Re: Ethernet names...
> On Oct 4, 2018, at 11:00 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk > wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 14:19 Eric Smith wrote: > >> except that in the Pelkey account the Alto network wasn't designed and >> built until June, _after_ the name change. >> > > I should have written that it the design and construction _started_ in > June. The initial Ethernet wasn't completed until late 1974. Below, my interpretation of Dr. Metcalfe’s talk. Dates were generally backed up by pictures of documents, with dates visible on the covers, so I suspect the timelines given are reasonably accurate. I didn’t hear anything to contradict the timeline Grant was describing. The talk was fun to listen to, lots of dry humor and very good scene-setting and reminders of what the computational environment used to be like. ——— Metcalfe claimed he got his start at serial data transmission "Sending bits 1 at a time down an acoustic delay line memory”. The other parts of that project didn’t deliver, but he learned a lot from that. He went on to connect a PDP-10 to the network at MIT, using similar serial technology. He showed a document dated Oct. 1972, "Scenarios for using the Arpnet” He got a Harvard PhD in 1972 He went to Xerox PARC in 1972 He showed a later photo of a Xerox Parc Alto personal computer, with Ethernet, and stated the intent there was to put that on the desk of all of the engineeris at PARC. He started with 1/2" yellow coax - yellow because that was the color his group decided to order. He says that is the standard color, which standard is almost universally ignored. He showed a diagram, including both the term "ether” - because the medimum could be coax cable - or telephone “ether", or radio “ether” - which presages the 802.11 standards. He showed a photo of an Aloha packet network radio system circa 1970. To the question, why did they not go not straight to wi-fi? He responded that RF technology would support no more than 4kbits at the time, while semiconductors developed in the 1990's allowed transition to radio at hundreds of kbits/s. They wanted at least hundreds of kbits/s, so they went with cable. The first version worked at 2.94 Mbits/s, due to card space restrictions - a 170 ns clock present on the backplane of the Xerox Alto was the determinant, since there was no place to put a clock on the original card (which had to go into the Alto). The bandwidth to his office went up by * 10,000 on installation of his card, vs. the old 300 bps modem it replaced. He founded 3Com corporation in 1980, named for "Computer Communications Compatibility", intending to generate that compatibility via standards. He said he would not start a company name with a number if he had it to do over again. Steve Jobs helped him start the company, invited him to the premier of Toy Story and sent a limo, and introduced him to Regis Mckenna (sic?) who was the marketing guy for 3Com for a few years. 3Com’s first shipping hardware was a transceiver running at 10 Mbits/s, costing $750. PC's at the time were not powerful enough to merit 10 Mbits/s, so 3Com pivoted to supply to Unix workstations, including Sun. By then they were moving to thin-net. He showed a draft Standard "blue book" Sept. 1980. Digital, Intel, Xerox were major participants. Competition from IBM and GM (?) led to 3 competing standards: IEEE 802.3, 802.4, 802.5. He said 3Com shipped token ring devices before IBM did, but had "compatibility” issues in IBM environments due to IBM implementation. In Sept. 1982, 3Com shipped etherlink for IBM PC at $1000/card. He showed a graphic of a 3Com sales tool Circa 1982, showing a plot of the value of the network as being proportional to the number of “connections” which is the square of the number of nodes. This formula was described as "Metcalfe's law" in Forbes magazine in 1995. Part of 3Com’s success was its ability to demonstrate network effectiveness as it would be ~10 years in the future by looking at PARC, which his competitors could not do. He referred to this as a “time machine” in marketing research. —— There was more to the talk, but that’s most of the historically relevant things he said. Hope this is helpful. - Mark
Re: Ethernet names...
> On Oct 4, 2018, at 11:00 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk > wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 14:19 Eric Smith wrote: > >> except that in the Pelkey account the Alto network wasn't designed and >> built until June, _after_ the name change. >> > > I should have written that it the design and construction _started_ in > June. The initial Ethernet wasn't completed until late 1974. > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside SwRI and it may contain > attachments and/or links. Do not open attachments or click on links unless > you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Good talk. I’ll summarize my notes and post tonight. Apologies for top-posting earlier, I was in a hurry. - Mark
Re: Ethernet names...
Listening to Bob Metcalfe talk right now (15:30 CST), and there may be a question and answer session. Any questions? - Mark 210-522-6025 office 210-379-4635cell > On Oct 4, 2018, at 11:00 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk > wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 14:19 Eric Smith wrote: > >> except that in the Pelkey account the Alto network wasn't designed and >> built until June, _after_ the name change. >> > > I should have written that it the design and construction _started_ in > June. The initial Ethernet wasn't completed until late 1974. > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside SwRI and it may contain > attachments and/or links. Do not open attachments or click on links unless > you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Re: Ethernet names...
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018, 14:19 Eric Smith wrote: > except that in the Pelkey account the Alto network wasn't designed and > built until June, _after_ the name change. > I should have written that it the design and construction _started_ in June. The initial Ethernet wasn't completed until late 1974.
Re: Ethernet names...
On 10/02/2018 09:20 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: I think Metcalfe was just giving credit for where he got the idea of letting packets collide like alohanet was doing. He took their idea and improved with collision detection and borrowed the name of his improvements and subsequent network "The Alto Aloha Network" i.e. it was his improved "alto" version of the concept inspired by alohanet. In May 1973 (I later found) he renamed his network system "Ethernet". There were a number of other more established networks out there at the time, this was just the start. I think this whole area of research is very interesting. According to the following link (which is purportedly an excerpt from page 5 of "Ethernet: The Definitive Guide"), the 3 Mbps Experimental Ethernet was indeed originally called Ethernet. Link - Why is it called Ethernet? - http://www.ethermanage.com/why-is-it-called-ethernet/ """ In late 1972, Metcalfe and his Xerox PARC colleagues developed the first experimental “Ethernet” network system to interconnect Xerox Altos to one another, and to servers and laser printers. The signal clock for the experimental interface was derived from the Alto’s system clock, resulting in a data transmission rate on the experimental Ethernet of 2.94 Mb/s. Metcalfe’s first experimental network was called the Alto Aloha Network. In 1973, Metcalfe changed the name to “Ethernet,” to make it clear that the system could support any computer‚ not just Altos‚ and to point out that his new network mechanisms had evolved well beyond the Aloha system. He chose to base the name on the word “ether” as a way of describing an essential feature of the system: the physical medium (i.e., a cable) carries bits to all stations, much the same way that the old “luminiferous ether” was once thought to propagate electromagnetic waves through space. Thus, Ethernet was born. """ I apparently need to pick up a copy of Ethernet: The Definitive Guide and do some reading. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: Ethernet names...
On 10/04/2018 12:16 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: I had to look up SQE. http://www.ethermanage.com/ethernet/sqe/sqe.html It's 802-speak for the same signal. I agree that it's the same concept and function. Though the link you shared states that there is some timing difference between D.I.X.'s "Collision Presence Test" (CPT) and IEEE's 802.3 "Signal Quality Error" (SQE). That page says you have to turn it off for the transceiver connected to an 802.3 repeater, but it should be on in all other cases. Sounds like the 802.3 people got the transceiver design wrong and that rule is a workaround. There certainly is no similar rule in the Ethernet spec, and repeaters are definitely part of that spec. Given that CPT / SQE / HB are between the transceiver and the host NIC, and NOT between the transceiver and the Ethernet, IMHO it makes sense that CPT / SQE / HB should not be used with a repeater. After all, a repeater is going between two (or more?) Ethernet segments. As such, I don't think it's a problem with the specification or design of transceivers. I think the CPT / SQE / HB are in some ways a feedback loop between the transceiver and the NIC to test the collision detection circuitry in the NIC. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: Ethernet names...
The typo(s) in the quote are mine, not the book's.
Re: Ethernet names...
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 1:55 PM Bill Degnan wrote: > I must have misrepresented this then, the book does claim Aloha Net to be > just a working name in the very beginning. When it got to the beta testing > phase it was already called Ethernet > After you referenced _Where Wizards Stay Up Late_, I reread the relevant portions, and I don't think you misrepresented what the book said. I think the account given in the book may be a bit confused on this point. For example, on page 239: Metcalfe and Lampson, along with Xerox researchers David Boogs and Chuck Thacker, built their first Alto Aloha system in Bob Taylor's lab at Xerox PARC. To their great delight, it worked. In May 1973 Metcalfe suggested a name, [...] My interpretation of that would be that they built it, had something basically working, were calling it Alto Aloha, and then later Metcalfe named in Ethernet. That sequence of events is contradicted by Pelkey, and my guess is that Pelkey is more authoritative on this point. Pelkey describes the name change from Alto Aloha to Ether as happening in May 1973 in agreement with WWSUL, except that in the Pelkey account the Alto network wasn't designed and built until June, _after_ the name change. However, I still think that WWSUL is an excellent book, well worth reading. Eric
Re: Ethernet names...
> > > Thanks! From that, it sounds like the name "Alto Aloha" was only used > during early planning, before CSMA/CD was invented, and that nothing that > was actually built ever used that name, contrary to the account in _Where > Wizards Stay Up Late_. > I must have misrepresented this then, the book does claim Aloha Net to be just a working name in the very beginning. When it got to the beta testing phase it was already called Ethernet b
Re: Ethernet names...
> On Oct 4, 2018, at 1:43 PM, Warner Losh wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:39 AM Paul Koning via cctalk > wrote: > > > > On Oct 4, 2018, at 1:30 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk > > wrote: > > ... > > That makes me wonder about the "heartbeat" switch that I see on older AUI > > transceivers. > > Yes, I think that's the collision test. So in the OFF position you have a V1 > compatible transceiver, ON is needed for V2. > > Is that the same as SQE? I always had to turn that bad-boy off or risk > collision storms :( > > Warenr I had to look up SQE. http://www.ethermanage.com/ethernet/sqe/sqe.html It's 802-speak for the same signal. That page says you have to turn it off for the transceiver connected to an 802.3 repeater, but it should be on in all other cases. Sounds like the 802.3 people got the transceiver design wrong and that rule is a workaround. There certainly is no similar rule in the Ethernet spec, and repeaters are definitely part of that spec. paul
Re: Ethernet names...
On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 11:39 AM Paul Koning via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > On Oct 4, 2018, at 1:30 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > On 10/04/2018 11:26 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > >> That's sort of accurate. A quick look shows some key differences: V2 > adds the "collision presence test" -- verifying the collision detect signal > is working. There is also the "jabber timer" -- a watchdog timeout that > stops excessively long frames. And V2 introduces the loopback protocol > (protocol type 90-00). > > > > That mostly sounds like the frame formats are the same on the wire and > that the differences are in the protocols that use said frame. > > > >> The collision presence test is somewhat of an interoperability issue: > if you attach a V1 transceiver to a V2 NIC, the NIC would complain on every > transmit that it didn't get the collision test signal. > > > > That makes me wonder about the "heartbeat" switch that I see on older > AUI transceivers. > > Yes, I think that's the collision test. So in the OFF position you have a > V1 compatible transceiver, ON is needed for V2. > Is that the same as SQE? I always had to turn that bad-boy off or risk collision storms :( Warenr
Re: Ethernet names...
> On Oct 4, 2018, at 1:30 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk > wrote: > > On 10/04/2018 11:26 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: >> That's sort of accurate. A quick look shows some key differences: V2 adds >> the "collision presence test" -- verifying the collision detect signal is >> working. There is also the "jabber timer" -- a watchdog timeout that stops >> excessively long frames. And V2 introduces the loopback protocol (protocol >> type 90-00). > > That mostly sounds like the frame formats are the same on the wire and that > the differences are in the protocols that use said frame. > >> The collision presence test is somewhat of an interoperability issue: if you >> attach a V1 transceiver to a V2 NIC, the NIC would complain on every >> transmit that it didn't get the collision test signal. > > That makes me wonder about the "heartbeat" switch that I see on older AUI > transceivers. Yes, I think that's the collision test. So in the OFF position you have a V1 compatible transceiver, ON is needed for V2. paul
Re: Ethernet names...
On 10/04/2018 11:26 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: That's sort of accurate. A quick look shows some key differences: V2 adds the "collision presence test" -- verifying the collision detect signal is working. There is also the "jabber timer" -- a watchdog timeout that stops excessively long frames. And V2 introduces the loopback protocol (protocol type 90-00). That mostly sounds like the frame formats are the same on the wire and that the differences are in the protocols that use said frame. The collision presence test is somewhat of an interoperability issue: if you attach a V1 transceiver to a V2 NIC, the NIC would complain on every transmit that it didn't get the collision test signal. That makes me wonder about the "heartbeat" switch that I see on older AUI transceivers. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: Ethernet names...
> On Oct 4, 2018, at 1:07 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk > wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 10:55 PM Grant Taylor via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > >> On 10/02/2018 05:27 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote: >>> 3 Mbps Ethernet is _NOT_ Ethernet I. Both Ethernet I and II were 10 Mbps >>> DIX standards, with II having only minor differences from I. >> >> Okay. Thank you for the correction ~> clarification. >> >> Now I'll keep an eye out (but not quite search for) the differences >> between Ethernet (I) and Ethernet II > > > The Ethernet I and II standards are available from Bitsavers: >http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/xerox/ethernet/ > > From the preface of _The Ethernet_ Version 2.0: > Version 2.0 of the Ethernet specification reflects the experience of the > three corporations in designing equipment to the Version 1.0 specification. > Version 2.0 includes network management functions and better defines the > details of the physical channel signalling. Version 2.0 is upward > compatible with Version 1.0. Equipment designed to the two specifications > is interoperable. That's sort of accurate. A quick look shows some key differences: V2 adds the "collision presence test" -- verifying the collision detect signal is working. There is also the "jabber timer" -- a watchdog timeout that stops excessively long frames. And V2 introduces the loopback protocol (protocol type 90-00). The collision presence test is somewhat of an interoperability issue: if you attach a V1 transceiver to a V2 NIC, the NIC would complain on every transmit that it didn't get the collision test signal. paul
Re: Ethernet names...
On 10/04/2018 11:07 AM, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote: The Ethernet I and II standards are available from Bitsavers: http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/xerox/ethernet/ Cool. From the preface of _The Ethernet_ Version 2.0: Version 2.0 of the Ethernet specification reflects the experience of the three corporations in designing equipment to the Version 1.0 specification. Version 2.0 includes network management functions and better defines the details of the physical channel signalling. Okay. Intriguing. Version 2.0 is upward compatible with Version 1.0. Equipment designed to the two specifications is interoperable. My brain is having some trouble unpacking and understanding "upward compatible". - I always think that it should be "new version is /downward/ compatible with the old version" or "the old version is /upward/ compatible with the new version". It's also stumbling on "the two specifications is interoperable". Is that "the (version) two specification is interoperable (with the version one specification)" or "the two specification(s) /are/ interoperable"? This might not make much difference. But my brain trips on are they truly 100% interoperable (as in extra fields in version 2 that version 1 ignores) or is it a case of version 1 only understand version 1 and version 2 is able to pretend to be version 1 when talking to version 1? Sort of like a crude diagram: v1 <--->| v2 v1 |<--->| v2 v1 |<---> v2 Which of the three is it? I'll have to check out the documentation on Bitsavers. Thank you for the link. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: Ethernet names...
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 11:21 PM Mark Kahrs via cctalk wrote: > I was there and it was always called "The Ethernet". When the 10 Mb > standard came into being, it was then referred to as "The Experimental > Ethernet". If you want to be *really* pedantic, you could refer to it as > the "2.94 MHz Ethernet" --- but that would be silly. > > If you'd like to see how Aloha inspired Metcalfe, read this: > > > http://www.historyofcomputercommunications.info/Book/6/6.7-EthernetRobertMetcalfeXeroxPARC71-75.html > Thanks! From that, it sounds like the name "Alto Aloha" was only used during early planning, before CSMA/CD was invented, and that nothing that was actually built ever used that name, contrary to the account in _Where Wizards Stay Up Late_.
Re: Ethernet names...
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 10:55 PM Grant Taylor via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > On 10/02/2018 05:27 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote: > > 3 Mbps Ethernet is _NOT_ Ethernet I. Both Ethernet I and II were 10 Mbps > > DIX standards, with II having only minor differences from I. > > Okay. Thank you for the correction ~> clarification. > > Now I'll keep an eye out (but not quite search for) the differences > between Ethernet (I) and Ethernet II The Ethernet I and II standards are available from Bitsavers: http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/xerox/ethernet/ >From the preface of _The Ethernet_ Version 2.0: Version 2.0 of the Ethernet specification reflects the experience of the three corporations in designing equipment to the Version 1.0 specification. Version 2.0 includes network management functions and better defines the details of the physical channel signalling. Version 2.0 is upward compatible with Version 1.0. Equipment designed to the two specifications is interoperable.
Re: Ethernet names...
On 10/04/2018 02:31 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote: It was probably just known as "Ethernet". If there's only one kind, why give it a longer name to distinguish it from future variants that may never come to be? My bumph tells me it was called "Experimental Ethernet", but I suspect that's a name given to it in retrospect. I agree that the "Experimental" in "Experimental Ethernet" is in fact probably retroactive. "Ethernet I" and "Ethernet II" were 10Mb/s thicknet variants which evolved into the 802.3/10Base5 standards. The exact details of the differences are probably lost in time. The contributions to this thread have satisfied my curiosity / question that "Ethernet (I)" was not the 3 Mbps Experimental Ethernet. Although thicknet is finally dead -- we had to hammer many stakes into the cable to make sure, but managed it in the end -- Um … I'm somewhat reluctant to tell you that there's a Thicknet segment in my basement with transceivers attacked. I've not sent traffic across it /yet/. But I will. ;-) Admittedly, it is purely for edutainment and hobbyist retro-computing / retro-networking reasons. Ethernet II's layer 2 protocol remains in use in modern IP networks, and contemporary usage of "Ethernet II" refers to just that rather than the older standard. Yep. I need to re-read something to see if (a variant of) Ethernet II frames are used for IP on WiFi or if they are closer to 802.2 LLC + SNAP similar to what is used on other, non-Ethernet, 802 networks. -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: Ethernet names...
On Tue, Oct 02, 2018 at 11:34:54AM -0600, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote: > Does anybody know names / terms that correspond to the original 3 Mbps > Ethernet? > I.e. 10 Mbps Ethernet is also knows as Ethernet II (2) and D.I.X. (for > Digital, Intel, and Xerox). > Was the first 3 Mbps Ethernet simply called "Ethernet" with an implicit "I" > (1)? Was there a name to differentiate it from D.I.X.? It was probably just known as "Ethernet". If there's only one kind, why give it a longer name to distinguish it from future variants that may never come to be? My bumph tells me it was called "Experimental Ethernet", but I suspect that's a name given to it in retrospect. "Ethernet I" and "Ethernet II" were 10Mb/s thicknet variants which evolved into the 802.3/10Base5 standards. The exact details of the differences are probably lost in time. Although thicknet is finally dead -- we had to hammer many stakes into the cable to make sure, but managed it in the end -- Ethernet II's layer 2 protocol remains in use in modern IP networks, and contemporary usage of "Ethernet II" refers to just that rather than the older standard.
Re: Ethernet names...
Grant - Occasional vague references to “I”, when Ethernet II was used (as I remember). I assumed the reference was for initial 3 Mbps work at PARC. Gateway Communications started in Irvine, CA (1981?) offering G/Net (~double the 3 Mbps), I remember installing their demonstration system (1982 or 1983?) By 1983, 3Com ThinNet (10-Base-2) released for IBM PCs. University of Iowa graduate college installed one of their first LANs with an Altos sever (8086, 10 MHz). greg == From: Grant Taylor Subject: Ethernet names... Does anybody know names / terms that correspond to the original 3 Mbps Ethernet? I.e. 10 Mbps Ethernet is also knows as Ethernet II (2) and D.I.X. (for Digital, Intel, and Xerox). Was the first 3 Mbps Ethernet simply called "Ethernet" with an implicit "I" (1)? Was there a name to differentiate it from D.I.X.? Grant. . . . unix || die Sent from iPad Air
RE: Ethernet names...
From: Noel Chiappa Sent: Wednesday, October 03, 2018 5:49 AM >> From: Eric Smith >> 3 Mbps was sometimes referred to as experimental Ethernet, but AFAIK >> the only official name was "Ethernet". >> The best way to refer to it is probably "3 Mbps Ethernet". That's what almost we call it here at the museum. We have a Xerox PDP-11 3Mbit Ethernet interface board in the front end of a DEC 1095 running WAITS, and a 3Mbit<->10Mbit bridge device that allows the Altos to talk to WAITS. > I was trying to remember what we called it at MIT (which had one), but my > memory was hazy, so I want back and looked at the sources for the packet > switch I wrote (which supported the first Ethernet, before the 10Mbit version > even came out), and I found (slightly to my suprise) that it was "3Mbit > Experimental Ethernet", or just plain "Exerimental Ethernet". (Of course, that > was just MIT - other sites may have had different terminology.) No doubt we > renamed it once the 10Mbit version showed up - I can probably search for early > versions of the code to confirm this, if anyone cares. Anyway, I'd vote for > the latter, short name. At Stanford, we tended to call it the "PUP Ethernet" after 10Mbit came in. >> From: Bill Degnan >> See where wizards stay up lote by Katie Halner and matthew lyon. > Interesting! It looks (from the Notes) like this was gleaned from an interview > with Metcalfe, and she was _very_ careful (I helped her with the technical > details - you can find me in the Acks), so I'd tend to believe it. > My _guess_ is that was his early, 'in his head' name for the thing, and when > they set out to actually build it, it was re-named 'Ethernet' (as Al's memo > search seems to indicate). Of course, the very first baseband cable network at PARC was 1 megabit/second; It may be that that is what got an Aloha name. But that's *my* guess. Rich Rich Alderson Vintage Computing Sr. Systems Engineer Living Computers: Museum + Labs 2245 1st Avenue S Seattle, WA 98134 mailto:ri...@livingcomputers.org http://www.LivingComputers.org/
Re: Ethernet names...
> From: Eric Smith > 3 Mbps was sometimes referred to as experimental Ethernet, but AFAIK > the only official name was "Ethernet". > The best way to refer to it is probably "3 Mbps Ethernet". I was trying to remember what we called it at MIT (which had one), but my memory was hazy, so I want back and looked at the sources for the packet switch I wrote (which supported the first Ethernet, before the 10Mbit version even came out), and I found (slightly to my suprise) that it was "3Mbit Experimental Ethernet", or just plain "Exerimental Ethernet". (Of course, that was just MIT - other sites may have had different terminology.) No doubt we renamed it once the 10Mbit version showed up - I can probably search for early versions of the code to confirm this, if anyone cares. Anyway, I'd vote for the latter, short name. > From: Bill Degnan > See where wizards stay up lote by Katie Halner and matthew lyon. Interesting! It looks (from the Notes) like this was gleaned from an interview with Metcalfe, and she was _very_ careful (I helped her with the technical details - you can find me in the Acks), so I'd tend to believe it. My _guess_ is that was his early, 'in his head' name for the thing, and when they set out to actually build it, it was re-named 'Ethernet' (as Al's memo search seems to indicate). Noel
Re: Ethernet names...
On 10/02/2018 07:38 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: I later looked this up to confirm. See where wizards stay up lote by Katie Halner and matthew lyon. IMHO Where Wizards Stay Up Late is a *WONDERFUL* book. It's been too long since I've read it. Perhaps I should (re)read it (again). Somehow I missed the type of technical details that I'm looking for the last time I read it. Of course, when I'm reading for edutainment reasons, I frequently don't retain hard core details. At least not on the first read. Well there you go, now you have ;-) -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: Ethernet names...
On 10/02/2018 05:27 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote: 3 Mbps Ethernet is _NOT_ Ethernet I. Both Ethernet I and II were 10 Mbps DIX standards, with II having only minor differences from I. Okay. Thank you for the correction ~> clarification. Now I'll keep an eye out (but not quite search for) the differences between Ethernet (I) and Ethernet II. 3 Mbps was sometimes referred to as experimental Ethernet, but AFAIK the only official name was "Ethernet". ACK The best way to refer to it is probably "3 Mbps Ethernet". :-) -- Grant. . . . unix || die
Re: Ethernet names...
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 10:55 PM Eric Smith via cctalk wrote: > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 7:38 PM Bill Degnan wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 7:46 PM Eric Smith via cctalk < > > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > I've never heard of an Alto being connected to an Aloha Network, nor of > any > > > >> network inside Xerox being called "Aloha". > >> > > Well there you go, now you have > > > > Thanks! I stand corrected. > I think Metcalfe was just giving credit for where he got the idea of letting packets collide like alohanet was doing. He took their idea and improved with collision detection and borrowed the name of his improvements and subsequent network "The Alto Aloha Network" i.e. it was his improved "alto" version of the concept inspired by alohanet.In May 1973 (I later found) he renamed his network system "Ethernet". There were a number of other more established networks out there at the time, this was just the start. I think this whole area of research is very interesting. b
Re: Ethernet names...
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 7:38 PM Bill Degnan wrote: > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 7:46 PM Eric Smith via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > I've never heard of an Alto being connected to an Aloha Network, nor of any > >> network inside Xerox being called "Aloha". >> > Well there you go, now you have > Thanks! I stand corrected.
Re: Ethernet names...
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 7:46 PM Eric Smith via cctalk wrote: > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018, 11:47 Bill Degnan via cctalk > wrote: > > > Ethernet was the name given to the Alto (XEROX) Aloha Network > > > It wasn't an Aloha Network. > > There is a difference between Alohanet and the alto aloha network. > created (?) > > by Bob Metcalff (sp?), which was based/inspired by an improved version of > > the ALOHANET used by the U of Hawaii. > > > In their CACM paper, Metcalfe and Boggs credit the Aloha Network, but > Ethernet was an entirely new network design, not an incremental improvement > to Aloha Network. > Inspired by, but I did not claim them to be the same, just for the record. > > I think Ethernet was a nickname, > > > > I wasn't there, but I've never seen any source claim that it was a > nickname. > > I later looked this up to confirm. See where wizards stay up lote by Katie Halner and matthew lyon. > eventually becoming the official name of what was originally the Alto Aloha > > Network. > > > > I've never heard of an Alto being connected to an Aloha Network, nor of any > network inside Xerox being called "Aloha". > Well there you go, now you have b
Re: Ethernet names...
On 10/2/18 4:45 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote: > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018, 11:47 Bill Degnan via cctalk > I've never heard of an Alto being connected to an Aloha Network, nor of any > network inside Xerox being called "Aloha". > I just went back and reviewed every memo I can find that I have access to (going back to March, 1974 when there were three Nova Ethernet boards and two Alto Ethernet boards, and they are consistently calling it "Ethernet". In fact, the word "Aloha" never appears.
Re: Ethernet names...
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018, 11:47 Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: > Ethernet was the name given to the Alto (XEROX) Aloha Network It wasn't an Aloha Network. created (?) > by Bob Metcalff (sp?), which was based/inspired by an improved version of > the ALOHANET used by the U of Hawaii. In their CACM paper, Metcalfe and Boggs credit the Aloha Network, but Ethernet was an entirely new network design, not an incremental improvement to Aloha Network. I think Ethernet was a nickname, > I wasn't there, but I've never seen any source claim that it was a nickname. eventually becoming the official name of what was originally the Alto Aloha > Network. > I've never heard of an Alto being connected to an Aloha Network, nor of any network inside Xerox being called "Aloha".
Re: Ethernet names...
On Tue, Oct 2, 2018, 11:35 Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote: > Does anybody know names / terms that correspond to the original 3 Mbps > Ethernet? > > I.e. 10 Mbps Ethernet is also knows as Ethernet II (2) and D.I.X. (for > Digital, Intel, and Xerox). > > Was the first 3 Mbps Ethernet simply called "Ethernet" with an implicit > "I" (1)? Was there a name to differentiate it from D.I.X.? > 3 Mbps Ethernet is _NOT_ Ethernet I. Both Ethernet I and II were 10 Mbps DIX standards, with II having only minor differences from I. 3 Mbps was sometimes referred to as experimental Ethernet, but AFAIK the only official name was "Ethernet". The best way to refer to it is probably "3 Mbps Ethernet".
Re: Ethernet names...
To the best of my knowledge, at the time it was developed at PARC in 1973/74, it was referred to as "Ethernet" (or "The Ethernet") and later was referred to as "Xerox Experimental Ethernet" likely to differentiate it from the developing 10mbit standards... - Josh On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 10:47 AM Bill Degnan via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Ethernet was the name given to the Alto (XEROX) Aloha Network created (?) > by Bob Metcalff (sp?), which was based/inspired by an improved version of > the ALOHANET used by the U of Hawaii. I think Ethernet was a nickname, > eventually becoming the official name of what was originally the Alto Aloha > Network. > > I did not look this up in Wikipedia, I am sure this must be somewhere > > Bill > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 1:35 PM Grant Taylor via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > Does anybody know names / terms that correspond to the original 3 Mbps > > Ethernet? > > > > I.e. 10 Mbps Ethernet is also knows as Ethernet II (2) and D.I.X. (for > > Digital, Intel, and Xerox). > > > > Was the first 3 Mbps Ethernet simply called "Ethernet" with an implicit > > "I" (1)? Was there a name to differentiate it from D.I.X.? > > > > > > > > Grant. . . . > > unix || die > > >
Re: Ethernet names...
Not clear the 3 Mb one had a name of its own. Note that Aloha is fundamentally different from Ethernet. Aloha is MA but not CS nor CD, and its performance characteristics are very different from Ethernet. paul > On Oct 2, 2018, at 1:46 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk > wrote: > > Ethernet was the name given to the Alto (XEROX) Aloha Network created (?) > by Bob Metcalff (sp?), which was based/inspired by an improved version of > the ALOHANET used by the U of Hawaii. I think Ethernet was a nickname, > eventually becoming the official name of what was originally the Alto Aloha > Network. > > I did not look this up in Wikipedia, I am sure this must be somewhere > > Bill > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 1:35 PM Grant Taylor via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > >> Does anybody know names / terms that correspond to the original 3 Mbps >> Ethernet? >> >> I.e. 10 Mbps Ethernet is also knows as Ethernet II (2) and D.I.X. (for >> Digital, Intel, and Xerox). >> >> Was the first 3 Mbps Ethernet simply called "Ethernet" with an implicit >> "I" (1)? Was there a name to differentiate it from D.I.X.? >> >> >> >> Grant. . . . >> unix || die >>
Re: Ethernet names...
Ethernet was the name given to the Alto (XEROX) Aloha Network created (?) by Bob Metcalff (sp?), which was based/inspired by an improved version of the ALOHANET used by the U of Hawaii. I think Ethernet was a nickname, eventually becoming the official name of what was originally the Alto Aloha Network. I did not look this up in Wikipedia, I am sure this must be somewhere Bill On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 1:35 PM Grant Taylor via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Does anybody know names / terms that correspond to the original 3 Mbps > Ethernet? > > I.e. 10 Mbps Ethernet is also knows as Ethernet II (2) and D.I.X. (for > Digital, Intel, and Xerox). > > Was the first 3 Mbps Ethernet simply called "Ethernet" with an implicit > "I" (1)? Was there a name to differentiate it from D.I.X.? > > > > Grant. . . . > unix || die >
