DOCSLIB.ORG

Abbate Ch1-2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

6 Introductum Wide Web are prominent examples of informally created applications that became popular, not as the result of some central agency's mar­ Heat and ,-,UIH..4< keting plan, but through the spontaneous decisions of thousands of a.ndMeanings of Hacket(Switching independent users. In reconstructing the history of the Internet, I have been struck time and again by. the unexpected twists and turns its development has taken. Often a well-laid plan was abandoned after a short time and replaced by a new approach from an unexpected quarter..Rapid advances, such as the introduction of personal computers and the invention of local-area networks, continually threatened to make existing network technologies obsolete. In addition, responsibility for operating the Internet changed hands several times over the course Of all the ARPANET's technical innovations, perhaps the most cele­ of its first thirty years or so. How, in the face of all this change and brated was packet switching. Packet switching was an experimental, uncertainty, did the system survive and even flourish? I believe that even controversial method for transmitting data across a network. Its the key to the Internet's success was a commitment to flexibility and proponents claimed that it would increase the efficiency, reliability, and diversity, both in technical design and in organizational culture. No speed of data communications, butit was also quite complex to imple­ one could predict the specific changes that would revolutionize the ment, and some communications experts argued that the technique computing and communications industries at the end of the twentieth would never work. Indeed, one reason the ARPANET became the century. A network architecture designed to accommodate a variety of focus of so much attenrion-wirhin the computer science community computing technologies, combined with an informal and inclusive was that it represented the first large-scale demonstration of the feasi­ management style, gave the Internet system the ability to adapt to an bility of packet switching. 1 The successful use. of packet switching in un predictable environment. the ARPANET and in other early networks paved the way for the The Internet's identity as a communication medium was not inher­ technique's widespread adoption, and at the end of the twentieth ent in the technology; it was constructed rhrough a series of social century packet switching continued to be the dominant .networking choices. The ingenuity of the system's builders and the practices of its practice. It had moved from the margins to the center, from experi­ users have proved just as crucial as computers and telephone circuits mental tp"normaJ" technology." in defining the structure and purpose of the Internet. That is what Many computer professionals have seen packet switching as having the title of this book, Inventing the Internet, is meant to evoke: not an obvious technical advantages over alternative nlt;:thods for transmitting isolated act of invention, but rather the idea that the meaning of the data, and they have tended to treat its widespread adoption as a Internet had to be.invented-and constantly reinvented-at the same natural result of these advantages. In fact, however, the success of time as the technology itself. I hope that this perspective will prove packet switching was not a sure thing, and 1'0\ many years there was useful to those of us, experts and users alike, who are even now no consensus on what its defining cbcaracteristics were, what advan­ engaged in reinventing the Internet. tages it offered, or how it should be implemented--in part because computer scientists evaluated it in ideological as well as technical terms. Before packet switching could achieve legitimacy in the eyes of data communications practitioners, its proponents had to prove that it would work by building demonstration networks. The wide disparity in the outcomes of these e<i\.rly experiraents with packet switching demonstrates that the concept different and that, far from being a a <H"pr,Ar 8 Chapter 1 Heat War 9 technology's winning out, the "success" of packet switching depended . U-2 plane was greatly on how it was interpreted. in the pubhc an . ~ I he USSR in 1960 the Berlin Wall went up m 190 , Packet switching was inv~ntecl independently by two C.ompmer down boverg~tethe Cuban Mis~ile Crisis. The shadow of nuclear researchers working in very different Contexts: Paul Baran at the Rand loomedrouover popular culture. .I'.he On the (Shute. Corporation in the United States and Donald Davies at the National R'Z-Safe (Burdick and Wheeler 1962)-both made mto Physical Laboratory in England. Baran was first to explore the idea, in tl at . 1 1960s-presented accounts of nuclear war around 1960; Davies came up with his own version ofpacket switching m()Vl1eS m ie eary '.. United States a few years later and subsequently learned of Baran's prior work. its aftermath. And in 1964, mOVIe theaters ' ., StlYLtl.,ge- presented a brilliant black comedy of Cold War paranOla, Dr. Davies was instrumental in passing on the knowledge ofpacket switch­ ing that he and Baran had developed to Lawrence Roberts, who was (Kubrick 1963). 1 hili Dr though humorous, highlighted.the Vou nera 1 ~ty . in charge of creating the ARPANET. This chain of invention and St-rangeZave '. 1 r,Unitedf States', communications channe1s to d'lSI ,,uptlon by a SOVIet dissemination has become a standard element of origin stories about ::~ck which might make them unavailable just when th~y were the Internet; indeed, it is easy to get the impression that packet switching simply took a detour through the United Kingdom before needed most. In the movie, a psychotic Air F.orce c..omman~el nk~me~ h.0I t · motion by 111VO mg a re-emerging, unchanged, in the United States to fulfill its destiny as J k D Ripper sets a nuclear ocaus in •.. .. the underlying technology of the ARPANETl ac . of mutual assured destruction called "Plan R." ThIS plan- strategy .. ent president's authority to declare However, while Baran's and Davies's versions of packet switching which allows Ripper to crreumv . '1" had some basic technical similarities, their conceptions ofwhat defined war-is specifically designed to compensate for a wa.rtime f~l Uler~~ conllnan ,.control. , and communications. In the mOVIe, an Air Fo packet switching and ofwhat it was good for were very different. Much d general explains: of this difference was due to the strong political pressures that were brought to bear on computing research in tlwJJnited Kingdom and . Ian in which a lower-echelon commander may Plan R IS an emerl-?eflcy war p . k k-ifthe normal chain ofcommand in the United States. Large computer projects in both countries were order nucle.ar retal;uon a~~r ~~~:aw::t:~ discourage the Russkies from any develQped in a context of government funding and control, and has been disrupte .. .. e .. W ihi t n as part ofa general sneak national leaders Saw computers as a strategictechnQIQgy for achieving h that they could knock out as mg 0 .. d I attackope and escape retaI'ia tion because oflack of proper command an contro. important political goals. But inthe very different policy contexts of the United States and the United Kingdom, packet switching took on PI . R allows Ripper to launch a "retaliatory" attack even th.oug~1 n~ different meanings for Baran, Davies, and Roberts. Packet switching firstan strike has actually OCCUlTed. In reality,(as t hems fil ' disclaimer. was never adopted on the basis ofpurely technical criteria, but always ) th U S Air Force never·ha.d any such strat.. egy. Even before Dr. states, e . d'ffl rent solu- because it fit into a broader socio-technical understanding ofhow data Z d the Air Force was explonng....a very 1. e . te n Strange ave opene , networks could and should be used. t the threat of a first strike: building a commumcauons sys 1 tron 0 . d h" er command that would be able to surviy,e a~ attack an . so t at prop. 133 has Networking Dr. Strangelove: The Cold War ROQts ofPacket Switching an dcentro 1" could be maintained. As Edwards (1996, p... ) in the United States d C ld War defense analysts saw robust cornmurucauons documente, 0 f "Fl ible k a necessity in any nuclear'.con rontauon: exioie- networ s as As the 1960s opened, relations between the United States and the t .aregy required that political leaders contmue to commu- response s 1 . Th ,fore preserv- Union of Soviet Socialist Republics were distinctly chilly. The USSR nicate during an escalating nuclear exchange. el e. ' . had launched its Sputnik satellite in 1957, setting off alarm in the mg,centra 1comman d and control-political., ... leadership,·'hbuthi halso t United States over a "science gap" and prompting a surge of govern­ . ' .. cedata and communications Iinks-s-achieved t e Ig es reconnaissan , . ., ... .•. ,,' ,. was ment investment in science and technology. A series ofevents kept the l1lilitaryyrioTity." The need for survivable erally recognized the Co/4War 11 10 Chapter 1 White Heat was a researcher at the Air Force's premier "think tank," the Rand Baran Corporation. for a new COllllllu,nilcatiOllS Founded by the Air Force in 1946 as an outgrowth of operations sUI'viv'abllltY with high capacity (ibid., pp. research efforts initiated during World War II, Rand (originally sioned a system would allow personnel to on VOICe RAND, derived from "research and development") was a nonprofit conversations or to use teletype, or low~speed computer corporation dedicated to research on military strategy and technology. terminalsunder wartime conditions. to this new was Rand was primarily funded by contracts from the Air Force, though a technique that Baran (1960, p.
Recommended publications
  • Internet Protocol Design 12 Networking Truths

    Internet Protocol Design 12 Networking Truths

    HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS AND NETWORKING Internet Design Principles Protocol Design © 2009 Jörg Ott & Carsten Bormann 1 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS AND NETWORKING Origin of Packet Switching Concepts show up in the early 1960s Devised by multiple, largely independent groups Paul Baran, Leonard Kleinrock, Donald Davies, Roger Scantlebury ARPANET Development sponsored by DARPA Motivated by considerations of fail-safe networks Applications shall not depend on individual elements in the networks Clearly based on quite some military thinking in general But: NOT a particular response to a Soviet nuclear threat © 2009 Jörg Ott & Carsten Bormann 2 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS AND NETWORKING Initial ARPANET (1969) UCSB SRI 56kbit/s Digital lines UCLA Univ Utah © 2009 Jörg Ott & Carsten Bormann 3 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS AND NETWORKING Common Goals for Early Internet Design Scientists interested in sharing and accessing (computing) resources Scientists and engineers interested in building an infrastructure to interconnect all computers in the world and make it work Designers, users, and operators: common vision and spirit © 2009 Jörg Ott & Carsten Bormann 4 HELSINKI UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATIONS AND NETWORKING Some Aspects of the Internet Design Philosophy “Has evolved considerably from the first proposal to the current standards…” Dave Clark, 1988 © 2009 Jörg Ott & Carsten
  • THE FUTURE of IDEAS This Work Is Licensed Under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License (US/V3.0)

    THE FUTURE of IDEAS This Work Is Licensed Under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License (US/V3.0)

    less_0375505784_4p_fm_r1.qxd 9/21/01 13:49 Page i THE FUTURE OF IDEAS This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License (US/v3.0). Noncommercial uses are thus permitted without any further permission from the copyright owner. Permissions beyond the scope of this license are administered by Random House. Information on how to request permission may be found at: http://www.randomhouse.com/about/ permissions.html The book maybe downloaded in electronic form (freely) at: http://the-future-of-ideas.com For more permission about Creative Commons licenses, go to: http://creativecommons.org less_0375505784_4p_fm_r1.qxd 9/21/01 13:49 Page iii the future of ideas THE FATE OF THE COMMONS IN A CONNECTED WORLD /// Lawrence Lessig f RANDOM HOUSE New York less_0375505784_4p_fm_r1.qxd 9/21/01 13:49 Page iv Copyright © 2001 Lawrence Lessig All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. Published in the United States by Random House, Inc., New York, and simultaneously in Canada by Random House of Canada Limited, Toronto. Random House and colophon are registered trademarks of Random House, Inc. library of congress cataloging-in-publication data Lessig, Lawrence. The future of ideas : the fate of the commons in a connected world / Lawrence Lessig. p. cm. Includes index. ISBN 0-375-50578-4 1. Intellectual property. 2. Copyright and electronic data processing. 3. Internet—Law and legislation. 4. Information society. I. Title. K1401 .L47 2001 346.04'8'0285—dc21 2001031968 Random House website address: www.atrandom.com Printed in the United States of America on acid-free paper 24689753 First Edition Book design by Jo Anne Metsch less_0375505784_4p_fm_r1.qxd 9/21/01 13:49 Page v To Bettina, my teacher of the most important lesson.
  • Paul Baran, Network Theory, and the Past, Present, and Future of the Internet

    Paul Baran, Network Theory, and the Past, Present, and Future of the Internet

    PAUL BARAN, NETWORK THEORY, AND THE PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE OF THE INTERNET CHRISTOPHER S. YOO* Paul Baran’s seminal 1964 article “On Distributed Communications Networks” that first proposed packet switching also advanced an underappreciated vision of network architecture: a lattice-like, distributed network, in which each node of the Internet would be homogeneous and equal in status to all other nodes. Scholars who have embraced the concept of a flat network have largely overlooked the extent to which it is inconsistent with network theory, which emphasizes the importance of short cuts and hubs in enabling networks to scale. The flat network is also inconsistent with the actual way the Internet was deployed, which relied on a three- tiered, hierarchical architecture resembling what Baran called a decentralized network. However, empirical studies reveal that the Internet’s architecture is changing; as large content providers build extensive wide area networks and undersea cables to connect directly to last-mile networks, it is in the process of becoming flatter and less hierarchical. This change is making the network become more centralized rather than more distributed. As a result, this article suggests that the standard reference model that places backbones at the center of the architecture may need to be replaced with a radically different vision: a stack of centralized star networks, each centered on one of the leading content providers. INTRODUCTION................................................................................. 162 I. BARAN’S UNREALIZED VISION OF A DISTRIBUTED NETWORKS 164 A. Baran’s Vision of a Distributed Network ........................ 164 B. The Partial Reception of Baran’s Vision ......................... 167 II. NETWORK SCIENCE’S INSIGHTS INTO THE BENEFITS OF NETWORKS ............................................................................
  • 9/8/19 Date: 9/10/19 Article Title: Brief History of the Internet Autho

    9/8/19 Date: 9/10/19 Article Title: Brief History of the Internet Autho

    ● Name: John Church ● Abstract Due Date: 9/8/19 ● Date: 9/10/19 ● Article Title: Brief History of the Internet ● Author: Barry M. Leiner, Vinton G. Cerf, David D. Clark, Robert E. Kahn, Leonard Kleinrock, Daniel C. Lynch, Jon Postel, Larry G. Roberts, Stephen Wolf. ● Journal: Internet Society “Brief History of the Internet” provides the reader with a cursory overview of the organizations, motivations, and pivotal moments behind the creation of the internet and its existence up to the date of publication, in 1997. The paper begins by recounting the parties and organization that began the creation of the first networks, and their motivations. The article notes the formation of key organizations and the parties involved in the creation of key technologies over the years following the Internet's inception. The article does not delve into the details of new improvements or the stories behind certain pivotal moments, but instead focuses on giving a brief overview of the parties, technologies, and events largely by name alone. One interesting aspect of the internet's inception that I did not realize until reading the article, was the largely decentralized nature from the beginning. For example, the article mentions that routers were designed to be “black box gateways” that did not hold on to any information. This was likely in line with DARPA’s goals (preventing sensitive military information fro sitting in places it shouldn’t.) as well as technical limitations of the time (the cost of memory in routers.) I wonder, though, that if the US government knew what the internet would become, if they would have insisted on more centralized control measures and less decentralization.
  • Telenet Communications Corp

    Telenet Communications Corp

    The user's role in connecting to a value added network Early next year data will start flowing at 56,000 bits a second over the circuits of a unique nationwide common carrier service Richard B. Hovey called a value added network. This new approach Telenet Communications Corp. to data communications combines old and new Washington, D.C. transmission facilities and adds to them a form of intelligence to improve the performance. The value added network (VAN) is different from present data transmission services and from private data networks in both the enhanced and extensive offerings to users and the sophisticated technology it employs. The technology, called packet switching, makes it possible for the value added carrier—the implementer and operator of the VAN—to provide any user, large or small, with the kind of fast-response, error-free, low-cost-per- transaction data transmissions now available only to companies that have invested in their own large private networks. In essence, the value added carrier (VAC) takes advantage of the substantial economies of scale re- sulting from one very large network— fully utiliz- ing such expensive resources as transmission lines and concentration equipment by sharing the net- work among the VAN'S subscribers. The VAC passes on a portion of the consequent savings to the indi- vidual user-subscribers through a tariff charge based mainly on traffic volume. Beyond the simple economics, leasing existing communications facilities allows the carrier to ob- tain just as much transmission capacity for each lo- cation as is required by the traffic load. This pro- vides the flexibility to adapt quickly to subscriber traffic and geographical demands, and permits the incorporation of new transmission offerings—such as satellites and AT&T'S Dataphone Digital Service- as they become available.
  • Marconi Society - Wikipedia

    Marconi Society - Wikipedia

    9/23/2019 Marconi Society - Wikipedia Marconi Society The Guglielmo Marconi International Fellowship Foundation, briefly called Marconi Foundation and currently known as The Marconi Society, was established by Gioia Marconi Braga in 1974[1] to commemorate the centennial of the birth (April 24, 1874) of her father Guglielmo Marconi. The Marconi International Fellowship Council was established to honor significant contributions in science and technology, awarding the Marconi Prize and an annual $100,000 grant to a living scientist who has made advances in communication technology that benefits mankind. The Marconi Fellows are Sir Eric A. Ash (1984), Paul Baran (1991), Sir Tim Berners-Lee (2002), Claude Berrou (2005), Sergey Brin (2004), Francesco Carassa (1983), Vinton G. Cerf (1998), Andrew Chraplyvy (2009), Colin Cherry (1978), John Cioffi (2006), Arthur C. Clarke (1982), Martin Cooper (2013), Whitfield Diffie (2000), Federico Faggin (1988), James Flanagan (1992), David Forney, Jr. (1997), Robert G. Gallager (2003), Robert N. Hall (1989), Izuo Hayashi (1993), Martin Hellman (2000), Hiroshi Inose (1976), Irwin M. Jacobs (2011), Robert E. Kahn (1994) Sir Charles Kao (1985), James R. Killian (1975), Leonard Kleinrock (1986), Herwig Kogelnik (2001), Robert W. Lucky (1987), James L. Massey (1999), Robert Metcalfe (2003), Lawrence Page (2004), Yash Pal (1980), Seymour Papert (1981), Arogyaswami Paulraj (2014), David N. Payne (2008), John R. Pierce (1979), Ronald L. Rivest (2007), Arthur L. Schawlow (1977), Allan Snyder (2001), Robert Tkach (2009), Gottfried Ungerboeck (1996), Andrew Viterbi (1990), Jack Keil Wolf (2011), Jacob Ziv (1995). In 2015, the prize went to Peter T. Kirstein for bringing the internet to Europe. Since 2008, Marconi has also issued the Paul Baran Marconi Society Young Scholar Awards.
  • The First Amendment, Common Carriers, and Public Accommodations: Net Neutrality, Digital Platforms, and Privacy

    The First Amendment, Common Carriers, and Public Accommodations: Net Neutrality, Digital Platforms, and Privacy

    University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law 2021 The First Amendment, Common Carriers, and Public Accommodations: Net Neutrality, Digital Platforms, and Privacy Christopher S. Yoo University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Communication Technology and New Media Commons, Digital Communications and Networking Commons, First Amendment Commons, Internet Law Commons, Law and Economics Commons, Policy History, Theory, and Methods Commons, Science and Technology Law Commons, and the Science and Technology Policy Commons Repository Citation Yoo, Christopher S., "The First Amendment, Common Carriers, and Public Accommodations: Net Neutrality, Digital Platforms, and Privacy" (2021). Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law. 2576. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/2576 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law by an authorized administrator of Penn Law: Legal Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE FIRST AMENDMENT, COMMON CARRIERS, AND PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS: NET NEUTRALITY, DIGITAL PLATFORMS, AND PRIVACY Christopher S. Yoo* Recent prominent judicial opinions have assumed that common car- riers have few to no First Amendment rights and that calling an actor a common carrier or public accommodation could justify limiting its right to exclude and mandating that it provide nondiscriminatory access. A re- view of the history reveals that the underlying law is richer than these simple statements would suggest. The principles for determining what constitutes a common carrier or a public accommodation and the level of First Amendment protection both turn on whether the actor holds itself out as serving all members of the public or whether it asserts editorial dis- cretion over whom to carry or host.
  • A Study Paper on Communication Network and Overview of Packet Switching Technology

    A Study Paper on Communication Network and Overview of Packet Switching Technology

    Council for Innovative Research International Journal of Computers & Technology www.cirworld.com Volume 3 No. 3, Nov-Dec, 2012 A Study Paper on Communication Network and overview of Packet Switching Technology Sandeep panwar Amit garg Naresh kumar Abstract— In this paper,we highlight some of the principal paths between any two points; and second, dividing events that led up to the revolution in communications complete user messages into what he called message blocks among information processing systems. We devote most of then third, delivery of these messages by store and forward this presentation to a brief summary of the communication switching.[12] networks experience, emphasizing the description, Baran's work was similar to the research performed functions, analysis, design and performance measurement independently by Donald Davies at the National Physical of packet-switching networks. We also discuss some recent Laboratory, UK. In 1965, Davies developed the concept of advances in radio packet switching for long-haul. packet-switched networks and proposed development of a .Index Terms— ARPANET, communication networks, UK wide network.. A member of Davies' team met computer networks, networks, packet switching. Lawrence Roberts at the 1967 ACM Symposium on I. INTRODUCTION Operating System Principles, bringing the two groups together.[11] It is widely assumed that, for reasons of efficiency, the various communication networks (Internet, telephone, TV, Interestingly, Davies had chosen some of the same radio, ...) will merge into one ubiquitous, packet switched parameters for his original network design as Baran, such as network that carries all forms of communications. This view a packet size of 1024 bits. In 1966 Davies proposed that a of the future is particularly prevalent among the Internet network should be built at the laboratory to serve the needs community, where it is assumed that packet-switched IP is of NPL and prove the feasibility of packet switching.
  • Core Magazine February 2002

    Core Magazine February 2002

    FEBRUARY 2002 CORE 3.1 A PUBLICATION OF THE COMPUTER HISTORY MUSEUM WWW.COMPUTERHISTORY.ORG PAGE 1 February 2002 OUR ACTIONS TODAY COREA publication of the Computer History3.1 Museum IN THIS MISSION ISSUE TO PRESERVE AND PRESENT FOR POSTERITY THE ARTIFACTS AND STORIES OF THE INFORMATION AGE INSIDE FRONT COVER VISION OUR ACTIONS TODAY The achievements of tomorrow must be was an outstanding success, and I simply doesn’t exist anywhere else in TO EXPLORE THE COMPUTING REVOLUTION AND ITS John C Toole rooted in the actions we take today. hope you caught the impact of these the world. With your sustained help, our IMPACT ON THE HUMAN EXPERIENCE Many exciting and important events announcements that have heightened actions have been able to speak much 2 THE SRI VAN AND COMPUTER have happened since our last CORE awareness of our enterprise in the louder than words, and it is my goal to INTERNETWORKING publication, and they have been community. I’m very grateful to Harry see that we are able to follow through Don Nielson carefully chosen to strategically shape McDonald (director of NASA Ames), Len on our dreams! EXECUTIVE STAFF where we will be in five years. Shustek (chairman of our Board of 7 John C Toole David Miller Trustees), Donna Dubinsky (Museum This issue of CORE is loaded with THE SRI VAN AND EARLY PACKET SPEECH EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR & CEO VICE PRESIDENT OF DEVELOPMENT 2 Don Nielson First, let me officially introduce our Trustee and CEO of Handspring), and technical content and information about Karen Mathews Mike Williams new name and logo to everyone who Bill Campbell (chairman of Intuit) who our organization—from a wonderful EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT HEAD CURATOR 8 has not seen them before.
  • I: the Conception

    I: the Conception

    Excerpt from: Mayo, Keenan and Newcomb, Peter. “How the Web Was Won,” Vanity Fair, July 2008. I: The Conception Paul Baran, an electrical engineer, conceived one of the Internet’s building blocks—packet switching— while working at the Rand Corporation around 1960. Packet switching breaks data into chunks, or “packets,” and lets each one take its own path to a destination, where they are re-assembled (rather than sending everything along the same path, as a traditional telephone circuit does). A similar idea was proposed independently in Britain by Donald Davies. Later in his career, Baran would pioneer the airport metal detector. Paul Baran: It was necessary to have a strategic system that could withstand a first attack and then be able to return the favor in kind. The problem was that we didn’t have a survivable communications system, and so Soviet missiles aimed at U.S. missiles would take out the entire telephone- communication system. At that time the Strategic Air Command had just two forms of communication. One was the U.S. telephone system, or an overlay of that, and the other was high-frequency or shortwave radio. So that left us with the interesting situation of saying, Well, why do the communications fail when the bombs were aimed, not at the cities, but just at the strategic forces? And the answer was that the collateral damage was sufficient to knock out a telephone system that was highly centralized. Well, then, let’s not make it centralized. Let’s spread it out so that we can have other paths to get around the damage.
  • Features of the Internet History the Norwegian Contribution to the Development PAAL SPILLING and YNGVAR LUNDH

    Features of the Internet History the Norwegian Contribution to the Development PAAL SPILLING and YNGVAR LUNDH

    Features of the Internet history The Norwegian contribution to the development PAAL SPILLING AND YNGVAR LUNDH This article provides a short historical and personal view on the development of packet-switching, computer communications and Internet technology, from its inception around 1969 until the full- fledged Internet became operational in 1983. In the early 1990s, the internet backbone at that time, the National Science Foundation network – NSFNET, was opened up for commercial purposes. At that time there were already several operators providing commercial services outside the internet. This presentation is based on the authors’ participation during parts of the development and on literature Paal Spilling is studies. This provides a setting in which the Norwegian participation and contribution may be better professor at the understood. Department of informatics, Univ. of Oslo and University 1 Introduction Defense (DOD). It is uncertain when DoD really Graduate Center The concept of computer networking started in the standardized on the entire protocol suite built around at Kjeller early 1960s at the Massachusetts Institute of Technol- TCP/IP, since for several years they also followed the ogy (MIT) with the vision of an “On-line community ISO standards track. of people”. Computers should facilitate communica- tions between people and be a support for human The development of the Internet, as we know it today, decision processes. In 1961 an MIT PhD thesis by went through three phases. The first one was the Leonard Kleinrock introduced some of the earliest research and development phase, sponsored and theoretical results on queuing networks. Around the supervised by ARPA. Research groups that actively same time a series of Rand Corporation papers, contributed to the development process and many mainly authored by Paul Baran, sketched a hypotheti- who explored its potential for resource sharing were cal system for communication while under attack that permitted to connect to and use the network.
  • The People Who Invented the Internet Source: Wikipedia's History of the Internet

    The People Who Invented the Internet Source: Wikipedia's History of the Internet

    The People Who Invented the Internet Source: Wikipedia's History of the Internet PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Sat, 22 Sep 2012 02:49:54 UTC Contents Articles History of the Internet 1 Barry Appelman 26 Paul Baran 28 Vint Cerf 33 Danny Cohen (engineer) 41 David D. Clark 44 Steve Crocker 45 Donald Davies 47 Douglas Engelbart 49 Charles M. Herzfeld 56 Internet Engineering Task Force 58 Bob Kahn 61 Peter T. Kirstein 65 Leonard Kleinrock 66 John Klensin 70 J. C. R. Licklider 71 Jon Postel 77 Louis Pouzin 80 Lawrence Roberts (scientist) 81 John Romkey 84 Ivan Sutherland 85 Robert Taylor (computer scientist) 89 Ray Tomlinson 92 Oleg Vishnepolsky 94 Phil Zimmermann 96 References Article Sources and Contributors 99 Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 102 Article Licenses License 103 History of the Internet 1 History of the Internet The history of the Internet began with the development of electronic computers in the 1950s. This began with point-to-point communication between mainframe computers and terminals, expanded to point-to-point connections between computers and then early research into packet switching. Packet switched networks such as ARPANET, Mark I at NPL in the UK, CYCLADES, Merit Network, Tymnet, and Telenet, were developed in the late 1960s and early 1970s using a variety of protocols. The ARPANET in particular led to the development of protocols for internetworking, where multiple separate networks could be joined together into a network of networks. In 1982 the Internet Protocol Suite (TCP/IP) was standardized and the concept of a world-wide network of fully interconnected TCP/IP networks called the Internet was introduced.