[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ih] NCP and TCP implementations
The only better error message I ever saw was from the TIPSERV. (To provide a bit more of a command line interface, TIPs could be configured to connect directly to TIPSERV on a BBN Tenex, which then provided the command interpreter.)
The only error message it emitted was:
(not can?t, won?t) ;-)
> On Mar 10, 2020, at 16:48, Dave Crocker via Internet-history <internet-history at elists.isoc.org> wrote:
> On 3/10/2020 11:53 AM, Bernie Cosell via Internet-history wrote:
>>> Am I right in inferring that the key driver behind the design decision
>>> was cost rather than elegance?
>> no. cost wasn't the issue. in fact elegance was.
> My subjective view, at the time, was the the existence of a single integrated device for terminal access was extremely helpful in growing the user population of the early Arpanet. Juggling two devices -- IMP and a separate host -- for sites needing access but not really having a machine or operator cycles to spare, would have been a significant barrier to entry.
> Small tidbit:
> As part of my job doing user support at the UCLA CS site, I got tasked with helping Einar Stefferud get started using access. He didn't access through our system but had other arrangements; I just had to help.
> One day he calls me up and says that he can't send email. He was using Tenex. I don't remember whether we were yet into the RD/BananaRD/MSG world yet, but in any case, sending was done with Sndmsg.
> So I ask him to describe the problem and he says he types the destination address and the system responded with "Bad".
> I told him he needed to enter at-sign (@) twice. I felt quite proud of realizing the TIP was intercepting the the at-sign. As I recall, the TIP was the only system on the net that gave 'bad' as an error message...
> Dave Crocker
> Brandenburg InternetWorking
> Internet-history mailing list
> Internet-history at elists.isoc.org