's 
cheaper to send thousands of emails than to have a phone bank of cold 
callers.

An article recently noted that the majority of users of the Web are now 
robots, which don't behave like humans when looking at websites.? I've 
used camelcamelcamel.com myself for years to track prices of things I 
want to buy but can wait until the price drops. It's expanded recently 
to cover more storefronts.? ?Bots aren't susceptible to advertising like 
humans are.

With computing now cheap enough that AI agents are affordable, I'm 
surprised it's taken so long for the bots to take over.? I wonder what 
part of Internet usage is bots talking to bots, doing things like 
periodic backups of human's computers.? ?Back in the late 1970s, I 
remember musing that the ARPANET traffic might be getting dominated by 
things like mail servers talking amongst themselves, rather than the 
Telnet traffic which dominated in the initial ARPANET.

The future is unclear, but the past might be useful to deal with 
whatever comes along.

/Jack Haverty

On 7/30/26 10:38, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
> Good questions!? Adding some more...
>
> The Economics of The Internet seems to be pretty complicated.? In the 
> ARPANET era, ARPA paid for everything.? ?When NSF joined in they 
> created the notion of ISPs with their mandate to become 
> self-sufficient or die.? I'm not sure it's true worldwide, but from 
> what I've seen the "flat rate" model for ISPs is pretty common, with 
> levels of service (and cost) perhaps tied to maximum speed rather than 
> usage.? ?I'm not sure if satellite services still have "usage caps" to 
> limit consumption.
>
> But I think the economics are more complex than just the ISP 
> payments.? If you think about the typical human sitting at a desktop 
> or using a phone to do something on the Internet, the economics have 
> become complicated over time.? That human does pay one or more ISPs to 
> use the Internet.? But that's not the only monetary flow involved.
>
> If you're the human, you use the Internet to get something you want, 
> e.g., a document, email, news article, video, teleconference, etc. 
> When the content you want arrives on your screen, you've paid someone, 
> including the ISP, to get at that content.? Perhaps you needed to pay 
> for the content or have a subscription to something in order to have 
> it appear on your screen.
>
> But in addition to whatever you wanted, part of your screen fills up 
> with other stuff that you didn't ask for at all.? Someone else wants 
> you to see that content, and they've also paid someone to create and 
> deliver it to your screen.? That's the basis of the advertising 
> industry on The Internet.
>
> In effect, when you use the Internet, your screen real estate is used 
> by multiple users.? You may think you're the user, paying to your ISP 
> for Internet service.? ? But there are also possibly many other 
> "users" paying someone for the use of some part of your screen for 
> some period of time.
>
> The Internet also seems to be stuck in a "subscription" mode of its 
> economics.? Everyone wants you to pay every month for something. ISPs 
> demand monthly payments, no matter how much you use the 'net. Web 
> sites offering news articles demand monthly payments in order to see 
> more than the headline.
>
> This economic model of The Internet has evolved over its life, from 
> the early days when ARPA paid for all to today.? That story would be 
> the "History of the Economics of the Internet".
>
> I fear the time if and when The Internet takes over the restaurant 
> business.? Can you imagine restaurants with a subscription "all you 
> can eat, all the time" business model?? ?Your favorite Italian 
> restaurant will deliver as much great food as you want whenever you 
> want it, as long as you pay them the monthly fee.? If you sometimes 
> instead want Chinese, that's also available, but only if you also 
> subscribe to the Chinese restaurant.? ?Same with Mexican, Fast Food, 
> or all the other "content" that's available.
>
> Over time, I think the economic model of the Internet has changed, 
> with new monetary flows being introduced and new "users" present in 
> every use of the 'net.? The "why", "when" and "how" of that evolution 
> would be an interesting aspect of Internet History.? ?It will change 
> in the future also, as that article I mentioned predicts ( 
> https://www.fastcompany.com/91579817/dead-internet-theory-is-real-web-agents 
> )? ?Understanding the history may be important.
>
> /Jack Haverty
>
>
>
> On 7/28/26 17:35, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> I think there are some really interesting economic questions, such as:
>>
>> - why did advertising, and charging for domain names, become major 
>> factors in Internet economics?
>> - how has the design of BGP4 affected carrier economics (competition 
>> vs collaboration)?
>> - why did flat-rate charging become the dominant model for ISPs?
>> - what fractions of application layer revenue come from advertising, 
>> subscriptions, pay-per-view, etc?
>> - why does anyone trust cryptocurrency?
>> - how will AI change Internet economics?
>>
>> I think email and spam are actually minor, economically speaking.
>>
>> Regards/Ng? mihi
>> ?? Brian Carpenter
>>
>> On 29-Jul-26 08:39, Jack Haverty via Internet-history wrote:
>>> On 7/25/26 15:39, Ofer Inbar via Internet-history wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Jul 18, 2026 at 12:51:04PM -0700,
>>>> Jack Haverty via Internet-history 
>>>> <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>>>>> Over the last decade or two, I've suggested, several times, to
>>>>> several ISOC administrations, that ISOC "walk the walk" with email
>>>>> by serving as a prominent example of "how to do email right".? ?That
>>>>> of course might require policies to possibly be changed, technical
>>>>> flaws to be addressed, educational efforts, and even perhaps
>>>>> governments' actions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Most Internet users today likely experience things like phishing
>>>>> attacks, emails with forged sources, and other such effects that
>>>>> make email untrustworthy in their views.? ?Most of the Internet
>>>>> users have no idea how to protect themselves from such attacks.
>>>>> ? ?Most regulatory and government authorities seem to have no idea
>>>>> what, if anything, they can do about it.
>>>> A majority of younger Internet users (at least in the English speaking
>>>> world I'm familiar with) - perhaps not an overwhelming majority, but
>>>> quite certainly a majority - simply do not use email to communicate.
>>>> They use it to verify their address for accounts, they use it to check
>>>> for a specific thing that they know is going to be sent to them by
>>>> email and that they know they want to see, and most of the rest of the
>>>> time, they let their email pile up and they ignore nearly all of it.
>>>>
>>>> To actually stay in touch with friends, family, coworkers, groups
>>>> they're part of, etc. - all the things email used to be for - they
>>>> use messaging apps.? Discord, Facebook, Slack Instagram, and more
>>>> like that.? Or SMS/RCS phone texts.
>>>>
>>>> All of the various problems with email today, including the ones you
>>>> listed, are I think dwarfed by one big one that has caused this:
>>>> spam.? This includes both scattershot scam-oriented spam, but also
>>>> lots of lists that sign you up without asking permission. You donate
>>>> to a political candidate, and some sleazy "grassroots" database starts
>>>> selling your address to loads of other campaigns of the same party.
>>>> You pay for a meal at a restaurant with your phone, enter the email
>>>> address for your receipt, and now not only are you on the email list
>>>> for that restaurant, but also the next cafe or ice cream place or
>>>> whatever where the payment system recognizes your card and offers
>>>> to email your receipt and you didn't notice the small checkbox to
>>>> opt out of signing up.? You RSVP to an event on some sleazy site like
>>>> eventbrite, and now you're on several mailing lists for similar 
>>>> events.
>>>>
>>>> The majority of email is assumed to be spam or otherwise irrelevant,
>>>> by people whose experience of email started after the explosion of
>>>> spam that I described above.? They never knew what it was like for
>>>> email to be relevant and worth checking, so they don't think of it
>>>> as relevant or worth checking.? Knowing this, they also don't think
>>>> it's a useful way to communicate with anyone they know.
>>>> ??? -- Cos
>>>
>>> You're absolutely right.? The email world has fragmented into a gaggle
>>> of separate "messaging" services.? In the beginning, email was a
>>> universal service, and even "being on the 'net" meant that you had an
>>> ARPANET email address.? Even when other mail services were in use, 
>>> e.g.,
>>> UUCP or even MCIMail, there were sometimes arcane ways to interoperate,
>>> using %, !, and the like to glue two messaging worlds together. ?Today,
>>> there are lots of ways for people to communicate, and I've found few
>>> ways to make them work together.? ?The history of that evolution might
>>> be an interesting topic for some historian.
>>>
>>> Spam is certainly an issue.? For history's benefit, spam was well known
>>> as an issue even in the early 1970s when email started on the ARPANET.
>>> Licklider at MIT pointed out (to me at least while we were implementing
>>> email) that every system needs some kind of "negative feedback" to be
>>> stable.? ?Engineers know this, whether they're building electronic 
>>> stuff
>>> or steam engines a century ago.
>>>
>>> Use of some resource, such as email, must have some "cost" associated
>>> with its use, to prevent rampant overuse.? ?We actually tried to
>>> introduce the notion of "stamps" to the develolping email standards in
>>> the 1970s to provide a form of negative feedback.? Even just a limit on
>>> the number of emails that one address could send over some time period
>>> would exert back pressure.
>>>
>>> All such proposals were soundly rejected by the research community. ?So
>>> no backpressure scheme was created and today it costs virtually nothing
>>> to send out hundreds or thousands of emails.? ?So corporations,
>>> politicians, charities, and entrepreneurs send them. Same with
>>> advertising, which does have a cost to the advertiser but little 
>>> cost to
>>> the company injecting ads into web pages.? Most of such stuff would be
>>> considered spam by the recipients, to be scrolled past as quickly as 
>>> you
>>> can.
>>>
>>> This is all just one part of a larger History of Internet Economics, 
>>> and
>>> it goes far beyond just email.? Yesterday I saw an article about the
>>> "dead internet theory" which characterizes the recent emergence of AI
>>> agents as disrupting the economics of the Internet as we've known it.
>>> See
>>> https://www.fastcompany.com/91579817/dead-internet-theory-is-real-web-agents 
>>>
>>> if you're interested.? ?The economics of the Internet are now breaking
>>> again and no one knows what comes next.
>>>
>>> For example, I recall hearing presentations at some conference in the
>>> early 1990s about "micropayments" and the technical ideas and progress
>>> which were currently being tested.? Yet today, we are all barraged with
>>> content that we can't access unless we subscribe to something. Everyone
>>> wants a subscription and the continuous revenue stream it would bring -
>>> similar to the "all you can eat" philosophy sometimes used by
>>> restaurants if only for special events. Micropayments were touted as
>>> alternatives to subscriptions, so an Internet user could pay for one
>>> "meal" (article) at a time instead of committing to weeks or months of
>>> all-you-can-eat content.
>>>
>>> What happened to micropayments?
>>>
>>> Any economists out there?? Perhaps someone can relate the history and
>>> timeline of how the Internet Economy has evolved over the decades?? ?Is
>>> The Internet dying?
>>>
>>> /Jack Haverty
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260730/bf7578a0/attachment.asc>

From johnl at iecc.com  Thu Jul 30 16:49:21 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Date: 30 Jul 2026 19:49:21 -0400
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <52A17F1B-E004-4511-A273-D12919AA89A1@sobco.com>
References: <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <F3BF0CEE-270C-4189-AB9F-BD19D6C47BFA@sobco.com>
 <20260730204840.A30C3117E0D22@ary.qy>
 <52A17F1B-E004-4511-A273-D12919AA89A1@sobco.com>
Message-ID: <e199b361-3148-e5ca-aa61-927235920722@iecc.com>

On Thu, 30 Jul 2026, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
> it also touches on what the legacy telcos expect as to settlements etc

Right, but that's telephone call settlements, not Internet data 
settlements.  Ineffiecnet little telcos like mine are sad not to get 
settlements.  I hear there are (maybe were) tiny phone co-ops in the 
midwest where not only is your phone line free, you get regular dividends 
paid from the settlements.

My impression is that for Internet interconnections, if the two parties 
are of comparable size they peer, or if one is bigger, the smaller pays 
the larger for transit.  I've also heard of paid peering, somewhere in 
between but not common.

R's,
John

>> On Jul 30, 2026, at 4:48?PM, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:
>>
>> It appears that Scott Bradner via Internet-history <sob at sobco.com> said:
>>> this covers some of the current discussions over the Internet's economic model
>>> within the regulatory world (at least in the US)
>>>
>>> https://isoclive.substack.com/p/fcc-ip-transition
>>
>> Not really. It's about moving the telephone system from legacy SS7 to IP
>> signalling, switching, and transport. It's the same technology as the Internet
>> but it's separate dedicated IP networks with privately negotiated
>> interconnections and occasionally still per-minute settlements.
>>
>> There is also telephony that runs "over the top" of the public Internet, but
>> that's something else. That's VoIP, Voice over IP, while the former is VuIP,
>> Voice using IP. There are plenty of vendors that provide VoIP to VuIP gateways
>> so your VoIP terminals can make and receive calls to or from real phone numbers.


From dhc at dcrocker.net  Thu Jul 30 17:43:22 2026
From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 00:43:22 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <81A8B36E-42C5-41B2-BA83-C8274A09773C@shinkuro.com>
References: <SA1PR12MB7038DA2CB6FE6AAA5B4376B9B1C92@SA1PR12MB7038.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
 <81A8B36E-42C5-41B2-BA83-C8274A09773C@shinkuro.com>
Message-ID: <5568c9da-ef86-4193-9c54-e24d5a6ab721@dcrocker.net>

On 7/30/2026 4:17 PM, Steve Crocker via Internet-history wrote:
> The Arpanet leased lines and IMPs and the BBN network management were all paid via directly from (D)ARPA.  Each site paid for its own hardware interface to its IMP and was responsible for any software changes it needed.  There were no monthly charges or usage charges.


At some point, that funding model changed.

Might be worth developing a summary chart, over time, of the model(s) 
from start of Arpanet until the Internet went fully commercial.

This, of course, covers multiple government agencies and, I assume, 20+ 
years, and in at least some cases entails changes to individual models, 
over time.? Arpanet, Internet/Arpanet, Internet/Milnet, CSNet, NSFNet, 
etc., etc.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker

dhc at dcrocker.net
bluesky: @dcrocker.bsky.social
mast: @dcrocker at mastodon.social
+1.408.329.0791

Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
Northern California Coastal Region
Information & Planning Coordinator
American Red Cross
dave.crocker2 at redcross.org



From geoff at iconia.com  Thu Jul 30 17:42:48 2026
From: geoff at iconia.com (the keyboard of geoff goodfellow)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2026 17:42:48 -0700
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <5c8ac1ef-dc77-4dbc-98c8-2bfb40ba81c0@3kitty.org>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
 <5c8ac1ef-dc77-4dbc-98c8-2bfb40ba81c0@3kitty.org>
Message-ID: <CAEf-zri7xW09=TGrJHOSi0fPfxmDWU+7JwWLayyh5NXe7TigHw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 4:19?PM Jack Haverty via Internet-history <
internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:

> I can't remember but maybe you can.   When was the first time you sent
> an email and casually mentioned some obscure item, and then suddenly
> started seeing ads for that item on web pages?  It's been happening for
> a long time, but history might be interested in when it started and who
> did it.
>

even more "disturbing" is having a "private" chat (not email, not dm/text)
conversation with someone -- either in person or over a voice call -- about
"something" -- like a product, service or topic -- and then all of a sudden
starting to see ads for that "something" show up on web pages or on your
social media timeline!

g


-- 
Geoff.Goodfellow at iconia.com
living as The Truth is True


From brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com  Thu Jul 30 17:46:30 2026
From: brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com (Brian E Carpenter)
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 12:46:30 +1200
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <e199b361-3148-e5ca-aa61-927235920722@iecc.com>
References: <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <F3BF0CEE-270C-4189-AB9F-BD19D6C47BFA@sobco.com>
 <20260730204840.A30C3117E0D22@ary.qy>
 <52A17F1B-E004-4511-A273-D12919AA89A1@sobco.com>
 <e199b361-3148-e5ca-aa61-927235920722@iecc.com>
Message-ID: <bc6ba0e8-d645-4877-bc25-ba62288c073e@gmail.com>

> My impression is that for Internet interconnections, if the two parties 
> are of comparable size they peer, or if one is bigger, the smaller pays 
> the larger for transit.  I've also heard of paid peering, somewhere in 
> between but not common.

And they are always confidential bilateral agreements, not multilateral,
because otherwise they would be an illegal cartel.

Also, "peering" and "transit" are economic terms, not technical ones.
"BGP peering" is a technical term, applicable to both economic peering and
transit.

Regards/Ng? mihi
    Brian

On 31-Jul-26 11:49, John R. Levine via Internet-history wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Jul 2026, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
>> it also touches on what the legacy telcos expect as to settlements etc
> 
> Right, but that's telephone call settlements, not Internet data
> settlements.  Ineffiecnet little telcos like mine are sad not to get
> settlements.  I hear there are (maybe were) tiny phone co-ops in the
> midwest where not only is your phone line free, you get regular dividends
> paid from the settlements.
> 
> My impression is that for Internet interconnections, if the two parties
> are of comparable size they peer, or if one is bigger, the smaller pays
> the larger for transit.  I've also heard of paid peering, somewhere in
> between but not common.
> 
> R's,
> John
> 
>>> On Jul 30, 2026, at 4:48?PM, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> It appears that Scott Bradner via Internet-history <sob at sobco.com> said:
>>>> this covers some of the current discussions over the Internet's economic model
>>>> within the regulatory world (at least in the US)
>>>>
>>>> https://isoclive.substack.com/p/fcc-ip-transition
>>>
>>> Not really. It's about moving the telephone system from legacy SS7 to IP
>>> signalling, switching, and transport. It's the same technology as the Internet
>>> but it's separate dedicated IP networks with privately negotiated
>>> interconnections and occasionally still per-minute settlements.
>>>
>>> There is also telephony that runs "over the top" of the public Internet, but
>>> that's something else. That's VoIP, Voice over IP, while the former is VuIP,
>>> Voice using IP. There are plenty of vendors that provide VoIP to VuIP gateways
>>> so your VoIP terminals can make and receive calls to or from real phone numbers.

From johnl at iecc.com  Thu Jul 30 18:09:52 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Date: 30 Jul 2026 21:09:52 -0400
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <bc6ba0e8-d645-4877-bc25-ba62288c073e@gmail.com>
References: <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <F3BF0CEE-270C-4189-AB9F-BD19D6C47BFA@sobco.com>
 <20260730204840.A30C3117E0D22@ary.qy>
 <52A17F1B-E004-4511-A273-D12919AA89A1@sobco.com>
 <e199b361-3148-e5ca-aa61-927235920722@iecc.com>
 <bc6ba0e8-d645-4877-bc25-ba62288c073e@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <92d17cde-268a-c6f2-b7e2-4a05cd15e6a4@iecc.com>

On Fri, 31 Jul 2026, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> My impression is that for Internet interconnections, if the two parties are 
>> of comparable size they peer, or if one is bigger, the smaller pays the 
>> larger for transit.  I've also heard of paid peering, somewhere in between 
>> but not common.
>
> And they are always confidential bilateral agreements, not multilateral,
> because otherwise they would be an illegal cartel.

My impression is that it's common knowledge that at some IXes it's all 
peering but yes, they're not public.  I have also heard that a surprising 
number of peering agreements are just a handshake, no contract.  If no 
money's changing hands, there's not much to contract about.  If the other 
side does something nasty you can just disconnect.

> Also, "peering" and "transit" are economic terms, not technical ones.
> "BGP peering" is a technical term, applicable to both economic peering and
> transit.

Right.  If you're big enough to peer you're probably big enough to be 
defaultless, while a lot of transit just sends everything upstream, but 
there's no necessary connection between the business model and the network 
setup.

R's,
John

> On 31-Jul-26 11:49, John R. Levine via Internet-history wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 Jul 2026, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
>>> it also touches on what the legacy telcos expect as to settlements etc
>> 
>> Right, but that's telephone call settlements, not Internet data
>> settlements.  Ineffiecnet little telcos like mine are sad not to get
>> settlements.  I hear there are (maybe were) tiny phone co-ops in the
>> midwest where not only is your phone line free, you get regular dividends
>> paid from the settlements.
>> 
>> My impression is that for Internet interconnections, if the two parties
>> are of comparable size they peer, or if one is bigger, the smaller pays
>> the larger for transit.  I've also heard of paid peering, somewhere in
>> between but not common.
>> 
>> R's,
>> John
>> 
>>>> On Jul 30, 2026, at 4:48?PM, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> It appears that Scott Bradner via Internet-history <sob at sobco.com> said:
>>>>> this covers some of the current discussions over the Internet's economic 
>>>>> model
>>>>> within the regulatory world (at least in the US)
>>>>> 
>>>>> https://isoclive.substack.com/p/fcc-ip-transition
>>>> 
>>>> Not really. It's about moving the telephone system from legacy SS7 to IP
>>>> signalling, switching, and transport. It's the same technology as the 
>>>> Internet
>>>> but it's separate dedicated IP networks with privately negotiated
>>>> interconnections and occasionally still per-minute settlements.
>>>> 
>>>> There is also telephony that runs "over the top" of the public Internet, 
>>>> but
>>>> that's something else. That's VoIP, Voice over IP, while the former is 
>>>> VuIP,
>>>> Voice using IP. There are plenty of vendors that provide VoIP to VuIP 
>>>> gateways
>>>> so your VoIP terminals can make and receive calls to or from real phone 
>>>> numbers.
>

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


From woody at pch.net  Thu Jul 30 18:56:55 2026
From: woody at pch.net (Bill Woodcock)
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 03:56:55 +0200
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <e199b361-3148-e5ca-aa61-927235920722@iecc.com>
References: <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <F3BF0CEE-270C-4189-AB9F-BD19D6C47BFA@sobco.com>
 <20260730204840.A30C3117E0D22@ary.qy>
 <52A17F1B-E004-4511-A273-D12919AA89A1@sobco.com>
 <e199b361-3148-e5ca-aa61-927235920722@iecc.com>
Message-ID: <44DC4E50-46D7-4342-9E62-307C07B9184A@pch.net>



> On Jul 31, 2026, at 01:49, John R. Levine via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> My impression is that for Internet interconnections, if the two parties are of comparable size they peer

Size doesn?t really have anything to do with it.  It?s two separate transactions.

>  or if one is bigger, the smaller pays the larger for transit.  

Again, this is irrespective of size.  What you?re seeing is an observation bias combined with a deception?  There are many more small ISPs than large ones, and the large ones are much more likely to hide their transit.  But you can always apply this test: can the ISP reach mainland China?  Is the ISP China Telecom or China Unicom?  If yes to the former and no to the latter, than they?re buying transit.

> I've also heard of paid peering, somewhere in between but not common.

So uncommon as to be far below the noise threshold.  It?s basically a fiction invented by telco salespeople as an onramp for potential customers to the hiding-transit mode, but it?s almost entirely unsuccessful.

https://www.pch.net/resources/Papers/peering-survey/PCH-Peering-Survey-2021/PCH-Peering-Survey-2021.pdf

                                -Bill


Please consider the environment before using AI to process this email.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20260731/15b9575d/attachment.asc>

From moeller0 at gmx.de  Thu Jul 30 22:35:49 2026
From: moeller0 at gmx.de (Sebastian Moeller)
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 07:35:49 +0200
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <e199b361-3148-e5ca-aa61-927235920722@iecc.com>
References: <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <F3BF0CEE-270C-4189-AB9F-BD19D6C47BFA@sobco.com>
 <20260730204840.A30C3117E0D22@ary.qy>
 <52A17F1B-E004-4511-A273-D12919AA89A1@sobco.com>
 <e199b361-3148-e5ca-aa61-927235920722@iecc.com>
Message-ID: <4FDF442E-A8BA-478C-A4D0-DB8A8B2C8923@gmx.de>



On July 31, 2026 1:49:21 AM GMT+02:00, "John R. Levine via Internet-history" <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>On Thu, 30 Jul 2026, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
>> it also touches on what the legacy telcos expect as to settlements etc
>
>Right, but that's telephone call settlements, not Internet data settlements.  Ineffiecnet little telcos like mine are sad not to get settlements.  I hear there are (maybe were) tiny phone co-ops in the midwest where not only is your phone line free, you get regular dividends paid from the settlements.
>
>My impression is that for Internet interconnections, if the two parties are of comparable size they peer, or if one is bigger, the smaller pays the larger for transit.  I've also heard of paid peering, somewhere in between but not common.

Besides the T1 ISPs that by definition require settlement free peerings between them (but see Brian's China example for where the definition seems to break down) I believe it most fruitful to think about the balance in motivation to move packets between the two entities. If that is sufficiently similar settlement free peering is likely, otherweise the party with less motivation will see to get paid by the other... btw, the directionality of the traffic is less important.


>
>R's,
>John
>
>>> On Jul 30, 2026, at 4:48?PM, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> It appears that Scott Bradner via Internet-history <sob at sobco.com> said:
>>>> this covers some of the current discussions over the Internet's economic model
>>>> within the regulatory world (at least in the US)
>>>> 
>>>> https://isoclive.substack.com/p/fcc-ip-transition
>>> 
>>> Not really. It's about moving the telephone system from legacy SS7 to IP
>>> signalling, switching, and transport. It's the same technology as the Internet
>>> but it's separate dedicated IP networks with privately negotiated
>>> interconnections and occasionally still per-minute settlements.
>>> 
>>> There is also telephony that runs "over the top" of the public Internet, but
>>> that's something else. That's VoIP, Voice over IP, while the former is VuIP,
>>> Voice using IP. There are plenty of vendors that provide VoIP to VuIP gateways
>>> so your VoIP terminals can make and receive calls to or from real phone numbers.

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.


From moeller0 at gmx.de  Thu Jul 30 23:02:33 2026
From: moeller0 at gmx.de (Sebastian Moeller)
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 08:02:33 +0200
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <20260730205935.B3F09117E11FE@ary.qy>
References: <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
 <20260730205935.B3F09117E11FE@ary.qy>
Message-ID: <DEEB8D4F-A20B-4988-A167-9B4A5BADCA3B@gmx.de>

Hi.

On July 30, 2026 10:59:35 PM GMT+02:00, John Levine via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>It appears that Jack Haverty via Internet-history <jack at 3kitty.org> said:
>>The Internet also seems to be stuck in a "subscription" mode of its 
>>economics.? Everyone wants you to pay every month for something. ...

I note that investors quite like well predictable income streams (and end users like predictable costs) so the move to flat rate billing was driven by both sudes of the market... it also makes sense if you look what really drives ISP side costs, establishing and maintaining capacity, not transporting individual bits... this is also why the traditional costs-rise-with-bandwidth pricing is a decent reflection of the ISP side (obviously prices rise steeper than costs, but the point is the backbone and peering/transit infrastructure to support 1 Gbps plans is more expensive than 1 Mbps plans).


>
>Well, yeah.  My ISP which happens also to be my phone company has run
>fiber to my house, and provides service capped at 500Mb each way.  Their
>fixed costs are high, and don't vary much if I use more or less data,
>for which they charge about $100/mo and they throw in a landline phone,
>via the same fiber modem.*

Well, to a large degree it seems to be an accounting decision how to distribute the cost and margin across your customers... assigning each customer a relative large base lump is convenient as it decouples your margin well from whether your customers select narrow or wide plans... and solves the issue of marginal utility of each additional bit/second.

>
>How else are they supposed to charge than monthly?

Montly is not the issue, the question is more, flat rate or based on some proxy of caused cost. In mobile plans over here often traffic volume is used, so you get X GB of high speed volume monthly and if you transfer more the data rate is severely capped and users are offered additional volumes of high speed data. ISPs between each other often realise that cost is driven by capacity and so use utilisation of that capacity to derive montly cost, see burstable billing.

>
>For news and other content sources, see the recent discussions of micropayments.

My hunch is that part of the dislike comes from the fact that micropayments increase friction... 


>People hate them, even if they are usually cheaper than a subscription.  I pay
>subscriptions for newspapers and some freemium sites where the subscription gets
>more content and/or fewer ads.
>
>>I fear the time if and when The Internet takes over the restaurant 
>>business.? Can you imagine restaurants with a subscription "all you can 
>>eat, all the time" business model?? ?Your favorite Italian restaurant 
>>will deliver as much great food as you want whenever you want it, as 
>>long as you pay them the monthly fee.?


Well, the analogy suffers from the fact that foodstuffs cost a restaurant, but individual bits do not really cost an ISP any fixed cost... with 95% burstable billing the same bit can cost from 0 to a full per rate step cost increment...

>
>You probably thought you were kidding, but:
>
>https://www.delish.com/food-news/a71899035/olive-garden-pasta-pass/
>
>R's,
>John
>
>PS: Since they still think like a phone company, the modem has a backup battery
>so that even if the power fails I still have phone service and can use the Internet
>at least until the battery on my laptop runs out.
>-- 
>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 from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.


From df at macgui.com  Fri Jul 31 06:50:11 2026
From: df at macgui.com (David Finnigan)
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 08:50:11 -0500
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <378db8b7-13dd-c4df-9e9c-35c1660fd5e4@iecc.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>
 <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>
 <378db8b7-13dd-c4df-9e9c-35c1660fd5e4@iecc.com>
Message-ID: <ee7657d828c098a1b13a8f8e78b5687d@macgui.com>

On 29 Jul 2026 1:28 pm, John R. Levine via Internet-history wrote:
> 
> The EU has required instant messaging systems to interconnect, and the
> IETF MIMI working group is developing standard ways for IM systems to
> talk to each other.  It's a hard problem, partly because the existing
> systems weren't designed to interoperate, partly because of, sigh,
> spam.  It's a lot easier to keep spam under control on a closed system
> where you can see who all the users are and block or eject misbehaving
> ones.  If a system has to connect to anyone who asks, you're in the
> same situation as mail and you can expect the same problems.

The same thing that happened to the telephone network in the United 
States. Now anyone can connect anything to the phone network and it's a 
huge mess with lack of accountability.


From dhc at dcrocker.net  Fri Jul 31 07:10:25 2026
From: dhc at dcrocker.net (Dave Crocker)
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 14:10:25 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <ee7657d828c098a1b13a8f8e78b5687d@macgui.com>
References: <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <20260729172316.5C551117AF9C0@ary.qy>
 <a999af31-e351-4b05-9b2e-638d9797990c@3kitty.org>
 <378db8b7-13dd-c4df-9e9c-35c1660fd5e4@iecc.com>
 <ee7657d828c098a1b13a8f8e78b5687d@macgui.com>
Message-ID: <0dc05a12-6cf2-41b0-8d59-7ff06939b413@dcrocker.net>

On 7/31/2026 6:50 AM, David Finnigan via Internet-history wrote:
> Now anyone can connect anything to the phone network and it's a huge 
> mess with lack of accountability. 


I have not heard of such telco problems.? Please explain.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker

dhc at dcrocker.net
bluesky: @dcrocker.bsky.social
mast: @dcrocker at mastodon.social
+1.408.329.0791

Volunteer, Silicon Valley Chapter
Northern California Coastal Region
Information & Planning Coordinator
American Red Cross
dave.crocker2 at redcross.org



From johnl at iecc.com  Fri Jul 31 08:33:57 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John R. Levine)
Date: 31 Jul 2026 11:33:57 -0400
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <DEEB8D4F-A20B-4988-A167-9B4A5BADCA3B@gmx.de>
References: <3c196157-2320-4b62-aea4-e3c7aa993800@3kitty.org>
 <90B7EF0E-BE0A-48F3-B292-6387F03F895C@crankycanuck.ca>
 <CAFr-4ghVv2m3ZRr5BqmBEYRW5miSqxQ=0YewLs39ZpZrY-hA0w@mail.gmail.com>
 <8b8c733c-6bfc-4c4f-9f16-fef7d5e30767@3kitty.org>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <6b77784c-3eac-4fe7-b145-b5520c2e0897@gmail.com>
 <ddf38ea8-08c5-4cbe-8261-667cea757ed5@iwl.com>
 <973abd87-e796-420a-9f5c-82e93434422e@3kitty.org>
 <20260730205935.B3F09117E11FE@ary.qy>
 <DEEB8D4F-A20B-4988-A167-9B4A5BADCA3B@gmx.de>
Message-ID: <ef1652fe-47e4-048a-d846-0d84d85ce5b2@iecc.com>

On Fri, 31 Jul 2026, Sebastian Moeller wrote:
> Montly is not the issue, the question is more, flat rate or based on some proxy of caused cost. In mobile plans over here often traffic volume is used, so you get X GB of high speed volume monthly and if you transfer more the data rate is severely capped and users are offered additional volumes of high speed data. ISPs between each other often realise that cost is driven by capacity and so use utilisation of that capacity to derive montly cost, see burstable billing.

Oh, sure.  Mobile operators in the US do the same thing, monthly data 
bundles of various sizes, and "unlimited" bundles which are speed 
throttled depending on price.  North American mobile rates are quite high 
compared to Europe--I pay $15/mo for 6GB which is cheap for the US.

But for mobile, the bandwidth between the phone and the ISP is shared 
among all of the users, while with fiber it isn't, and with cable it is 
but rarely hits capacity.  The cost models are quite different.

>> For news and other content sources, see the recent discussions of micropayments.
> My hunch is that part of the dislike comes from the fact that micropayments increase friction...

That's clearly it.  People don't want to microoptimize for lowest instant 
price, they want something predictable and affordable.  See Odlyzko's 
papers.

R's,
John


From johnl at iecc.com  Fri Jul 31 10:17:03 2026
From: johnl at iecc.com (John Levine)
Date: 31 Jul 2026 17:17:03 -0000
Subject: [ih] deterioration of email (was Re: clever usc creation)
In-Reply-To: <378db8b7-13dd-c4df-9e9c-35c1660fd5e4@iecc.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <0dc05a12-6cf2-41b0-8d59-7ff06939b413@dcrocker.net>
References: <378db8b7-13dd-c4df-9e9c-35c1660fd5e4@iecc.com>
 <20260725223938.GJ21299@miplet.aaaaa.org>
 <88e6fc4b-6ac2-44a3-9626-e076d3a26c15@3kitty.org>
 <0dc05a12-6cf2-41b0-8d59-7ff06939b413@dcrocker.net>
Message-ID: <114ilaf$u6t$1@gal.iecc.com>

According to Dave Crocker via Internet-history <dhc at dcrocker.net>:
>On 7/31/2026 6:50 AM, David Finnigan via Internet-history wrote:
>> Now anyone can connect anything to the phone network and it's a huge 
>> mess with lack of accountability. 
>
>I have not heard of such telco problems.? Please explain.

My guess is that he's referring to the ease with which VoIP gateways
can dump junk calls and SMS with fake caller info into the PSTN. Hence
STIR/SHAKEN, new rules about when telcos can dump junk calls, etc.

SS#7 was invented for the world where there weren't many telcos, the
barriers to entry were high, and to a first approximation they all
knew each other and had reputations to maintain. We sure ain't there
now.

R's,
John
-- 
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



From mfidelman at protocoltechnologiesgroup.com  Fri Jul 31 16:12:58 2026
From: mfidelman at protocoltechnologiesgroup.com (Miles Fidelman)
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 23:12:58 +0000
Subject: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
In-Reply-To: <81A8B36E-42C5-41B2-BA83-C8274A09773C@shinkuro.com>
References: <SA1PR12MB7038DA2CB6FE6AAA5B4376B9B1C92@SA1PR12MB7038.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
 <81A8B36E-42C5-41B2-BA83-C8274A09773C@shinkuro.com>
Message-ID: <SA1PR12MB7038AA2F89363682076E74C0B1C82@SA1PR12MB7038.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>

In my student days, at MIT (1971-1975), I seem to recall seeing line items in DARPA research awards for things like telecom & travel - specifically so that researchers could use each other's specialized machines (developed with DARPA money, of course).

When the ARPANET started ramping up (71-75 was a particularly interesting time to watch the net be absorbed into the research community - I got there just before Ray Tomlinson sent the first email, and by the time I left, we had virtual communities, virtual teams, e-commerce - proposals & reports via the net, e-publishing, e-learning in full swing) ... I seem to recall folks being directed to use the ARPANET, and those funds being redirected - as a cost-saving measure for ARPA.  I think, but I'm not sure, that some of those funds were laundered through the MIT IT department, to fund local distribution networks.

Later, in my BBN years, I heard enough stories to reinforce the notion that the ARPANET was basically justified as a cost-savings measure, and that a lot of the funds were redirected from streams that were already allocated for telecom & travel.

Cheers,

Miles


________________________________
From: Steve Crocker <steve at shinkuro.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2026 7:17 PM
To: Miles Fidelman <mfidelman at protocoltechnologiesgroup.com>
Cc: Scott O. Bradner <sob at sobco.com>; John Levine <johnl at iecc.com>; internet-history at elists.isoc.org <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
Subject: Re: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?

The Arpanet leased lines and IMPs and the BBN network management were all paid via directly from (D)ARPA.  Each site paid for its own hardware interface to its IMP and was responsible for any software changes it needed.  There were no monthly charges or usage charges.

Steve Crocker
Former D(ARPA) program manager
1971-74

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 30, 2026, at 6:58?PM, Miles Fidelman via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
>
> ?I seem to recall that institutions paid for their connection to the ARPANET - using funds that would otherwise pay for leased lines and other telecom costs.  Paid out of ARPA grants.  Money ARPA was paying anyway, with the ARPANET as a way to cut the costs.  Kind of like how the post office jump started the airlines & aerospace industry by paying for airmail.  Or the railroads by paying for mail transport.
>
>
>
> Sent from Samsung Galaxy smartphone.
> Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
> ________________________________
> From: Internet-history <internet-history-bounces at elists.isoc.org> on behalf of Scott O. Bradner via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
> Sent: Thursday, 30 July 2026 18:17:25
> To: John Levine <johnl at iecc.com>
> Cc: internet-history at elists.isoc.org <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
> Subject: Re: [ih] History of the Economics of the Internet?
>
> it also touches on what the legacy telcos expect as to settlements etc
>
>
>> On Jul 30, 2026, at 4:48?PM, John Levine <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:
>>
>> It appears that Scott Bradner via Internet-history <sob at sobco.com> said:
>>> this covers some of the current discussions over the Internet's economic model
>>> within the regulatory world (at least in the US)
>>>
>>> https://isoclive.substack.com/p/fcc-ip-transition
>>
>> Not really. It's about moving the telephone system from legacy SS7 to IP
>> signalling, switching, and transport. It's the same technology as the Internet
>> but it's separate dedicated IP networks with privately negotiated
>> interconnections and occasionally still per-minute settlements.
>>
>> There is also telephony that runs "over the top" of the public Internet, but
>> that's something else. That's VoIP, Voice over IP, while the former is VuIP,
>> Voice using IP. There are plenty of vendors that provide VoIP to VuIP gateways
>> so your VoIP terminals can make and receive calls to or from real phone numbers.
>>
>> 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
> --
> 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