From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id a09b0eb1 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 01:01:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 826F39C20B; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 11:01:33 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEEA99C14A; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 11:00:51 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="Hs+tVPlA"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id D80799C14A; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 11:00:48 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qk1-f169.google.com (mail-qk1-f169.google.com [209.85.222.169]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8063E9C104 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2020 11:00:47 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qk1-f169.google.com with SMTP id 21so1807734qky.4 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 17:00:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=SHTaYazY0De9lYYU6/Xp//fFcFwJpiK7v1eKfs3p408=; b=Hs+tVPlAe/FFc0hephPi97v2cJBq+f7JRxlkSmLByJnANrMnQbYZCzkdJChdX+dmi2 +ZNhEDQ43ypkhN5XuA82dOIABdHa/cI7CehPg7Vx/GE6gQ8r9nrIDvUtjEzjEJKP6X5B QONQVGIG9ZJlnqK8kGIzlmI38BkKn2LamakcJkujL4/gQuh6SzSo12tTbdeI1KhdoWS0 vpmSZpDkePPOgKM6vF0l/Lnh8uSY89Q4evD0TsDVU//cxlIam8tlySTckTBs7QMlru3t SOzpDZhTltXxhV90gql5qh3AkKPzBVaVsG0su3AZfqTlX6hjYf9VFiAp2oMoFa0vhv1n 4OTg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=SHTaYazY0De9lYYU6/Xp//fFcFwJpiK7v1eKfs3p408=; b=b2/KpFNIhCG5q0gm5ZKo1asom187pz/NW6aBaFxWFWdvQ+6pWmXwYNUferHuFHyByC 0cuaUXsKTiI+6Xo2Olg5NMzN8Q/Uke6tTKQ90jZOeMKLK1bdoWYasKFWC47HjrHte3PV h7gL+ijp2SvyiPiOLvQMwP6LvEe9jOHIL07aAlz2H+MjCkx+cvzuTSyYZMj07heAbLS6 fSKoCxU2GUkGA9PiOuOG6LSfnMTPVUyhDRE1tAWIB4LjoFj5twc24qNcbPzJ+IiKhd/Z 8TlrZ12m9qQQPnID6BnmWofZse21cUiaVHrcWgoX517jyTg+wmce2CWuPihqhMk/kWpt 1MQA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV1TTEZQ0vGNDKt4wcICahFg8ddPJGheiZc9r8EFKttBsk1dt7J Gp6WKeqN+t/zRR9Fy8v9fL49XTXjfUw0PQtVbNC1lA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzMtx5yA6SXBEABPRwz1YCtQB413/I/h/Gzb+R9tz/uSshjwz4J06YicFzJjRUPmJWcMAXgAXDoGnTco43gxd4= X-Received: by 2002:a37:a80a:: with SMTP id r10mr12457327qke.240.1579741246438; Wed, 22 Jan 2020 17:00:46 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <54907FF0-3700-43FC-AA46-95F43F54AEB2@planet.nl> In-Reply-To: <54907FF0-3700-43FC-AA46-95F43F54AEB2@planet.nl> From: Warner Losh Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2020 18:00:35 -0700 Message-ID: To: Paul Ruizendaal Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000d4d3db059cc42bd5" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Spider [was: Unix quix] X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: TUHS main list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --000000000000d4d3db059cc42bd5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 12:54 PM Paul Ruizendaal wrote: > I can answer some of the below, as I was looking into that a few years ag= o. > > > 81. Q: What was the first Unix network? > > A: spider > > You thought it was Datakit, didn't you? But Sandy Fraser had an earlier > > project. > > > > When did Alexander G Fraser's spider cell network happen? For that > matter, > > when did Datakit happen? I can't find references to either start date o= n > > line (nor anything on spider except for references to it in Dr Fraser's > > bio). I can find references to Datakit in 1978 or so. > > Spider was designed between 1969 and 1974 - the final lab report (#23) > dates from December 1974. It was based around a serial loop running at T1 > signalling speed (~1.5Mhz). Here is a video recorded by Dr. Fraser about > it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DojRtJ1U6Qzw (first half is about > Spider, second half about Datakit). > Cool! I'll have to watch that. It connected to its hosts via a (discrete TTL-based) microcontroller or > =E2=80=9CTIU=E2=80=9D and seems to have been connected almost immediately= to Unix systems: > the oldest driver I have been able to locate is in the V4 tree ( > https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-bin/utree.pl?file=3DV4/nsys/dmr/tdir/tiu.c). = It > used a DMA-based parallel interface into the PDP11. As such, it seems to > have been much faster than the typical Datakit connection later - but I > know too little about Datakit to be sure. > Me too. I know even less about Spider. I've been looking for Bell Labs Computing Science Technical Report #23. It's referenced in the visit report below. So far, the closest I've come is https://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102773566 which says that CHM has it on paper. :/ From about 1990 or so, these reports are easy to find. > There is an interesting visit report from 1975 that discusses some of the > stuff that was done with Spider here: > https://stacks.stanford.edu/file/druid:rq704hx4375/rq704hx4375.pdf > Beyond those experiments I think Spider usage was limited to file serving > (=E2=80=99nfs=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98ufs=E2=80=99) and printing (=E2=80=99= npr=E2=80=99). It would seem logical that it was > used for remote login, but I have not found any traces of such usage. Sam= e > for email usage. > Oh that's very interesting. The earliest Network Unix was all about remote login and file transfer (not file servering). The earliest version were for telnet/ftp clients. Later versions have the servers in them. > From what little I know, I think that Datakit became operational in a tes= t > network in 1979 and as a product in 1982. > OK. That's good to know. Are there good references for this? > > I thought the answer was "ARPANET" since we had a NCP on 4th edition > Unix > > in late 1974 or early 1975 from the University of Illinois dating from > that > > time (the code in TUHS appears to be based on V6 + a number of patches)= . > > =E2=80=9CNetwork Unix=E2=80=9D (https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc681.htm= l) was written > by Steve Holmgren, Gary Grossman and Steve Bunch in the last 3 months of > 1974. To my best knowledge they used V5 and migrated to V6 as it came > along. I think they were getting regular update tapes, and they implement= ed > their system as a device driver (plus userland support) to be able to kee= p > up with the steady flow of updates. Greg Chesson was also involved with > this Arpanet Unix. > That makes sense. The version in our archive is very close to V6. > As far as I can tell, Arpanet Unix saw fairly wide deployment within the > Arpanet research community, also as a front end processor for other syste= ms. > My research matches that. Starting in about 1976 there was an explosion of host names with -unix in their name. There's a number of ARPANET census reports, or ARPANET resource reports that have lots of Unix systems. RFCs show the explosion from 1977 onward. Google has these reports that can be downloaded as a PDF, but are otherwise kinda hard to find :(. > A few years back I asked on this list why =E2=80=9CNetwork Unix=E2=80=9D = was not more > enthusiastically received by the core Unix development team and > (conceptually) integrated into the main code base. I understood the repli= es > as that (i) people were very satisfied with Spider; and (ii) being part o= f > Bell they wanted a networking system that was more compatible with the Be= ll > network, i.e. Datakit. > Yea. I never understood how Unix could be so leading edge in computing, yet so backward (at least so poor at picking winners) at networking. But this does make a certain amount of sense. We've also seen NIH in the children of Unix as well (Linux, NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD and MacOS have all had this issue, sometimes for good, sometimes for ill). > In my opinion both =E2=80=9CSpider Unix=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CArpanet Uni= x=E2=80=9D threw a very long > conceptual shadow. From Spider onwards, the Research systems viewed the > network as a device (Spider), that could be multiplexed (V8 streams) or > even mounted (Plan9). The Arpa lineage saw the network as a long distance > bidirectional pipe, with the actual I/O device hidden from view; this vie= w > persists all the way to 4.2BSD and beyond. > Yes. It's difficult to match a connected socket to a network interface... And sockets definitely take the view that it's not a device you are talking to at all, but a special kind of thing that you can do normal I/O to (and a few other special things too). > I often wonder if it was (is?) possible to come up with a design with the > conceptual clarity of Plan9, but organised around the =E2=80=9Cnetwork as= a pipe=E2=80=9D > view instead. > We'll never know. Warner --000000000000d4d3db059cc42bd5 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 12:54 PM Paul= Ruizendaal <pnr@planet.nl> wrot= e:
I can answer = some of the below, as I was looking into that a few years ago.

> 81. Q:=C2=A0 What was the first Unix network?
> A: spider
> You thought it was Datakit, didn't you? But Sandy Fraser had an ea= rlier
> project.
>
> When did Alexander G Fraser's spider cell network happen? For that= matter,
> when did Datakit happen? I can't find references to either start d= ate on
> line (nor anything on spider except for references to it in Dr Fraser&= #39;s
> bio). I can find references to Datakit in 1978 or so.

Spider was designed between 1969 and 1974 - the final lab report (#23) date= s from December 1974. It was based around a serial loop running at T1 signa= lling speed (~1.5Mhz). Here is a video recorded by Dr. Fraser about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DojRtJ1U6Qzw (first h= alf is about Spider, second half about Datakit).

<= /div>
Cool! I'll have to watch that.

It connected to its hosts via a (discrete TTL-based) microcontroller or =E2= =80=9CTIU=E2=80=9D and seems to have been connected almost immediately to U= nix systems: the oldest driver I have been able to locate is in the V4 tree= (https://minnie.tuhs.org/cgi-= bin/utree.pl?file=3DV4/nsys/dmr/tdir/tiu.c). It used a DMA-based parall= el interface into the PDP11. As such, it seems to have been much faster tha= n the typical Datakit connection later - but I know too little about Dataki= t to be sure.

Me too. I know even less = about Spider. I've been looking for Bell Labs Computing Science Technic= al Report #23. It's referenced in the visit report below. So far, the c= losest=C2=A0I've come is=C2=A0https://www.computerhistory.org/collection= s/catalog/102773566=C2=A0which says that CHM has it on paper. :/ From a= bout 1990 or so, these reports are easy to find.
=C2=A0
There is an interesting visit report from 1975 that discusses some of the s= tuff that was done with Spider here: https://stacks.stanford.edu/file/druid:rq704hx4375/rq704hx4375.pdf Beyond those experiments I think Spider usage was limited to file serving (= =E2=80=99nfs=E2=80=99 and =E2=80=98ufs=E2=80=99) and printing (=E2=80=99npr= =E2=80=99). It would seem logical that it was used for remote login, but I = have not found any traces of such usage. Same for email usage.

Oh that's very interesting. The earliest Networ= k Unix was all about remote login and file transfer (not file servering). T= he earliest version were for telnet/ftp clients. Later versions have the se= rvers in them.
=C2=A0
>From what little I know, I think that Datakit became operational in a test = network in 1979 and as a product in 1982.

OK.=C2=A0 That's good to know. Are there good references for this?
=C2=A0
> I=C2=A0 thought the answer was "ARPANET" since we had a NCP = on 4th edition Unix
> in late 1974 or early 1975 from the University of Illinois dating from= that
> time (the code in TUHS appears to be based on V6 + a number of patches= ).

=E2=80=9CNetwork Unix=E2=80=9D (https://www.rfc-editor.org= /rfc/rfc681.html) was written by Steve Holmgren, Gary Grossman and Stev= e Bunch in the last 3 months of 1974. To my best knowledge they used V5 and= migrated to V6 as it came along. I think they were getting regular update = tapes, and they implemented their system as a device driver (plus userland = support) to be able to keep up with the steady flow of updates. Greg Chesso= n was also involved with this Arpanet Unix.

=
That makes sense. The version in our archive is very close to V6.
=C2=A0
As far as I can tell, Arpanet Unix saw fairly wide deployment within the Ar= panet research community, also as a front end processor for other systems.<= br>

My research matches that. Starting in a= bout 1976 there was an explosion of host names with -unix in their name. Th= ere's a number of ARPANET census reports, or ARPANET resource reports t= hat have lots of Unix systems. RFCs show the explosion from 1977 onward. Go= ogle has these reports that can be downloaded as a PDF, but are otherwise k= inda hard to find :(.
=C2=A0
A few years back I asked on this list why =E2=80=9CNetwork Unix=E2=80=9D wa= s not more enthusiastically received by the core Unix development team and = (conceptually) integrated into the main code base. I understood the replies= as that (i) people were very satisfied with Spider; and (ii) being part of= Bell they wanted a networking system that was more compatible with the Bel= l network, i.e. Datakit.

Yea. I never u= nderstood how Unix could be so leading edge in computing, yet so backward (= at least so poor=C2=A0at picking winners) at networking. But this does make= a certain amount of sense. We've also seen NIH in the children of Unix= as well (Linux, NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD and MacOS have all had this issue= , sometimes for good, sometimes for ill).
=C2=A0
In my opinion both =E2=80=9CSpider U= nix=E2=80=9D and =E2=80=9CArpanet Unix=E2=80=9D threw a very long conceptua= l shadow. From Spider onwards, the Research systems viewed the network as a= device (Spider), that could be multiplexed (V8 streams) or even mounted (P= lan9). The Arpa lineage saw the network as a long distance bidirectional pi= pe, with the actual I/O device hidden from view; this view persists all the= way to 4.2BSD and beyond.

Yes. It'= s difficult to match a connected socket to a network interface...=C2=A0 And= sockets definitely take the view that it's not a device you are talkin= g to at all, but a special kind of thing that you can do normal I/O to (and= a few other special things too).
=C2=A0
I often wonder if it was (is?) possible to come up with a design with the c= onceptual clarity of Plan9, but organised around the =E2=80=9Cnetwork as a = pipe=E2=80=9D view instead.

We'll n= ever know.

Warner=C2=A0
--000000000000d4d3db059cc42bd5--