How the Internet got its rules

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

For the record I have known Steve for maybe 30 plus years.  djf

and

CERT Technical Symposium on 11 March Reinventing the Internet – Can We  
and How Would We? Panelists: David Farber, moderator, Carnegie Mellon  
University Lawrence Roberts, Anagram, Inc. Steve Crocker, Shinkuro,  
Inc. Paul Mockapetris, Nominum, Inc. Guru Parulkar, Clean Slate  
Internet Design Program

mms://wms.andrew.cmu.edu/001/CERT1_Session3.wmv

Begin forwarded message:

From: "David S. Isenberg (isen)" <isen () isen com>
Date: April 7, 2009 7:40:11 AM EDT
To: David Farber <dave () farber net>
Subject: How the Internet got its rules

Dave,

I'm sure you know Steve Crocker, who wrote RFC #1
at the dawn of the Internet, long before the
letters IETF stood for anything. Now the NY Times
has published Steve's Op-Ed commemorating the 40th
Anniversary of RFC #1. This history, the story of
how RFC #1 (and the RFC system, the IETF and the
Internet) came to be, is history that those of us
who care about preserving the Internet's most
vital properties should know.

Here are several key paragraphs:

> The early R.F.C.’s ranged from grand visions to mundane
> details, although the latter quickly became the most
> common. Less important than the content of those first
> documents was that they were available free of charge
> and anyone could write one. Instead of authority-based
> decision-making, we relied on a process we called “rough
> consensus and running code.” Everyone was welcome to
> propose ideas, and if enough people liked it and used
> it, the design became a standard.
>
> After all, everyone understood there was a practical
> value in choosing to do the same task in the same way.
> For example, if we wanted to move a file from one
> machine to another, and if you were to design the
> process one way, and I was to design it another, then
> anyone who wanted to talk to both of us would have to
> employ two distinct ways of doing the same thing. So
> there was plenty of natural pressure to avoid such
> hassles. It probably helped that in those days we
> avoided patents and other restrictions; without any
> financial incentive to control the protocols, it was
> much easier to reach agreement.
>
> This was the ultimate in openness in technical design
> and that culture of open processes was essential in
> enabling the Internet to grow and evolve as
> spectacularly as it has. In fact, we probably wouldn’t
> have the Web without it.

Steve's complete Op-Ed is here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/07/opinion/07Brooks.html?ref=opinion
and here: http://bit.ly/UBIWf

David I


-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com