[ih] NIC, InterNIC, and Modelling Administration

[vint at google.com (Vint Cerf)]

john,

I thought INWG 96 was a compromise that was not identical to, though it drew
heavily upon, the Cyclades TS protocol?

v


On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 9:25 AM, John Day <jeanjour at comcast.net> wrote:

> At 8:35 -0500 2011/02/18, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>
>> John Day wrote:
>>
>>> At 7:14 -0500 2011/02/18, Miles Fidelman wrote:
>>>
>>>> You've said that before.  Can you elaborate with some examples of where
>>>> ISO has simply codified existing practice?
>>>>
>>> Screw threads, highway signs, paper size, HDLC, Transport Layer, Session
>> Layer, Network Layer
>>
>> I was all set to buy "screw threads" - until I read the Wikipedia article
>> on
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screw_thread#History_of_standardization
>>
>> Re. Transport, Session, Network layer: how can you say that with a
>> straight face, after all the recent discussion here?  (I don't see an ISO
>> number stamped on TCP/IP.)
>>
>
> I figured you would take the bait.  ;-)
>
> TP4 was INWG 96 which was CYCLADES TS which had been operational since
> 1972.
>
> Network:  X.25 was an ISO standard that had been in use since 1976.
>
> Session:  Was lifted (for better or worse, mostly worse) from SGVIII
> Videotex standards that were built and operating in France.
>
> No there is no ISO number stamped on TCP.  That decision was worked out in
> an open process in IFIP WG6.1 prior to start of OSI, which chose a modified
> CYCLADES TS.
>
> As long as we are on the topic, all of the IEEE 802 standards are also ISO
> standards.  Ethernet was in use for close to 10 years before it was an ISO
> standard.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20110218/2ecc77d7/attachment.html>