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

[ih] The history of "This" network?

On 2/12/2019 3:58 PM, Michael Greenwald wrote:
> The Arpanet Protocol Handbook was available in every office I sat in
> at MIT

I long-ago lost my copy of that.  Plus it came a bit late4

The Computer History Museum shows two versions in its archive -- 1976 
and 1978 -- but apparently neither has been digitized. sigh.

>    so the relevant NICs and RFCs seemed equally

I'm not sure what you mean by NICs as you are using the term.  I'm used 
to its meaning Network Information Center, which is a group operation, 
not a document series.  My bad memory?

> available. So I didn't feel that it not existing in an RFC form was a
> lack in any way. NIC vs. RFC didn't make much difference to me,

 From 1969, work produced by that community got circulated by RFC.  It 
was easy and, I thought, automatic.

> That said, although NCP was easily available, I believe the 1822

Well, yeah, the BBN specs were essentially independent of documents 
produced by the 'network working group'.

> spec (Host-Imp protocol) was *not* as easily available (it was also a
> much bigger specification [if I am remembering correctly] than any
> other protocol I came across back then --- maybe that's the reason it
> wasn't included). The Host-Host protocol was, I think, in the

NCP and Host-Host were the same thing.  (Well, NCP referred to the 

Uh oh.  facepalm.  That's why 'NCP' doesn't up in the early RFCs.

    HOST-HOST Communication Protocol in the ARPA Network*

> Totally a guess here: I don't think anything surprising or
> interesting occurred with this. I think the NICs were just older and
> more established than the RFCs, and because they were older and not
> directly relevant to the IP/TCP effort

Older than 1969?

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking