Draft for Comment Computer Science and the Role of Government in Creating the Internet: ARPA/IPTO(1962-1986) Creating the Needed Interface by Ronda Hauben rh120@columbia.edu Section IV Developing the New Field of Computer Communications 1. Considering the Social Impact of Computer Communications The ICCC'72 conference where the first public demonstration of the ARPANET was done, was notable in yet another way. The conference was an international, interdisciplinary conference on the topic of computer communications. There were participants from around the world and papers were presented on a broad range of topics. There were participants from the research community, from industry, the university community, from governments. A number of the papers described not only the nature of the change that computer communications developments represented, but also the problems this change would present to society. Describing the nature of the development, Stanley Winkler from IBM, in a paper titled "Computer Communication - the Quiet Revolution" writes(97): Today it is...unlikely that anyone can fully perceive the full impact and implications of combining computers and communications.... He emphasizes why the description of the field should be computer communications, not computers and communications. He explains (98): This is not just a semantic preference, but a conscious choice intended to indicate that it is not the appending of communications onto a computer, but rather the intimate entwining, amalgation, if you will, of computers and communication. The essential characteristic of this entwining is the pushing out in space over communication links of computing functions. Distributed Computing is a more accurate and descriptive term for this phenomenon. He goes on to describe how the persuasiveness of the developments in this new field were "producing an effect much greater than the sum of the individual effects of which it is composed." (99) He predicts that (100): These changes will include the kind of work we do; the way in which we will do it, the way in which we will travel;, the kind of homes in which we will live; how we will spend our leisure; how our children will be educated or trained; and all other aspects of life as we know it. Therefore he concluded that these developments would create a new kind of revolution, a revolution that was almost undetected, but that nevertheless would result in great changes. And that it is (101): "The totality of these changes which constitute the quiet revolution."(101) Another talk exploring the change that computer communications would bring to society was presented by Carl Hammer from UNIVAC, titled "Computer Communications: The Future". Hammer proposes that to understand the trend represented by this new technology it would be helpful to critically examine the past, make a statement about the present, and extrapolate these experiences to the future. He describes the remarkable development of computers including the operating systems, remote terminals, and communication capability and special purpose devices that could be used with them. Reviewing the communications developments of the past 100 years including, the beginning of the telephone, Hammer points to the uses of the vacuum tube repeaters in telephony, the development of coaxial cables in the 1940s and then microwave radio links in 1946, the 1960s bringing satellites and high speed wave guides and the introduction of lasers in the 1970s. "In a hundred years," he writes, "the capacity of our communication links has risen from fifteen to a billion baud, from two to over a hundred million characters per second."(102) In its own right, these developments would have heralded significant social changes. But concurrently, with communications developments have come the remarkable development of the computer and then of computing power. Hammer traces the achievements of the 1930's of electronic-mechanical calculators, the development of the concept of storing "recipes" and data in a computer by John von Neumann in the 1940's, the Eniac in 1946, and the continued development of the computer and the ability of the human to interact with and utilize its power. "This developing relationship between computer and communications technology," Hammer writes, "is possibly the most important event of our times. By themselves, the communications or the computer industry alone were capable of bringing about changes in business, government, and in our whole way of life. But the two technologies complement each other; in combination their power is more than additive! Computers control our immense communication switching centers and assist in managing the enormous capacity of new transmission links into useable channels; communications in return, make available the power of computers and the information in data banks to millions of users in remote locations." (103) Looking at the implications of these developments for the future, he warns of the need to have long term planning to properly guide these developments into a socially beneficial direction (104): The rapidly increasing rate of change in all of society's activities forces us to look more penetratingly into the future than ever before. Our style of decision-making is changing as social scientists and environmental specialists begin to exploit recent advances in technology. We can no longer plan solely for short-term profit, ignoring the adverse side-effects of the means for obtaining it. The need, he explains, is for a decision making process adequate for the change represented by the new technology. He explains (105): Growing public awareness of the effects of technology upon society and the accompanying political debate indicate that the long-term must become our standard planning horizon. Industry and government must be made aware of complementing and competitive technologies; they must learn to understand the practical, social, and economic impacts. And be able to plan for contigencies. Our industrial and political leadership is becoming aware of the need to reduce uncertainty to short-term and long-range planning. So many inter-related factors must be evaluated that decision-making is becoming a far more complicated task than ever before. This is clearly reflected by the acutely rising consciousness of accountability in setting policy and goals, both nationally and internationally, and by attempts to establish a balance between short-term existence and long term-growth and continuity. "We must understand," he emphasizes, "that we are in the midst of a transition from an automated to a cybernetic society. By the end of this decade (1970's), electronic systems and especially communications will affect practically every aspect of business behavior. Information utilities and real-time systems will be available to the public in the same sense that other utilities today service our homes and offices. Linked global and spatial communication systems will serve government officials, businessmen, scientists, students, and even our children, furnishing them with the ability to `converse' with computers as readily as they now talk by telephone." (106) But he also explains that the methodology of developing these systems is not something that can be shortened or treated lightly (107): Scientists and engineers plan certain experiments and design the required equipments; only to learn upon implementation that they did not foresee all possible contigencies. They improve their experiments or equipment designs in a second round, incorporating the experience gained from the first. This incremental process of invention and innovation has a well-defined gestation period and does not allow for leap- frogging. Thus these developments will be significant, but not easy to achieve. Also at the conference, D.L.A. Barber from the NPL presented a paper describing the European Computer Network Project. He relates how in November of 1971, ministers from 8 European countries signed an agreement for a project to link together computer networks in their countries with a center at Ispra. The network planned as a packet switching network would link 5 data processing research centers and 8 countries. The countries included France, Yugoslavia, Italy, Norway, Portugal, Switzerland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.(108) 2. Plans for Multiple National Networks Predicting that the use of computers would be one of the most important factors in the economic growth of a country, there was the recognition that there would be increasing use of telecommunications and networks to transport data in the future. However, Barber writes, that "the growing number of private data communication networks owned by Industry, Commerce and Government is a cause for concern because private networks often under utilize telecommunications resources." (109) "Shared networks," it was realized, would be a more efficient use of networking. "When an attempt is made to connect several computer systems by a shared data network fundamental incompatibles are usually revealed between them." (110) Therefore, Barber recognizes the need for standards to make communication possible. Citing the beneficial effect of ARPA's network on the development of computing in the U.S., he explains the plan to build a similar network in Europe. (111) There was also a presentation at the conference by Herbert Maisel of Georgetown University who asked "where will the battle for the humanistic use of the information take place?" (112) Thinking about the U.S., Maisel questions whether the FCC, or Congress, or the Office of the President were equipped to understand what was needed to have the public benefit from these developments. "Will the Commission regulate communication networks and their information processing users in such a way that the public good is assured?" he asks. (113) Maisel maintains that if some have access while others don't to the benefits of the computer communications networks, there could be a radical alternation in the balance of power in society. And he wonders if the development of this technology would lead to a greater concentration or dispersal of power in society. "Unless the profit motive is supplemented by the public concern, the public may not benefit," he cautions. (114) Given the seriousness of the concerns raised at the ICCC'72 conference, and the excitement the public demonstration of the ARPANET inspired, it will be helpful to look at the nature of the resource sharing networks that were being developed during this period of the early 1970s. 3. The Nature of Resource Sharing Networks In his article "Resource-Sharing Computer Communications Networks," published in the Proceedings of the IEEE in November, 1972, Robert Kahn explains how the developing packet switching networks like the ARPANET are networks which make it possible to share computer resources and human resources. He writes (115): A principal motive underlying computer network development is to provide a convenient and economic method for a wide variety of resources to be shared. Such a network provides more than an increased collection of hardware and software resources; it affords the capability for computers as well as individuals to interact in the exchange and processing of information. Not only do computer networks make it possible to share computer resources, they also encourage participation among users, Kahn explains (116): Computer networks provide a unique mechanism for increased participation between individuals. Participation in research and development using the distributed resources of a computer network can lead to the close cooperation between individuals who might otherwise have little incentive to work together. This interaction can further cross-fertilize the network community and encourage even higher levels of achievement through technical cooperation. Kahn describes the ARPANET as "one of the most advanced examples of a computer communications network. It consists of a geographically distributed set of different computers interconnected by a communication system based on very fast response (interactive) message switching...It is interesting to note," he continues, "that the ARPANET was originally designed with the notion of computer-to-computer communication in mind. It has subsequently been extended in capability to allow users with terminal equipment but no computer to connect to the net and communicate with computers and other users. In this sense, the ARPANET has taken the opposite approach from every other network with user access originally in mind." (117) Writing his article in 1972, Kahn explains that there are also other similar networks that are being developed or planned. He includes the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) network in England which "has experimented with the use of `single packet' messages for switching in the `local area of a data communication network'" (118) Kahn also describes the Cyclades computer-to- computer network "under development in France to allow data sharing without costly duplication of files and its attendant problems of control, updating, security, etc. Central files, each accessible via a local computer," he writes, "will be made accessible to other computers and hence to an extended user community. This network is expected to use a message switching technique similar to that used by the ARPANET in the United States." (119) He also notes that there are networks under development or being planned in other countries like Canada and Japan. Realizing that these newly developing networks could be built using a different sort of architecture from the architecture of incompatible private networks, Kahn describes the challenge that will be developing to determine how to make it possible to have not only resource sharing networks, but to link these networks to make interconnection and communication, to make sharing, possible between diverse packet switching networks. He explains: (120): It is important that a communication system not preclude the possibility that separate or private data networks may be accessed through it in a separate and convenient way. A digital message-switched network has this property, while an analogue frequency-based system may not. Incompatible data networks are clearly undesirable if all resources are to be mutually accessible. If separate data networks are jointly planned before development, at least at the interconnection level, they may be connected at a later date and viewed together as a single network that evolved by way of separate networks. The problem of how to link up the diverse packet switching networks that were being developed was the next problem that IPTO would make it possible solve. This was the problem of how to interconnect multiple packet switching networks or the Multiple Network Problem. (to be continued) Footnotes 97. Computer Communication: Impacts and Implications, the First International Conference on Computer Communication, edited by Stanley Winkler, October 24-26, 1972, Washington, D.C., pg. 29- 30. 98. Ibid. pg. 30. 99. Ibid. 100. Ibid. 101. "Computer Communications: The Future" by Carl Hammer, in Computer Communication: Impacts and Implications, the First International Conference on Computer Communication, edited by Stanley Winkler, October 24-26, 1972, Washington, D.C., pg. 31- 35. 102. Hammer writes:"Early telegraph links, in Napoleon's time, had signal speeds of about two characters per second. The ability to combine up to six communications channels in one physical link came into being in 1874 with a scheme invented by Jean Maurice Emile Baudot. Two years later, Bell spoke his first sentence over the telephone. In 1913 vacuum tube repeaters were introduced into telephony. Other developments in electronics followed quickly: by 1918 the first carrier system permitted several voice channels to occupy a single pair of wires. High capacity coaxial cables started to replace wirepair cables in the early 1940's; today they can carry thousands of telephone channels. Microwave radio links were first installed in 1946; they can now accommodate more than 10,000 telephone channels and even more in the future. The 1960's brought us satellites and high-speed waveguides; the 1970's...lasers. In a hundred years, the capacity of our communication links has risen from fiftenn to a billion baud, from two to over a hundred million characters per second." (pg 31) 103. Ibid., pg 32. 104. Ibid., pg. 33. 105. Ibid., pg 33-34. 106. Ibid. pg. 35. 107. Ibid., pg. 31. 108. D. L. A. Barber, "The European Computer Network Project" in "Computer Communications: The Future" by Carl Hammer, in Computer Communication: Impacts and Implications, the First International Conference on Computer Communication, edited by Stanley Winkler, October 24-26, 1972, Washington, D.C., pg. 192. 109. Ibid. 110. Ibid. 111. Barber writes (pg 192-193): The provision of efficient shared data communictions facilities can also have a useful effect on advanced computer system development by allowing co-operation between research centres. An excellent example is the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) network (1) sponsored by the Department of Defence of the United States. The ARPA network is clearly having a most beneficial influence upon the development of computing in America. Networks of a similar type have been proposed and investigated by Universities and Research Establishments in Europe and there are various plans under consideration for building such networks in some countries. There could be many advantages if these networks were joined by an International network, and this would be particularly the case if the international networks were compatible with it, and each other. It is of the utmost importance, therefore, that early and adequate thought be given to problems of international networks and of standarisation in particular, so that national developments do not produce a set of incompatible systems which cannot be linked without great difficulties requiring special interfacing or even re-design. International bodies like the CCITT (International Telegraph & Telephone Consultative Committee) and CEPT (Eorupean Committee of Post and Telepgraph) are studying the telecommunication aspects of these networks, but many of the problems concerned with the linking of computers both to other computers and also to various types of terminal equipment, are of a somewhat different nature to those concerned with existing telecommunications facilities; and there is already much debate on how best to deal with these new problems both nationally and internationally. 112. Herbert Maisel, "Responsibility for the Humanistic Use of the Information Revolution: Where Will the Battle Be Fought?" in Computer Communication: Impacts and Implications, the First International Conference on Computer Communication, edited by Stanley Winkler, October 24-26, 1972, Washington, D.C., pg. 47. 113. Ibid., pg 51. 114. Ibid., pg 48. 115. "Resource-Sharing Computer Communications Networks", Proceedings of the IEEE, November 1972, page 1406. 116. Ibid., pg. 1407. 117. Ibid. pg 1398-1399. 118. Ibid., pg 1399. 119. Ibid. 120. Ibid., pg 1406-7. Last Updated: January 22, 2000 part I http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/arpa_ipto.txt part II http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/basicresearch.txt part III http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/centers-excellence.txt part IV http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/computer-communications.txt part V http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/birth_internet.txt part VI http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/birth_tcp.txt