DOCSLIB.ORG

End-To-End Arguments in the Internet: Principles, Practices, and Theory

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
End-To-End Arguments in the Internet: Principles, Practices, and Theory End-to-End Arguments in the Internet: Principles, Practices, and Theory vorgelegt von Matthias Bärwolff Von der Fakultät IV Elektrotechnik und Informatik der Technischen Universität Berlin zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades Doktor der Ingenieurwissenschaften (Dr. Ing.) genehmigte Dissertation Promotionsausschuss: Prof. Dr. Anja Feldmann (Vorsitzende) Prof. Dr. Bernd Lutterbeck (Berichter) Dr. David D. Clark (Berichter) Tag der wissenschaftlichen Aussprache: 22. Oktober 2010 Berlin 2010 D 83 Dissertation submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at Technische Universität Berlin in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Dr. Ing. Advisers: Prof. em. Dr. iur. Bernd Lutterbeck, Technische Universität Berlin Dr. David D. Clark, Massachusetts Institute of Technology I gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the German Academic Exchange Service (Deutscher Akademischer Auslandsdienst, DAAD) who have given me a scholarship for a stay at MIT in early 2009. Diese Doktorarbeit wurde mit finanzieller Unterstützung des Deutschen Akademischen Auslandsdiensts (DAAD) in Form eines dreimonatigen Doktorandenstipendiums im Jahr 2009 angefertigt. © Copyright 2010 by Matthias Bärwolff www.bärwolff.de [email protected] +49 30 20238852 rinciples are often more effective guides for action when they appear as no more than an unreasoned prejudice, Pa general feeling that certain things simply “are not done”; while as soon as they are explicitly stated speculation begins about their correctness and their validity. [ . ] Once the instinctive certainty is lost, perhaps as a result of unsuccessful attempts to put into words principles that had been observed “intuitively”, there is no way of regaining such guidance other than to search for a correct statement of what before was known implicitly. —Friedrich August von Hayek (1973, p. 60) Abstract The end-to-end arguments — a founding principle of the Internet — have inspired a world of opinionated interpretations, re-articulations, and com- ments about their lower-level technical and higher-level normative merit. However, their precise meaning and scope of applicability have remained diffuse — arguably as diffuse as the constituency of stakeholders in the very Internet itself. Our thesis elaborates the end-to-end arguments by putting them into a meaningful context of other principles as well as the current realities of the Internet. Also, it elaborates their normative content in view of a defendable set of purposes. To these ends we have conducted a most thorough study of primary literature going back to the intellectual predecessors of the Internet in the early 1960s, and developed the several notions of this thesis in a largely desk-based research effort. Following a comprehensive discussion of the various different versions of the end-to-end arguments both prior to and subsequent to the seminal Saltzer et al. (1981a) formulation we trace the actual manifestations of the end-to-end arguments walking from the Arpanet as developed in the late 1960s to the eventual Internet architecture emerging from the mid-1970s. We find that the descriptive content of the end-to-end arguments is, in fact, broader than their self-contained formulation as a logical argument about application completeness implies. Second, we find that they are best conceived as one principle within a framework of other, no less relevant principles. And, third, we argue for a revised normative take on the end- to-end arguments that emphasizes the importance of edge redundancy as a crucial means of extending their scope beyond the classic considerations of data integrity alone. In all, we add much needed focus and clarity to a notion that has been carried so far away from its original content as to cloud its true relevance in both today’s Internet and tomorrow’s. v Zusammenfassung Seit ihrer ursprünglichen Fassung von Saltzer u. a. (1981a) wurden die „End-to-End Arguments“ – der Kern eines der grundlegenden Prinzipien des Internets – im Hinblick auf ihre technische und normative Bedeutung stetig neu interpretiert und bewertet. Indes, der eigentliche Gehalt und die Grenzen ihrer Gültigkeit sind dabei weitgehend diffus geblieben – ebenso diffus wohl wie das Internet und die Menge derer, die es prägen und nut- zen. Diese Arbeit entwickelt die „End-to-End Arguments“ weiter, indem sie sie in einen sinnvollen Kontext aus anderen Prinzipien führt und da- bei nicht nur den Realitäten des heutigen Internets gerecht wird, sondern zudem eine sorgfältige Zweckbestimmung für deren normativen Gehalt vornimmt. Basierend auf einer ausführlichen Erörterung der verschiedenen Ver- sionen der „End-to-End Arguments“ betrachten wir die technischen Arte- fakte, in denen sich jene von der Entwicklung des Arpanets in den späten 1960er Jahren bis hin zum Internet in den 1970er Jahren spiegeln. Es zeigt sich, dass die „End-to-End Arguments“ auf deskriptiver Ebene deutlich breitere Anwendbarkeit finden, als sich dies aus dem logischen Kern der ursprünglichen Formulierung ergibt. Weiterhin zeigt sich, dass der Ge- halt der „End-to-End Arguments“ sich in einem systematischen Kontext aus weiteren für die Platzierung von Funktionen relevanten Prinzipien am besten fassen lässt. Nicht zuletzt entwickelt die Arbeit eine sinnvol- le normative Fassung der „End-to-End Arguments“, die die Wichtigkeit von Redundanz an den Rändern des Internets, dort wo die Enden Zugang nehmen, betont. Dadurch verbreitert sich deren Geltungsbereich weit über den klassischen Betrachtungsgegenstand von Datenintegrität hinaus. Ins- gesamt gewinnen die „End-to-End Arguments“ durch unsere Arbeit an Fokus und Klarheit im Hinblick auf deren, auch künftige, Bedeutung. vii Preface Who Should Read this Thesis This thesis has been written first and foremost in pursuit of an academic degree, but we hope that it will also be read by more than six people.1 Broadly speaking, this thesis aims at (1) scholars, students, and reflective practitioners at the intersection of computer science and economics, (2) those interested in the broader history of the Internet, but also (3) regula- tors and all those with a stake in technology policy ranging from political parties to technology industry representatives and strategists. We neither strictly assume the reader to be familiar with basic text- book descriptions of the Internet (e. g., Peterson and Davie 2007; Kurose and Ross 2005; Stallings 2007) nor with historical accounts of networking (e. g., Norberg et al. 1996; Hafner and Lyon 1998); however, having some general intuition about the basic notions of computer networking will sub- stantially ease the reading of this thesis. Also, we highly recommend to have read the original paper on “end-to-end arguments in system design” by Saltzer et al. (1981a). Technical Aspects of This Thesis This thesis is written in (American) English language.2 Largely this is be- cause the bulk of the underlying literature and controversy is in English. Also, in all modesty, we hope that this work will be read beyond the con- fines of the German speaking world. As for the content, while it does get technical in some places, we have tried to keep the text concise and accessible. Also, we have chosen to move the notes — which are often very copious, sometimes bordering the ix Preface pedantic — into the back matter, (1) to make the body of the text readable and coherent in its own right, and (2) to allow for the flexibility of adding comprehensive asides where they are suitable (if only for completeness’ sake). As for the broad structure of this thesis, while it obviously follows some linear sequence, most sections are self-contained, and the reader may choose to jump over sections and generally read them in the order they prefer (see the contents). A note on style, particularly regarding the endnotes: at times, we have here included copious digressions which are not central, sometimes not even strictly relevant, to the arguments in the main text. However, often we felt that such asides would add to the broader discussion — be it by providing additional perspectives, or by recounting obscure but instructive literature threads (see the index of interesting asides). Last, we should like to mention the most important layout choices and LATEX packages we have used: • The notes have been moved away from the main body of the text by using the endnotes package with a slight customization for obtaining hyperlinks from the notes back to the places in the main text that spawned them. • The headers and footers have been customized using the fancyhdr package, plus tweaks for which credit goes to Philipp Lehmann. • The bibliography has been managed with the biblatex package, again by Philipp Lehmann, with some minor customizations. • Also, we have made rather extensive use of the hyperref package. Finally, readers of the electronic version may want to press here to turn on (or off) some of the mini tables of content in the PDF (when viewing in Acrobat Reader — layer and JavaScript support necessary). (Now they are on.) x Acknowledgments Many thanks to Prof. Dr. Bernd Lutterbeck — first, for letting me work on a subject as ambitious and difficult as this research turned out to be; second, for guiding my efforts such that the whole work became manageable; and, third, for being patient with me, and letting me get away with taking a fair bit longer than we had planned. Speaking of getting away with things, I also want to thank the School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science at Technische Universität Berlin for accepting my thesis, even though I do not hold an proper univer- sity degree in computer science. Horst Bamberg, Lutz Haase, and Gabriela Ernst handled my ‘case’ with a most professional and flexible attitude. Thanks also to Prof. Dr. Adam Wolisz for handling my exam. The third paragraph of this list of acknowledgments firmly goes to Dr. David D. Clark of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He took me on as a visiting student for the academic year 2008/2009 despite a lack of any meaningful references other than a thesis proposal.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • On IP Networking Over Tactical Links
    On IP Networking over Tactical Links Claude Bilodeau The work described in this document was sponsored by the Department of National Defence under Work Unit 5co. Defence R&D Canada √ Ottawa TECHNICAL REPORT DRDC Ottawa TR 2003-099 Communications Research Centre CRC-RP-2003-008 August 2003 On IP networking over tactical links Claude Bilodeau Communications Research Centre The work described in this document was sponsored by the Department of National Defence under Work Unit 5co. Defence R&D Canada - Ottawa Technical Report DRDC Ottawa TR 2003-099 Communications Research Centre CRC RP-2003-008 August 2003 © Her Majesty the Queen as represented by the Minister of National Defence, 2003 © Sa majesté la reine, représentée par le ministre de la Défense nationale, 2003 Abstract This report presents a cross section or potpourri of the numerous issues that surround the tech- nical development of military IP networking over disadvantaged network links. In the first sec- tion, multi-media services are discussed with regard to three aspects: applications, operational characteristics and service models. The second section focuses on subnetworks and bearers; mainly impairments caused by characteristics of the wireless environment. An overview of the Iris tactical bearers is provided as an example of a tactical IP environment. The last section looks at how IP can integrate these two elements i.e. multi-media services and impaired sub- network links. These three sections are unified by a common theme, quality of service, which runs in the background of the discussions. Résumé Ce rapport présente une coupe transversale ou pot-pourri de questions reliées au développe- ment technique des réseaux militaires IP pour des liaisons défavorisées.
    [Show full text]
  • The Internet Development Process Stockholm October 2010
    The Internet development Process Stockholm October 2010 Pål Spilling What I would talk about? • The main Norwegian contributions • Competitions between alternatives • Did Norway benefit from its participation? • Some observations and reflections • Conclusion A historical timeline 1981/82 TCP/IP accepted standard for US 1993 Web browser Mosaic Defence became available 1980 TCP/IP fully 2000 developed 1975 Start of the Internet Project; 1974 Preliminary specificaons of TCP 1977 First 3 – network Demonstration Mid 1973 ARPANET covers US, Hawaii, FFI Kjeller, and UCL London 1950 1955 ‐1960, End 1968 Ideas of resource Start of the ARPANET sharing networks project Norway and UK on ARPANET 1973 London o SATNET o Kjeller Norwegian Contributions • SATNET development – Simulations – Performance measurements • Internet performance measurements • Packet speech experiments over the Internet • Improved PRNET protocol architecture Competitions between alternatives • X.25 (ITU) • ISO standards (committee work) • DECNET (proprietary) • IBM (proprietary) • TCP/IP demonstrated its usefullness i 1977 accepted as a standard for US defence Norwegian benefits • Enabled me to create a small Norwegian internet • Got access to UNIX, with TCP/IP and user services integrated • Gave research scientists early exposure to internet and its services • Early curriculum in computer communications; Oslo University Observations and reflections • Norwegian Arpanet Committee; dissolved itself due to lack of interest • IP address space too small for todays use • TCP split in
    [Show full text]
  • Engineering of Computer Networking Protocols : an Historical Perspective Gregor V
    Engineering of computer networking protocols : an historical perspective Gregor v. Bochmann University of Ottawa with thanks to Colin West and Dave Rayner http://www.site.uottawa.ca/~bochmann/talks/history.ppt McNaughton Lecture 24th Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering Niagara Falls, May 2011 Gregor v. Bochmann, University of Ottawa 1 Approximate time line 1960: first high-level programming languages 1965: time sharing operating systems and interactive terminals 1970: first experimental computer networks 1975: X.25 networking standard, proprietary networking architectures, e.g. IBM’s SNA 1980: experimental Internet, OSI standardization started, Teletex (a kind of Web service, Telidon in Canada) 1985: Formal Description Techniques (FDTs) developed, experimental tools 1990: commercial SDL tools, beginning of public use of the Internet and Web 1995: Java released, wide use of the Internet, digital wireless telephony spreads – UML (universal modeling language) 2000: XML and Web Services 2005: beginning integration of wireless services with the Internet 2011: there we are . Gregor v. Bochmann, University of Ottawa 2 Computer communications in the 1970ies Remote access to servers User terminals Batch entry terminals Line multiplexing line speed: 300 bps Link protocols (with sequence numbering) Alternating bit protocol (1969) Bisync, SDLC (IBM) Gregor v. Bochmann, University of Ottawa 3 Computer communications in the 1970ies Computer networks ARPANET (USA): first long distance computer network – first trial in 1969 NPL network (UK): first LAN Cyclade (France): introduced IP service at the network layer – around 1972 Donald Davies, NPL Leonard Kleinrock, UCLA Louis Pouzin with ARPAnet node INRIA (France) Gregor v. Bochmann, University of Ottawa 4 Computer communications in the 1970ies Protocol standards First network protocol standard: X.25 Vendor networking architectures IBM (SNA), DEC, Honeywell, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Growth of the Internet
    Growth of the Internet K. G. Coffman and A. M. Odlyzko AT&T Labs - Research [email protected], [email protected] Preliminary version, July 6, 2001 Abstract The Internet is the main cause of the recent explosion of activity in optical fiber telecommunica- tions. The high growth rates observed on the Internet, and the popular perception that growth rates were even higher, led to an upsurge in research, development, and investment in telecommunications. The telecom crash of 2000 occurred when investors realized that transmission capacity in place and under construction greatly exceeded actual traffic demand. This chapter discusses the growth of the Internet and compares it with that of other communication services. Internet traffic is growing, approximately doubling each year. There are reasonable arguments that it will continue to grow at this rate for the rest of this decade. If this happens, then in a few years, we may have a rough balance between supply and demand. Growth of the Internet K. G. Coffman and A. M. Odlyzko AT&T Labs - Research [email protected], [email protected] 1. Introduction Optical fiber communications was initially developed for the voice phone system. The feverish level of activity that we have experienced since the late 1990s, though, was caused primarily by the rapidly rising demand for Internet connectivity. The Internet has been growing at unprecedented rates. Moreover, because it is versatile and penetrates deeply into the economy, it is affecting all of society, and therefore has attracted inordinate amounts of public attention. The aim of this chapter is to summarize the current state of knowledge about the growth rates of the Internet, with special attention paid to the implications for fiber optic transmission.
    [Show full text]
  • The Internet and Isi: Four Decades of Innovation
    THE INTERNET AND ISI: FOUR DECADES OF INNOVATION ROD BECKSTROM President and Chief Executive Officer Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 40th Anniversary of USC Information Sciences Institute 26 April 2012 As prepared for delivery It’s an honor to be here today to mark the 40th anniversary of the University of Southern California’s Information Sciences Institute. Thank you to Herb Schorr for inviting me to speak with you today and participate in the day’s events. When he steps down he will leave some very large shoes to fill. When I received Herb’s invitation, I seized upon it as an opportunity to come before you to express the sincere gratitude that my colleagues and I feel for the work and support of ISI. When I think of ICANN and its development, and all we have accomplished, I never forget that we stand upon the shoulders of giants, many of whom contributed to my remarks today. In fact, I owe a special debt of gratitude to Bob Kahn, who has been a mentor to me. I am honored that he took the time to walk through a number of details in the history I have been asked to relate. The organizers asked me to speak about the history of ISI and ICANN. They also invited me to talk a bit about the future of the Internet. In my role as President and CEO of ICANN, I have many speaking engagements that are forward looking. They are opportunities to talk about ICANN’s work and how it will usher in the next phase in the history of the global, unified Internet that many of you have helped to create.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • The Internet Development Process: Observations and Reflections Pål Spilling
    The Internet Development Process: Observations and Reflections Pål Spilling To cite this version: Pål Spilling. The Internet Development Process: Observations and Reflections. 3rd History of Nordic Computing (HiNC), Oct 2010, Stockholm, Sweden. pp.297-304, 10.1007/978-3-642-23315-9_33. hal- 01564646 HAL Id: hal-01564646 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01564646 Submitted on 19 Jul 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution| 4.0 International License The Internet Development Process: Observations and Reflections Pål Spilling University Graduate Center (UNIK), Kjeller, Norway [email protected] Abstract. Based on the experience of being part of the team that developed the internet, the author will look back and provide a history of the Norwegian participation. The author will attempt to answer a number of questions such as why was The Norwegian Defense Research Establishment (FFI) invited to participate in the development process, what did Norway contribute to in the project, and what did Norway benefit from its participation? Keywords: ARPANET, DARPA, Ethernet, Internet, PRNET 1 A Short Historical Résumé The development of the internet went through two main phases.
    [Show full text]
  • 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 ............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • 2013-2014 Annual Report Annual Message from the Chairman Professor M
    Henry Samueli School of Engineering and Applied Science Electrical Engineering Annual Report 2013-2014 Table of Contents Annual Report Message from the Chairman 3 Gifts from Alumni & Faculty: David Mong and Oscar M. Stafsudd 4-5 Alumni Recognitions: Dariush Divsalar and Henry T. Nicholas, III 6-7 New Members of National Academies: Chandrashekar J. Joshi and Alan N. Willson 8 Faculty Highlights 4Stanley J. Osher 9 4Ali H. Sayed 10 4Mona Jarrahi 11 4Robert N. Candler 12 4Dejan Markovic and Ali H. Sayed 13 4Tatsuo Itoh 14 4Yahya Rahmat-Samii 15 4John D. Villasenor 16 4Suhas N. Diggavi 16 4Diana L. Huffaker 16 4Aydogan Ozcan 17 4Bahram Jalali 17 Best Paper Awards 18 2013-2014 Oustanding Student and Teaching Awards 19 Alumni Board 20 Department Faculty 21-29 New Books by Faculty 29 IEEE and HKN Student Clubs 30-31 Department Overview 32-33 Industrial Affiliates Program 34 2 Electrical Engineering | 2013-2014 Annual Report Message from the Chairman Professor M. -C. Frank Chang am pleased to share with you highlights of our ac- fessor Rob Candler was awarded the National Science tivities for academic year 2013-2014. Our faculty, Foundation’s CAREER Award, the federal agency’s I students, and alumni continue to push innovation by most prestigious award in support of junior faculty. developing state-of-the-art technology while making Professor John Villasenor was named a member of the a positive impact on society and giving back to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the non-profit electrical engineering community and beyond. organization specializing in foreign policy and inter- The legacy of our department is carried on by dis- national affairs, and Professor Diana Huffaker was tinguished alumni.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]