On Sep 14, 2010, at 5:08 PM, Richard Bennett wrote:
I wonder how many people realize that X.25 was a direct descendant of
ARPANET, and that BB&N became a leading supplier of X.25 hardware simply by
continuing the IMP down its evolutionary path.
I was at BBN at the time this was going on. BBN implemented X.25 because it
needed a "standardized" interface to the network instead of BBN's proprietary
1822 interface and choose X.25. X.25 was developed in parallel to the Arpanet
and I disagree that it "was a direct descendant of ARPANET". It has a very
different interface (connection oriented vs. message oriented) that IMHO was
not an improvement.
Bob
p.s. I suggest that BBN use Ethernet instead but that didn't get any traction.
I am pretty sure the world would be different had they followed my suggestion.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf