I don't remember how Kipp did it. It would have been very V7 oriented and using the FS and signals I suspect. I remember is was not very sexy and one of things sockets allowed was completely rethink. That was the bull session I was referring too. As for the security issue, sure - we would not have considered that. Again we were grad students and basically friendly so actions like that would have been considered uncool. As I have pointed out elsewhere when a connection to the ARPAnet cost 250K/yr per host and a host cost $1-4M, the concepts of security and us all being in it together—a friendly community, as it were—had different behaviors when a host is is $10-30 micro and wireless Interconnect can slimed at Starbucks for free. ᐧ On Sat, Dec 14, 2024 at 11:01 AM Dan Cross wrote: > On Sat, Dec 14, 2024 at 10:41 AM Clem Cole wrote: > > I was thinking about this some more. > > > > IIRC: Peter and I sketched out the protocol for the sockets version on a > whiteboard in our office one night after a beer and pizza run. Rick > Spicklemeir, Tom Quarles, and Jim Kleckner also participated in those bull > sessions. I started writing the program soon after that and had it working > to a point in a couple of hours. I don't remember the issues, but a couple > of them were when I left for the USENIX conference later that week. When I > got back Peter had finished it and put it into RCS. The key is that the > coding was primarily Peter and myself, but Rick, TQ, and Jim all had > contributed in some manner, too, > > > > Although the famous bug of using a vax integer, you can squarely blame > me — and as I said, having worked on networking for several years before my > time at UCB, I should have known better. But did not even think about it. > I failed Henry's ten programming commandments and concluded that the world > was a Vax. Mei culpa. > > ᐧ > > Thanks, Clem, these are very interesting notes. > > The protocol had some interesting aspects to it; since the ctl address > was embedded in the message sent to the distant end, a trick of some > locals when I was younger was to put fake data in the request. The > effect would be that one would get a request to talk from user1@host1, > but actually be talking to user2@host2. This could either be very > funny or very uncool. > > I'm curious how the original worked, which I sort of gather was before > sockets? How did the two users rendezvous? > > - Dan C. >