[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[ih] XEROX/PUP and Commercialization (was Re: FYI - Gordon Crovitz/WSJ on "Who Really Invented the Internet?")



Bill et al.,
   Just a short note apropos both (a) the unfortunate government drive 
to OSI of the 1980s and (b) Milo's distinctive sense of humor.

   At a late-1980s (or so) meeting of engineers from agency networks and 
some NSFnet regional folks, we were obliged to go around the table, 
reporting on how our networks were responding to the mandate to support 
the (at least connectionless) OSI protocols.
   People were routinely making polite and overly optimistic statements 
about how progress was being made, until it was Milo's turn to report 
for NASA.
   "NASA", said Milo with a mostly straight face, "is going to OSI 
<pause>, and to Mars, <pause> and to Pluto.  But not necessarily in that 
order."
   From that moment, the meeting engaged in a greater degree of truth 
telling, and I personally reckon the doom of OSI from that moment.

	-- Guy

On 7/30/12 8:23 AM, Bill Ricker wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc2 at dcrocker.net
> <mailto:dhc2 at dcrocker.net>> wrote:
>
>     In any event, your extended list of government proactive efforts for
>     TCP/IP usage are well-taken.
>
>     But to riff off of a phrase that Marshall Rose coined -- with enough
>     thrust, pigs /can/ fly -- some of the alternatives would have
>     required planetary levels of thrust.
>
>
>
> Most on the list will remember, but so far only a side reference to
> AutoDIN-II has acknowledged that US Government support for further
> development of TCP/IP was once not a forgone conclusion.  Shortly after
> the TCP/IP Flagday, much of the US Government was actively hostile to
> TCP/IP and proactively supporting OSI.
>
> The ISO OSI "ISORM" was mandated for civil and military procurements,
> much as ADA was for military. I've never been clear on whether this was
> a DOD peace treaty with NBS/NIST, or an attempt to bring NATO on-board
> for air-land-battle interop without offending them with US-centric
> standards, or undue influence from vendors who had greater sway in
> ANSI/ISO commitees than in NWG's where vendor advantage was not a proper
> concern. Probably an unholy combination. Some latterday supporters of
> TCP/IP were in the day actively selling the on-paper elegant, in
> practice baroque or not yet implemented, vendor-sponsored OSI style,
> calculating how much thrust their pig would require.
>
> (I was a couple doors down from Mike Padlipsky in the mid-80's -- I was
> on the periphery of the ADA vs MLS and Kernel vs Crypto battles -- so
> had a ring-side seat as one of Mike's confidants. I am the party guilty
> of referring his Tea Bag Papers to the PH Field-Editor, which Mike then
> expanded into /The Elements of Networking Style/. Hence my life sentence
> as Literary Heir.)
>
> Cheers (as Mike taught us to say),
>
> Bill Ricker
> custodian of the Padlipsky Archive
> @n1vux bill.n1vux at gmail.com <mailto:bill.n1vux at gmail.com>