From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: rochkind@basepath.com (Marc Rochkind) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2017 09:22:09 -0700 Subject: [TUHS] TUHS Digest, Vol 14, Issue 63 In-Reply-To: <201701161600.v0GG00XA080461@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> References: <201701161600.v0GG00XA080461@tahoe.cs.Dartmouth.EDU> Message-ID: Thanks for this, Doug. When I started at Bell Labs, in the Summer of 1970, my organization was involved in what I think was called the Digital Data System. I recall that it was synchronous, meaning, I think, that there were clocks that timed everything on the network. Where does that fit into your story? --Marc On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Doug McIlroy wrote: > > One thing that I'm unclear about is why all this Arpanet work was not > filtering more into the versions of Unix done at Bell Labs. > > The short answer is that Bell Lbs was not on Arpanet. In the early > 80s the interim CSNET gave us a dial-up window into Arpanet, which > primarily served as a conduit for email. When real internet connection > became possible, network code from Berkeley was folded into the > research kernel. (I am tempted to say "engulfed the research kernel", > for this was a huge addition.) > > The highest levels of AT&T were happy to carry digital data, but > did not see digital as significant business. Even though digital T1 > was the backbone of long-distance transmission, it was IBM, not > AT&T, that offered direct digital interfaces to T1 in the 60s. > > When Arpanet came along MCI was far more eager to carry its data > than AT&T was. It was all very well for Sandy Fraser to build > experimental data networks in the lab, but this was seen as a > niche market. AT&T devoted more effort to specialized applications > like hotel PBXs than to digital communication per se. > > Doug > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: