Here's some information about HOSTS.TXT from Jake Feinler, formerly of
SRI-NIC.
Alex.
> The SRI NIC registered hosts and maintained the official list of host
> names from 1970 up until the SRI NIC ceased to exist in Oct. 1992. At
> that time naming and addressing activities were turned over to
--On Tuesday, 30 January, 2001 00:44 -0800 Dave Crocker
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmmm. It occurs to me that what you have highlighted is
> another Internet demonstration that scaling imposes more
> stringent demands.
Probably
> However this was perhaps one of the earliest examples of socia
At 01:59 PM 1/27/2001 -0500, John C Klensin wrote:
>"spooling" or "mail store" mail-receiving processes came later --
>in the Multics case, not much later, as it became clear that
>direct-to-user-space delivery raised some security issues that no
>one was happy about-- but well before SMTP.
Hmmm.
Jeff Weisberg wrote:
> quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> | I'm curious when HOSTS.TXT finally died completely.
>
> My memory isn't what it used to be, but at rochester.edu, I'm
> thinking it had to be in use until at least 89 or 90.
It was in use on the math department Sun workstations when I was at
quoth [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
|
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan McDonald) writes:
| >
| > Speaking of that, does anyone know where one could find a copy (final,
| > historical, or otherwise) of HOSTS.TXT? I barely remember huge /etc/hosts
| > files, and it would be historically interesting to peruse, I thi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan McDonald) writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Ole J. Jacobsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> >I think NATs should be loaded with the final copy of HOSTS.TXT
> >and assign names on the net 10 side accordingly...
>
> Speaking of that, does anyone know where one c
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Ole J. Jacobsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I think NATs should be loaded with the final copy of HOSTS.TXT
>and assign names on the net 10 side accordingly...
Speaking of that, does anyone know where one could find a copy (final,
historical, or otherwise) of HOST
In the 1980s we ran an X.400 to SMTP-RFC822 mail
gateway at Wisconsin. This was during the height of the
Internet / OSI protocol wars.
Earlier, we also ran a BITNET to Internet mail gateway.
Both used software developed at Wisconsin (an IBM VM
internet protocol implementation (WISCNET) f
My apologies -- I should have been more precise about chronology.
When we _first_ did mail-over-FTP, the norm was to deliver more
or less directly into the user's file system. The notion of
"spooling" or "mail store" mail-receiving processes came later --
in the Multics case, not much later, as i
At 03:14 PM 1/26/2001 -0500, John C Klensin wrote:
>With FTP, the mail was delivered more or less into the space of
>the receiving user. So any conversations that were done (and I
>can't remember much, if anything) would have needed to be done in
>what we would now call the receiving MUA -- there
Can people *please* trim the CC list on this thread - and in particular, make
sure to remove "Info-Explorer"? I'm so tired of getting three copies of
everything...
Noel
--On Thursday, 25 January, 2001 23:41 -0500 vint cerf
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> my recollection is that we did very little email conversion -
> but maybe I am thinking just about ftp?
With FTP, the mail was delivered more or less into the space of
the receiving user. So any conversations t
on that picture, UCL would have been running triple (or maybe even
quadruple) staccks - we had the x.25/colour book (you did i think),
and the cambridge ring stuff, as well as some weird port expanders and
so on..
to get email between 2 pdp11/44s on a cambridge ring at one point we
used to u
At 11:41 PM 1/25/2001 -0500, vint cerf wrote:
>my recollection is that we did very little email conversion - but
>maybe I am thinking just about ftp?
well, you gave udel an arpa contract to do an ncp/tcp email gateway.
but, then, I didn't stay around to implement it myself...
somebody convinced
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 20:33:23 -0800
From: Dave Crocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Peter Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bob Braden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 10
my recollection is that we did very little email conversion - but
maybe I am thinking just about ftp?
vint
At 08:33 PM 1/25/2001 -0800, Dave Crocker wrote:
>At 10:21 PM 1/25/2001 -0500, vint cerf wrote:
>>we never actually did this though
>
>except for email...
>
>
>>vint
>>
>>At 05:52 PM 1/25/2
At 10:21 PM 1/25/2001 -0500, vint cerf wrote:
>we never actually did this though
except for email...
>vint
>
>At 05:52 PM 1/25/2001 -0800, Peter Ford wrote:
>
> >Ah, dual stacks, a time tested transition strategy. But there was some
> Application Layer Gateway cruft (ALG) although not at the
we never actually did this though
vint
At 05:52 PM 1/25/2001 -0800, Peter Ford wrote:
>Ah, dual stacks, a time tested transition strategy. But there was some Application
>Layer Gateway cruft (ALG) although not at the level of sophistication and beauty of a
>NAT ...
>
>From RFC 801:
>
>Becau
Kind of like public schools in England which are private ;-)
I think NATs should be loaded with the final copy of HOSTS.TXT
and assign names on the net 10 side accordingly...
Ole
Ole J. Jacobsen
Editor and Publisher
The Internet Protocol Journal
Office of the CTO, Cisco Systems
Tel: +1 408-5
Title: RE: Blast from the past
Ah, dual stacks, a time tested transition strategy. But there was some Application Layer Gateway cruft (ALG) although not at the level of sophistication and beauty of a NAT ...
From RFC 801:
Because all hosts can not be converted to TCP simultaneously, and
>However, I have to observe that this strange thing called ARPANET
>appears to be using private addresses :-)
I think it was Danny Cohen who said that in the US the private networks are
public and the public networks are private.
Bob
*> >
*> >However, I have to observe that this strange thing called ARPANET
*> >appears to be using private addresses :-)
*>
*> And I assume there were ALGs to translate between NCP and TCP hosts...
*>
*>
Nope. Dual stacks.
Bob Braden
*>--Steve Bellovin, http://w
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Brian E Carpenter writes:
>Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:
>>
>> At 10:30 PM -0500 1/24/01, J. Noel Chiappa wrote:
>> >PS: Those of you with sharp eyes will notice that everything has a class A
>> >address!
>>
>> ...and that some of those addresses still work, and appea
On Thu, 25 Jan 2001 16:20:54 CST, Brian E Carpenter said:
> However, I have to observe that this strange thing called ARPANET
> appears to be using private addresses :-)
So damned private some people started CSNet and Bitnet because they
couldnt' get Arpanet addresses ;)
--
Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:
>
> At 10:30 PM -0500 1/24/01, J. Noel Chiappa wrote:
> >PS: Those of you with sharp eyes will notice that everything has a class A
> >address!
>
> ...and that some of those addresses still work, and appear to be used
> by folks directly related to the original owners.
At 10:30 PM -0500 1/24/01, J. Noel Chiappa wrote:
>PS: Those of you with sharp eyes will notice that everything has a class A
>address!
...and that some of those addresses still work, and appear to be used
by folks directly related to the original owners. If only URLs could
be so persistent...
26 matches
Mail list logo
