[ih] How long did it take?

[John Day]

Yes, they tried to do everything except packet switching.

> On Sep 17, 2026, at 01:40, Miles Fidelman via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
> As I recall, all the while the Bells were selling ISDN based packet services, they were selling frame relay services in parallel.  Frame relay actually worked and made sense.
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Internet-history <internet-history-bounces at elists.isoc.org> on behalf of the keyboard of geoff goodfellow via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2026 8:06:50 PM
> To: John Day <jeanjour at comcast.net>
> Cc: Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org>
> Subject: Re: [ih] How long did it take?
> 
> Grok sez:
> 
> AT&T operated X.25 packet-switched networks in the 1980s.
> 
> The main one was ACCUNET Packet Service, a public data network that AT&T
> launched as a regulated basic service. The FCC tariff took effect 18 August
> 1984. By 1986 it had 99 service points in the U.S. Subscriber interfaces
> followed CCITT X.25 (1980 recommendation, with a later move toward the 1984
> version). It offered switched virtual calls and permanent virtual circuits
> over access lines at 4.8, 9.6, and 56 kbps (via Dataphone Digital Service
> or analog private lines). Nodes were interconnected with 56 kbps DDS
> facilities.
> 
> AT&T also ran a separate value-added X.25 service called Net 1000 (AIS*Net
> 1000) through its unregulated subsidiary (American Bell / AT&T Information
> Systems). That offering added protocol conversion, processing, and storage
> on top of an underlying X.25 packet network supplied by the regulated side
> of AT&T. It was withdrawn in 1986 after large losses.
> 
> After the 1984 breakup, the long-distance AT&T entity continued ACCUNET
> Packet Service while the Regional Bell Operating Companies offered their
> own intra-LATA X.25 packet services (some of those RBOCs later became part
> of today’s AT&T). Bell Labs also did packet-switching research and built
> systems such as LADT that used X.25 internally.
> 
> AT&T was late to commercial packet switching compared with Telenet and
> Tymnet, but it did own and operate X.25 networks once it entered the market.
> 
> ➔➔https://x.com/i/grok?conversation=2100374688069489036
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 16, 2026 at 4:07 PM John Day via Internet-history <
> internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> 
>> In the 60s, Baran backed out of an offer from AT&T to build a packet
>> switched network because he sensed wisely they didn’t believe in it and
>> would not put the effort into to make it real.
>> 
>> We also all know the story from the ARPANET demo at ICCC72 when Bob
>> Metcalfe was demoing the TIP to several AT&T attendees. The TIP crashed and
>> re-booted from its neighbors. Bob thought this was a great aspect of the
>> system. The AT&T guys thought it showed the ARPANET was a joke and not
>> serious.
>> 
>> So when did AT&T start to take packet switching seriously?
>> 
>> Take care,
>> 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
>> 
>> 
> 
> --
> 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
> 
> -- 
> 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