- A virtual community of network engineers
 Home  BookStore  StudyNotes  Links  Archives  StudyRooms  HelpWanted  Discounts  Login
RE: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657] posted 04/06/2002
[Chronological Index] [Thread Index] [Top] [Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]

My two cents - for what it's worth ... first, we all understand the purpose
of this forum, but like in 3D conversations, sometimes the topics veer.
Perhaps we need to redirect things back, but my God, folks - we're human
beings, after all.  Just because we're so intimately involved in machinery,
they are, after all, just machines!

And my own pet peeve, just because someone comments on something not
appealing to you doesn't mean they have too much time on their hands -
frankly, they seem to be more well-rounded than the one-trick ponies in the
world.  If you disagree with the man's politics, great - just say so in a
non-aggressive manner and move on.

Have a non-confrontational weekend, folks.

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
Don Claybrook
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 5:23 PM
To: cisco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657]

Sorry, Mr. Hall.  Take a look at the order of operations.  I was making the
point that this was a technical forum that probably didn't need politics
inserted.  I was RESPONDING to someone who made the political remark in the
first place.  I'll discontinue this since the purpose is supposed to be all
Cisco all the time here, but since you called me out by name, I thought I'd
take a stab at defending my statement before bowing out.


Don Claybrook
(without much extra time on my hands)

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
Jeffrey W. Hall
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 4:16 PM
To: cisco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657]

What??  Those of you who insist on detracting a good conversation with
needless comments like that have tooooo much time on your hands, Don.
Why don't you and others like you stick to the topic and not be so
tempted to provide such a short-sighted remark.

Jeffrey W. Hall
Network Administrator, MCSE, CCNA, SCSA

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Don Claybrook
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 6:22 PM
To: cisco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657]

Well, if we're veering off into the realm of political commentary and
putdown, I suppose it's ok to ask whether George W. Bush could spell
"all by himself".

----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Zeitz"
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 2:09 PM
Subject: RE: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657]

> Yea, it was Al Gore who invented TCP/IP and the internet, all by
> himself.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:cilla@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 4:30 PM
> To: cisco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657]
> Vint Cerf wasn't commissioned. He was a graduate student at UCLA. BBN
> set
> up the infrastructure of the ARPANET and got the Interface Message
> Processors (routers) and the 56-Kbps links up and running. To use the
> ARPANET, universities had to write software for the devices that
> connected
> to the ARPANET. TCP/IP grew out of that effort.
> Priscilla
> At 03:47 PM 4/5/02, Rico Ortiz wrote:
> >My understanding is Vint Cerf, was the creator of the TCP/IP
> Not
> >sure but was he not commissioned by DOD/BBN during the ARPAnet days..
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:nobody@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf
> >Steven A. Ridder
> >Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2002 2:05 PM
> >To: cisco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: TCP/IP and DOD [7:39657]
> >
> >
> >I am a technical reviewer for a book, and someone wrote that TCP/IP
> >written by the Depertment of Defense.  I am confident that ARPAnet
> >commissiond by the DoD in the 60's to BBN, and maybe TCP/IP was
> from
> >these early protocls, but to say the the DoD, or BBN or anyone other
> than
> >the Internet community wrote TCP and IP would be incorrect, right?  I
> seem
> >to remember that IP was used in ArpaNet, but not TCP.  I thought TCP
> was
> >written in various universities.  I could even look up the couple
> used
> >to work at Cisco) who wrote it.
> >
> >--
> >
> >RFC 1149 Compliant.
> >Get in my head:
> >
> ________________________
> Priscilla Oppenheimer

Message Posted at:
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to abuse@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx