[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Dave Horsfall]

The Internet (spelled with a capital "I", please, as it is a proper noun) 
was born in 1969, when RFC-1 got published; it described the IMP and 
ARPAnet.

As I said at a club lecture once, there are many internets, but only one 
Internet.

-- 
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Warren Toomey]

On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 02:48:04PM +1000, Dave Horsfall wrote:
> The Internet (spelled with a capital "I", please, as it is a proper noun) 
> was born in 1969, when RFC-1 got published; it described the IMP and 
> ARPAnet.

https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1 7 April 1969
	Warren

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Lars Brinkhoff]

Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> writes:
> The Internet (spelled with a capital "I", please, as it is a proper
> noun) was born in 1969, when RFC-1 got published; it described the IMP
> and ARPAnet.

Actual data transmissions were first made on October 29 later that year.
If my two-minute research checks out.

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

On Friday,  7 April 2017 at  7:13:36 +0200, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:
> Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> writes:
>> The Internet (spelled with a capital "I", please, as it is a proper
>> noun) was born in 1969, when RFC-1 got published; it described the IMP
>> and ARPAnet.
>
> Actual data transmissions were first made on October 29 later that year.
> If my two-minute research checks out.

Yes, this was my date, too, though I call it 30 October (UTC).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet#ARPANET

Greg
--
Sent from my desktop computer.
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
This message is digitally signed.  If your Microsoft mail program
reports problems, please read http://lemis.com/broken-MUA
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 163 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20170407/30a8eab8/attachment.sig>

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Nemo]

On 7 April 2017 at 00:48, Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:
> The Internet (spelled with a capital "I", please, as it is a proper noun)
> was born in 1969, when RFC-1 got published; it described the IMP and
> ARPAnet.
>
> As I said at a club lecture once, there are many internets, but only one
> Internet.

From the OED entry of Internet, n. (with a capital I):
"Originally (in form internet): a computer network consisting of or
connecting a number of smaller networks, such as two or more local
area networks connected by a shared communications protocol; spec.
such a network (called ARPAnet) operated by the U.S. Defense
Department. In later use (usu. the Internet): the global computer
network (which evolved out of ARPAnet) providing a variety of
information and communication facilities to its users, and consisting
of a loose confederation of interconnected networks which use
standardized communication protocols; (also) the information available
on this network."

I have seen -- and written it -- abbreviated as "the 'Net".  Is this
common about the globe?

N.

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Dave Horsfall]

On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:

> > Actual data transmissions were first made on October 29 later that 
> > year. If my two-minute research checks out.
> 
> Yes, this was my date, too, though I call it 30 October (UTC).
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet#ARPANET

This is a problem that I regularly face, when keeping a global calendar.

I'm in Australia (Sydney time), which is pretty much at the leading edge 
of the dateline, but most of America is close to the trailing edge, and 
therefore events can happen "yesterday".

So, which reference should I use?  My time, US time (for US events), or 
UTC?  I'm starting to lean towards the latter, but it's equally confusing; 
I'll have people saying that it happened yesterday, by their reference.

I dimly recall that the moon landings were on GMT (not the same as UTC),
for example.

-- 
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

On Saturday,  8 April 2017 at 15:13:42 +1000, Dave Horsfall wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>
>>> Actual data transmissions were first made on October 29 later that
>>> year. If my two-minute research checks out.
>>
>> Yes, this was my date, too, though I call it 30 October (UTC).
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet#ARPANET
>
> This is a problem that I regularly face, when keeping a global calendar.
>
> I'm in Australia (Sydney time), which is pretty much at the leading edge
> of the dateline, but most of America is close to the trailing edge, and
> therefore events can happen "yesterday".
>
> So, which reference should I use?  My time, US time (for US events), or
> UTC?

Clearly UTC, as the name implies.

Greg
--
Sent from my desktop computer.
Finger grog at lemis.com for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
This message is digitally signed.  If your Microsoft mail program
reports problems, please read http://lemis.com/broken-MUA
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 163 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20170409/bc2686d3/attachment-0001.sig>

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Jason Stevens]

Moving to Hong Kong has made this a major issue for me as well...  It can be strange sending stuff from the future and getting replies in the past, just as I then forget to phone people the day after for stuff so I have to slide my calendar+1 day.  It's a shame we don't have a real universal time

On April 8, 2017 1:13:42 PM GMT+08:00, Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:
>On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>
>> > Actual data transmissions were first made on October 29 later that 
>> > year. If my two-minute research checks out.
>> 
>> Yes, this was my date, too, though I call it 30 October (UTC).
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Internet#ARPANET
>
>This is a problem that I regularly face, when keeping a global
>calendar.
>
>I'm in Australia (Sydney time), which is pretty much at the leading
>edge 
>of the dateline, but most of America is close to the trailing edge, and
>
>therefore events can happen "yesterday".
>
>So, which reference should I use?  My time, US time (for US events), or
>
>UTC?  I'm starting to lean towards the latter, but it's equally
>confusing; 
>I'll have people saying that it happened yesterday, by their reference.
>
>I dimly recall that the moon landings were on GMT (not the same as
>UTC),
>for example.
>
>-- 
>Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will
>suffer."

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20170409/2d95dce1/attachment-0001.html>

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Dave Horsfall]

On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, Lars Brinkhoff wrote:

> > The Internet (spelled with a capital "I", please, as it is a proper 
> > noun) was born in 1969, when RFC-1 got published; it described the IMP 
> > and ARPAnet.
> 
> Actual data transmissions were first made on October 29 later that year. 
> If my two-minute research checks out.

Noted - thanks.

-- 
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Clem Cole]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1057 bytes --]

On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Noel Chiappa <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
wrote:

> ​...​
>  one can confidently say that even had NCP _not_
> been turned off, history would have proceeded much as it actually did,
> since
> all the machines not on the ARPANET would have wanted to be connected to
> the
> Internet.


​I agree - this is classic Metcalfe's law.   Because no new NCP sites were
being added, the Internet quickly became the more and more valuable.
 Which is exactly why IPv6 never flipped.    We succeeded in keeping the
old being more valuable than the new, so there was not real push.


I had hoped the backbone providers would offer a rate differential (i.e.
make it cheaper) to use IPv6 because it should have been easier for them.
I practice is not and none of them ever did to my knowledge.  So the
economics just there like it was between NCP and IPv4.

Clem
ᐧ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20180410/9334c064/attachment.html>

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Clem Cole]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 681 bytes --]

On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 11:37 AM, Noel Chiappa <jnc at mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
wrote:

>     > From: Clem Cole
>
>     > first of Jan 83 was the day the Arpanet was supposed to be turned off
>
> Err, NCP, not the ARPANet.

​Absolutely right.

​ Sorry about that.​



> The latter kept running for quite some time,
> serving as the Internet's wide-area backbone, and was only slowly turned
> off
> (IMP by IMP) in the late 80's, with the very last remnants finally being
> turned off in 1990.

​Indeed​


ᐧ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20180410/fabd3438/attachment.html>

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Noel Chiappa]

    > From: Clem Cole

    > first of Jan 83 was the day the Arpanet was supposed to be turned off

Err, NCP, not the ARPANet. The latter kept running for quite some time,
serving as the Internet's wide-area backbone, and was only slowly turned off
(IMP by IMP) in the late 80's, with the very last remnants finally being
turned off in 1990.

    > The truth is, it did not happen, there were a few exceptions granted for
    > some sites that were not quite ready (I've forgotten now).

A few, yes, but NCP was indeed turned off for most hosts on January 1, 1983.


    > From: "Erik E. Fair"

    > as of the advent of TCP/IP, all those Ethernet and Chaosnet connected
    > workstations became first class hosts on the Internet, which they
    > could not be before.

Huh? As I just pointed out, TCP/IP (and the Internet) was a going concern well
_before_ January 1, 1983 - and one can confidently say that even had NCP _not_
been turned off, history would have proceeded much as it actually did, since
all the machines not on the ARPANET would have wanted to be connected to the
Internet.

(Also, to be technical, I'm not sure if TCP/IP ever really ran on CHAOSNet
hardware - I know I did a spec for it, and the C Gateway implemented it, and
there was a Unix machine at EECS that tried to use it, but it was not a great
success. Workstations connected to the CHAOSNet as of that date - AFAIK, just
LISP Machines - could only get access to the Internet via service gateways,
since at that point they all only implemented the CHAOS protocols; Symbolics
did TCP/IP somewhat later, IIRC, although I don't know the exact date.)

	Noel

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Erik E. Fair]

Noel, I'll disagree for the simple reason that as of the advent of TCP/IP, all those Ethernet and Chaosnet connected workstations became first class hosts on the Internet, which they could not be before.

That was a very big deal.

	Erik Fair

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Noel Chiappa]

    > From: Clem Cole

    > Katie Hafner's: Where Wizards Stay Up Late: The Origins Of The Internet
    > ...
    > It's a great read

Yes, she did a great deal of careful research, and it's quite accurate.

It _is_ pointed toward a general readership, not a technical one, so it's not
necessarily the best _technical_ history (which she had the material at hand
to produce, had she wanted to - but did not). Still, very worthwhile.

	Noel

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Noel Chiappa]

    > From: Steve Nickolas

    > I thought the epoch of the Internet was January 1, 1983.

Turning off NCP was a significant step, but not that big a deal in terms of
its actual effects, really.

For those of us already on the Internet before that date (since as the number
of ARPANet ports was severely limited, for many non-ARPANet-connected machines
- which were almost all time-sharing systems, at that point in time, so lots
of actual users - there was a lot of value in an Internet connection, so there
were quite a few), it didn't produce any significant change - the universe of
machines we could talk to didn't change (since we could only talk to
ARPANet-connected machines with TCP), etc.

And for ARPANET-connected machines, there too, things didn't change much - the
services available (remote login, email, etc) remained the same - it was just
carried over TCP, not NCP.

I guess in some sense it marked 'coming of age' for TCP/IP, but I'd analogize
it to that, rather than a 'birth' date.

	Noel

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Kurt H Maier]

On Sun, Apr 08, 2018 at 08:06:50PM -0400, Clem Cole wrote:
> 
> That BTW: the difference between ARPAnet to IP and IPv4 to v6 switch.
>

The other difference is that IPv4 was a well-designed protocol, where   
IPv6 is a hodgepodge of harebrained pet projects.  Despite being tagged
version 6, it's the worst case of Second-System Effect I've ever seen in
my life.
        
Most sites I know of that have chosen to sit it out so far have done so
because it's a massive engineering lift with little discernable benefit;
it merely trades IPv4's problems for newer, experimental problems.
        
This is the same situation that keeps UNIX entrenched:  it's not
flawless, but we understand the flaws, and the core design is at least 
comprehensible.  
       
khm

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Clem Cole]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1096 bytes --]

Dave, first of Jan 83 was the day the Arpanet was supposed to be turned off
by then DDN who was running things and all sites were supposed to have
switched to the IP.   One of must have a copy of the DDN memo somewhere.

The truth is, it did not happen, there were a few exceptions granted for
some sites that were not quite ready (I've forgotten now).

That BTW: the difference between ARPAnet to IP and IPv4 to v6 switch.
 There was someone in charge, the US Gov - which was paying the bills, so
they could declare a red-letter day.  IMHO:  It really too bad, economic
got in the way of sanity so we still have v4.

Clem
ᐧ

On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 7:34 PM, Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 7 Apr 2018, Steve Nickolas wrote:
>
> I thought the epoch of the Internet was January 1, 1983.
>>
>
> Citation, please?
>
>
> --
> Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will
> suffer."
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20180408/ee147352/attachment.html>

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Dave Horsfall]

On Sat, 7 Apr 2018, Steve Nickolas wrote:

> I thought the epoch of the Internet was January 1, 1983.

Citation, please?

-- 
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Dave Horsfall]

On Sat, 7 Apr 2018, Noel Chiappa wrote:

> I have this vague memory that the Internet-History list decided that the 
> appropriate day was actually the day the format of the v4 headers was 
> set, i.e. 16 June, 1978. (See IEN-68, pg. 12, top.)

I'm happy to be corrected if we can reach a consensus; history is written 
by the victors, after all.

> Picking the date of RFC-1 seems a little odd. Why not the day the first 
> packet was send over a deployed IMP, or the day the RFP was sent out, or 
> the contract let? And the ARPANet was just one predecessor; one might 
> equally have picked a CYCLADES date...

I saw the reference on one of those history sites, I think.  And I already 
have the date of the first packet.  Again, updates to my list are always 
welcome; I'm not pronouncing them ex-cathedra or anything...

> I myself prefer the formulation 'there are many white houses, but only 
> one White House'! :-)

Yeah, well...

-- 
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Clem Cole]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1687 bytes --]

On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 12:54 AM, Rudi Blom <rudi.j.blom at gmail.com> wrote:

> Just had a look at RFC-1, my first look ever. First thing I noticed is
> the enormous amount of abbreviations one is assumed to be able to
> instantly place :-)
>
> So looking up IMP for instance the wiki page gives me this funny titbit
>
> "When Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy learned of BBN's
> accomplishment in signing this million-dollar agreement, he sent a
> telegram congratulating the company for being contracted to build the
> "Interfaith Message Processor"."
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interface_Message_Processor
>
​A small suggestion, instead of trying to piecemeal it together here; to
all if you have not yet read (but certainly to newer and maybe younger
readers of this list since I think this was late 1990s), please go find a
copy of Katie Hafner's: Where Wizards Stay Up Late: The Origins Of The
Internet <https://www.amazon.com/Where-Wizards-Stay-Up-Late/dp/0684832674> .
Many and more of these interesting facts can be found.

It's a great read and I can say, a large number of the parts I lived and
knew specifically about, pretty much follow the way I remembered it.  There
are things left out, and some other good stories not there [Dave Clark does
not get enough credit in my opinion or in the infamous milkshake spilled
into the CMU IMP].  But, the mail header wars are well handled.  And
certainly the road to the ARPAnet, then to the Internet itself is pretty
thoroughly examined.

Clem

ᐧ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20180407/d7223dee/attachment-0001.html>

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Clem Cole]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 714 bytes --]

On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 10:34 AM, Steve Nickolas <usotsuki at buric.co> wrote:
>
>
> I thought the epoch of the Internet was January 1, 1983.
>
​In the USA, we have an idea called adoption day, which is picked when
family of an adopted child celebrates their becoming part of the family,
which when the kids are young we point is in many ways is more powerful
than the birthday. because it says we picked you.

​So one might want to claim that 1983/01/01 is the Internet's 'Adoption
Day' and not really care much about the others.

Clem​
ᐧ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20180407/2d5c6147/attachment.html>

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Steve Nickolas]

On Sat, 7 Apr 2018, Noel Chiappa wrote:

>    > From: Dave Horsfall
>
>    > The Internet ... was born on this day in 1969, when RFC-1 got published
>
> I have this vague memory that the Internet-History list decided that the
> appropriate day was actually the day the format of the v4 headers was set,
> i.e. 16 June, 1978. (See IEN-68, pg. 12, top.)

I thought the epoch of the Internet was January 1, 1983.

-uso.

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Noel Chiappa]

    > From: Dave Horsfall

    > The Internet ... was born on this day in 1969, when RFC-1 got published

I have this vague memory that the Internet-History list decided that the
appropriate day was actually the day the format of the v4 headers was set,
i.e. 16 June, 1978. (See IEN-68, pg. 12, top.)

Picking the date of RFC-1 seems a little odd. Why not the day the first packet
was send over a deployed IMP, or the day the RFP was sent out, or the contract
let? And the ARPANet was just one predecessor; one might equally have picked a
CYCLADES date...

    > (spelled with a capital "I", please, as it is a proper noun) ... As I
    > said at a club lecture once, there are many internets, but only one
    > Internet.

I myself prefer the formulation 'there are many white houses, but only one
White House'! :-)

      Noel

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Rudi Blom]

Just had a look at RFC-1, my first look ever. First thing I noticed is
the enormous amount of abbreviations one is assumed to be able to
instantly place :-)

So looking up IMP for instance the wiki page gives me this funny titbit

"When Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy learned of BBN's
accomplishment in signing this million-dollar agreement, he sent a
telegram congratulating the company for being contracted to build the
"Interfaith Message Processor"."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interface_Message_Processor

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Kurt H Maier]

On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 07:10:02PM -0400, Nemo wrote:
> 
> Where was this codified?  (I recall reading RFCs that referred to "an
> internet" but cannot remember where.)

It's all over the place in RFC 1180, although that's not a standards
document.


khm

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Dave Horsfall]

On Fri, 6 Apr 2018, Nemo wrote:

> This prompted me to look through the list (at 
> https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-index.html).  Some very interesting 
> titles there.

Especially the ones published on 1st April :-)

>> As I said at a club lecture once, there are many internets, but only 
>> one Internet.
>
> Where was this codified?  (I recall reading RFCs that referred to "an 
> internet" but cannot remember where.)

Dunno where I saw it, and I would credit it if I could (I certainly did 
not coin the phrase, but I may have adapted it).

-- 
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Nemo]

On 06/04/2018, Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:
> The Internet (spelled with a capital "I", please, as it is a proper noun)
> was born on this day in 1969, when RFC-1 got published; it described the
> IMP and ARPAnet.

This prompted me to look through the list (at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc-index.html).  Some very interesting
titles there.

> As I said at a club lecture once, there are many internets, but only one
> Internet.

Where was this codified?  (I recall reading RFCs that referred to "an
internet" but cannot remember where.)

N.

[TUHS] Happy birthday, Internet!

[Dave Horsfall]

The Internet (spelled with a capital "I", please, as it is a proper noun) 
was born on this day in 1969, when RFC-1 got published; it described the 
IMP and ARPAnet.

As I said at a club lecture once, there are many internets, but only one
Internet.

-- 
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."