Communicating Across the Boundaries of Dissimilar Networks The Creation of the Internet and the Emergence of the Netizen A Work in Progress by Ronda Hauben, rh120@columbia.edu "Improved historical understanding of technology, society and environment at border regions is a key challenge for Europe today and increasingly so in the future." Invitation to 2nd Tensions of Europe "[I]t might be profitable to look upon government less as a problem of power and somewhat more as a problem of steering, and... to show that steering is decisively a matter of communication." Karl Deutsch, "Nerves of Government", p. ix Abstract Like the goal of European construction, the goal of early Internet research was to make communication possible across the boundaries of technically different networks which were under diverse forms of political and administrative control. This early collaborative research process helped to nourish an environment which provided for the emergence of a new form of social consciousness, for the identity of the online user as a net.citizen or netizen. Creating the Internet was not only a technical achievement. There was also the social challenge of facilitating cooperation among the researchers from different national, political and technical backgrounds. New forms of communication like mailing lists and Usenet newsgroups helped to make possible a social networking that in turn facilitated the creation of the technical and scientific metasystem of networks which we now call the Internet. This paper will explore both the technical and the social processes that made it possible to foster collaboration across the boundaries of different networks and different nations. This technical research gave birth to a protocol that makes it possible to interconnect diverse entities, and the social research gave birth to the identity of online users who were committed to spread of the Net and to spread the communication that the Net makes possible. In 1997, a Polish researcher, Leszek Jesien, wrote, "At the time the European Union struggles to shape the European citizenship -- the other citizenship -- Netizenship emerges. European political leaders should perhaps look at this phenomenon with sympathy and attention." Jesien is arguing that the project of European construction would benefit from a study of the emergence and development of the netizen. A conceptual framework for the continued investigation of the international and social origins of the Internet and the emergence and development of the netizen will be proposed in an effort to provide a framework for future Internet research. I - Introduction The history of the Internet is actually a history of making possible communication across the boundaries, or I could say the borders of networks with differing technologies and under the ownership and control of different administrative and political entities. The history of the development of the Internet represents the solving of a technical problem, the problem of how data can be communicated across the borders of networks that differ technically. The technical history also has a social component. How was it possible to develop the collaboration of researchers from different nations? This required solving a series of problems. At first, the problem of getting permission and support for researchers from different countries to work together. Later the problem became how to get permission from the five different countries controlling the Intelsat IV satellite to use it for a purpose outside the original agreement. Another problem meriting attention is how the researchers were able to overcome the obstacles and constraints in their own countries to be able to contribute to the collaborative Internet research. While researchers from Norway, Great Britain and the U.S. managed to solve the problems to be part of the early Internet research work, French researchers had a more difficult time domestically, severely limiting their ability to take part in certain aspects of the collaborative work. While I will mainly explore the technical collaboration in the current draft of this paper, there is a broader focus that I hope to develop as I continue to work on the paper . This is the social focus. As an article in the "ARPANET News", published in 1974 indicates, the technical collaboration to be able to build the Internet required a social orientation. Researchers needed a broad perspective, rather than being limited to the narrow focus of any of the individual networks. Worthy of future research is an investigation to gain insight into how the researchers were able to develop this broader social perspective and to transmit it to succeeding generations. This was one of the enduring problems, but also one of the major successes of the story of the history of the Internet. The success of this project became evident in 1992-1993. A college student, Michael Hauben, became interested in the impact the developing Internet was having on the lives of its users. He began an investigation into this question. He came to the conclusion that a new form of social identity had emerged on the Internet, the emergence of the 'netizen'. Describing the netizen, Hauben wrote: "Netizens are Net Citizens . . . These people are . . . those who. . . make [the Net] a resource of human beings. These netizens participate to help make the Net both an intellectual and a social resource." (Michael Hauben, "Further Thoughts about Netizens") http://www.columbia.edu/ ~hauben/CMC/netizen_thoughts.html Subsequently, a Polish researcher was studying a problem that concerned the EU in 1995-1996, the problem of how to build a social form of citizenship. He recognized the relevance of the netizen phenomenon for the project of European construction. Leszek Jesien wrote a paper exploring the problem of how to develop such a new form of citizenship. Jesien recommended that attention be given to the emergence of the netizen on the Internet as a means of gaining insight into what he saw as a comparable phenomenon. Reviewing the discovery of the emergence of the netizen will, I hope, provide a means to begin the project Jesien proposed would be helpful to the problem of European construction. In the book, "Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet," my co-author Michael Hauben and I proposed that the Internet is a new and important development which needs to be the subject of serious scholarly investigation. There is a need for a theoretical framework for continuing study which not only will help to build a consciousness about the nature of the Internet but more importantly will help to support the continuing development of the Internet and the netizen. (1) II JCR Licklider and the Intergalactic Network In order to understand the technical and social nature of the Internet, it is helpful to know something about JCR Licklider and his vision for an intergalactic network, a vision which helped to set the foundation for the Internet. In 1962 Licklider was invited to create a civilian research organization within the U.S. Department of Defense and to invite outstanding US computer science researchers to develop projects to be supported by the new organization. Licklider called the research organization he created the Information Processing Techniques Office (IPTO). The IPTO was an office in the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA). ARPA was created in the late 1950s. He referred to the researchers he supported as part of an 'intergalactic network'. Licklider recognized the challenge before him, the need to facilitate and encourage research collaboration among different groups of computer science researchers who were spread out both geographically and in terms of the research interests they pursued. How he would foster collaboration among these diverse entities was both a theoretical and practical problem. For the Internet pioneers, the name of JCR Licklider has special meaning. Larry Roberts was the director of the Information Processing Technologies Office (IPTO) during the period when the ARPANET, an experimental large scale packet switching network, a forerunner to the Internet, was built. Roberts credits Licklider with inspiring him to become involved in networking research. (2) Others among the Internet pioneers point to Licklider's vision for an "intergalactic computer network" as some of the glue that fostered early computer networking research collaboration. (3) In a memorandum Licklider sent to the different IPTO researcher groups on April 25, 1963, he wrote (4): "It is evident that we have among us a collection of individuals (personal and/or organizational) aspirations, efforts, activities and projects. These have in common, I think, the characteristics that they are in some way connected with the advancement of the art of technology, of information processing, the advancement of intellectual capability (man, man-machine, or machine), and the approach to a theory of science. The individual parts are, at least to some extent, mutually interdependent. To make progress, each of the active researchers need a software and a hardware facility, more complex and more extensive than he, himself can create in reasonable time." Licklider proposes that one purpose of the common meetings will be 'to explore the possibilities for mutual advantage..." (p. 2) He asks that the plans for research in each group be shared before the actual research begins. Since each group would be doing different research, the problem they would face was analogous to the problem "discussed by science fiction writers." This problem, he writes, is (Licklider, 1963): "How do you get communication started among totally uncorrelated sapient beings." Solving such a problem, Licklider explains, requires at least finding a way to ask the question, "What language do you speak?" Licklider proposed that there be attention to both the specific activities of each of the different research groups, and attention to identifying a framework to coordinate collaboration among the different groups which will provide for a broader social perspective than each research group on its own could achieve. Licklider perceives of this framework as being identified through the creation of an actual technical computer network linking the different research groups. Though this period in the early 1960s was still too early to be able to realize the development of such a physical computer computer communications network, the theoretical perspective Licklider proposed provided a helpful vision when the technological and organizational development became more advanced by the end of the decade. III The ARPANET By the mid 1960s, IPTO had a number of different computer research groups but there was no way to link these groups into a common computer network. Research to create a prototype packet switching network which would be called the ARPANET, began in the late 1960s. The problem of how to interconnect dissimilar computers and the researchers using these computers was a problem that led to the creation of a form of computer communications technology called packet switching. Packet switching is an efficient way of transmitting computer data that takes advantage of the bursty nature of such data. Packet switching technology breaks a message into small sections of data and gives each of these sections addressing information called a header. The header, together with the data, is called a 'packet'. The packet switching network then routes and delivers these packets, interspersed with other packets, from other messages. After the packets reach their destination, the message is reconstructed. In the U.S., early research efforts led to a project to explore the feasibility of a packet switching network to interconnect dissimilar computers and dissimilar operating systems. The research spanned the period from 1967 - 1972. By fall of 1972, researchers around the world had learned about the research creating the ARPANET, and the research creating the British packet switching network, NPL. French researchers, for example, were studying both these developments and planning to create a French packet switching network to be called CYCLADES. IV ICCC'72 and the ARPANET Demonstration In October, 1972 researchers from over 50 countries attended a conference held in Washington, DC, the First International Conference on Computer Communication (ICCC'72). Many papers were presented describing computer network research or plans for such research in countries around the world. The most thrilling part of the conference was the demonstration of the ARPANET packet switching network. One of the pioneers responsible for the invention of packet switching technology, the British research pioneer Donald Davies, describes his excitement in being able to take part in the ARPANET demonstration that was presented at the conference. Davies writes: "The meeting at the Washington Hilton in 1972 was quite the most important and influential conference I have ever attended. I arrived at the Hilton Hotel early to see what was happening and met an extraordinary scene. On a podium was 'Terminal IMP' or TIP joined to the existing ARPA network, surrounded by many terminal devices of all kinds.... It was a complete turn-around, seemingly in one day, though in fact it was the enormous efforts of the ARPA team that achieved this demonstration and caused the revolutionary change in thinking about networks. What happened in Washington was that people could now see these ideas in the form of practical achievements. They could get a glimpse of the intellectual impact that networks were destined to produce." (from Donald W. Davies, "Early Thoughts on Computer Communications") This demonstration of a working prototype packet switching network, however, was not the Internet. Internet research began a few months later. V The Multiple Network Problem The problem to be explored for Internet research, was what can be called the Multiple Network Problem. This problem asks: How is it possible to connect dissimilar packet switching networks and make communication possible across the boundaries of their differing technical, political and administrative components? A diagram included in a memo written by Vinton Cerf, co-inventor of the TCP/IP protocol, documents the interest in 1973 in this problem. Explaining this problem at a meeting in 1974, Davies writes: "To achieve... the interconnection of packet switching systems we have to decide at what level they will interwork.... After some discussion a group including ARPA, NPL and CYCLADES is trying out a scheme of interconnection based on... an agreed protocol for message transport." (from Donald Davies, "The Future of Computer Networks", IIASA Conference on Computer Communications Networks, October 21-25, 1974, p. 36) It is the solution to this problem, the problem of how to connect dissimilar packet switching networks, that has made it possible to create the Internet. This problem was solved by the creation of a protocol, the TCP/IP protocol. This research was an international effort involving researchers from different countries. The myth that equates the ARPANET with the Internet is a myth that also replaces the internetworking communication made possible by the Internet with communication in a single network like the ARPANET. It is important to understand that the development of the TCP/IP protocol, not the development of packet switching, is the essential aspect of the Internet's development and it was international from the very beginning. At a meeting arranged at the ICCC'72, an international network working group (INWG) was created to support the collaboration of researchers from around the world in creating computer networking in their respective countries. How would it be possible for the networks created in these various countries to communicate with each other? No network owner or administrator would want their network to be subordinate to another network. This was the problem that would have to be solved to create the Internet. Describing the creation of the INWG, an internet pioneer from Norway, Yngvar Lundh, writes that while he was at the ICCC'72, he was invited to attend a meeting with other networking researchers from around the world. The meeting was held after the ICCC'72 at the Comsat Corporation (at L'Enfant Plaza). He writes that this meeting "may well have been the first Internet meeting." (Lundh, E-mail April 26, 2002) This was also the meeting where the International Network Working Group (INWG) was created. Lundh reports that at the meeting at Comsat, "The discussion(s) were in rather general terms as I recall, and mainly clarifying reasons for establishing a net of nets where each individual net would use the best low level protocol for utilizing the respective transmission. He estimates that there were 10-15 people there that day. Certainly Bob Kahn and most likely Dick Binder from BBN." (Lundh, E-mail, June 24, 2002) British Internet pioneer, Peter Kirstein notes that he was there. Cerf adds that he was there, along with Steve Crocker from ARPA, Louis Pouzin and Gesualdo Lemoli from France , Roger Scantlebury and perhaps Donald Davies from Great Britain. Also Kirstein presented a paper at the ICCC'72 conference.(5) In the diagram below, there are three different networks. ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (CYCLADES)-------------( ARPA )-------------( NPL ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) How could data be transmitted across the borders of these different networks? The solution proposed was presented to researchers in the International Network Working Group at a conference at the University of Suffolk in Brighton, England in September, 1973. The solution was to create gateways that would make it possible to transform data after it left one network and before it entered another network. A memo written in 1973 included a diagram of these three networks linked by gateways. These gateways would make it possible to transmit messages across the boundaries of the different networks. Following is a replica of the diagram (Cerf, Memo, p. 5.): (Host) / ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) (Host)-(CYCLADES)--(gateway)--( ARPA )--(gateway)--( NPL ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) \ (Host) Also there was a diagram of data going from a host computer on one computer network to a gateway and then to a host computer on another computer network. (H)----(G)----(G)---(H) \ / \ / (H) VI Open Architecture The solution would not require that any of the networks change their internal operation. Rather it provided a means to wrap, or encapsulate the data so that it would be able to fit the requirements of different networks. This solution was part of what has been called "open architecture." An entry in the "Encyclopedia of Computers and Computer History" on open architecture explains(p. 561): "Traditionally the word architecture refers to the framework guiding the construction of a structure or system. It describes vital elements of the whole and the rules for interconnection among components. In the case of computer networks, the challenge in designing an open architecture system is to provide local autonomy, the possibility of interconnecting heterogeneous systems, and communication across uniform interfaces. Providing a basic format for data and a common addressing mechanism makes possible data transmission across the boundaries of dissimilar networks." Other aspects of "open architecture" are standard interfaces, protocols, a basic data format, and a uniform identifier or addressing mechanism. "All the information needed regarding the interconnection aspects is publicly available," explains the encyclopedia entry. (6) The protocol suite that makes the Internet possible is known as the TCP/IP protocol suite (Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol). A paper describing the design for TCP/IP was published in the IEEE Transactions on Communications, Vol 22, No. 5, in May 1974. The paper, "A Protocol for Packet Network Intercommunication", by Vinton Cerf and Robert Kahn proposed "the means to create a metalevel architecture by designing software for host computers on diverse networks and for gateways to interface between them." (Encyclopedia, vol 2, p. 654-655) The problem facing the computer communication research community now was to choose among the protocols being proposed to solve the multi network problem, and find a working prototype so that a functioning internetwork could be created. VII Great Britain - Norway - US The challenge to turn the TCP protocol design into a working prototype was taken up by U.S., British and Norwegian researchers. Lundh describes the extensive effort needed to transform the design into functioning protocol specifications. He describes the years of experiments, analysis of the results, and the design of new experiments to test the theory developed from the experimental process. Failures or surprises from the actual experience of the researchers helped them to make the needed changes in the implementation efforts. Lundh writes: Those protocols resulted from an extremely thorough analysis and design. 'No stone was left unturned' during the development which took several years. Theoretical analyses were complemented by experiments. Combinations of traffic types and requirements, network topologies and application types were imagined, tried, failed, changed and tried again. The 'final' TCP and IP were not easily postulated and approved. Nobody can ever reproduce in a laboratory the chaotic traffic pattern of a lively telecom or computing network and even less the diverse demands of information exchange. The growing active dynamic traffic situation in the ARPANET prevailed during onwards development of its own underlying technology. That may be one reason for the robustness, elegance and survivability of the result. (Lundh, 12) Lundh emphasizes the importance of a functional network with actual users and traffic as a "laboratory" for the researchers. He describes how theory grew out of experimental research and then was used to guide the experimental process. In this way, the theory was verified or modified. Recalling his experience, Lundh writes, "During a period of intensively active development, methods were conceived and perfected until functioning well in an environment which was closer to reality than anyone might have dreamt up in a 'sterile' laboratory." This experimental process was closely intertwined with theoretical development. He adds: At the same time a profound theoretical understanding was developed. It kept its scrutiny on experimental results and was both guiding and following up the work in an admirable teamwork. (Lundh, 12) Describing the political conditions that had to be accommodated to create a protocol that would function for the international community, Paal Spilling, another Norwegian Internet pioneer, explains the rationale of the TCP design: In order to allow Host computers, connected to different networks to communicate, these networks have to be interconnected. This is not a trivial matter, since different networks, in general, are supported by organizations with different requirements and therefore will develop differently. Any changes in existing networks in order to interconnect these, will be costly and impeded by political factors. The obvious approach therefore, would be to leave the local nets undisturbed and to perform the interconnections outside them. This is one of the main ideas behind the TCP. (Spilling, Proposal to Nato, 5) The protocol requirements were such that the networks participating in the Internet would not be limited in their internal development or activities. The use of gateway computers helped in this process. Gateway computers would reformat the packets of data from the form needed by one network into the form to meet the requirements of the next network. The gateway software would also determine the best next path for the packets of data to take to get to their destination. This is the routing function of the gateways. (Today gateways are called routers.) Spilling explains that when Host 1 (on Net 1) wants to exchange data with Host 2 (on Net 2), it forms the data into Internet packets according to the TCP format and encloses them in the format required by Net 1. This action, he says, is called "wrapping." (Spilling, Proposal to Nato, 6) Spilling attributes the term "wrapping" to an article by Louis Pouzin and H. Zimmerman. Internet packets are then transported to the gateway where they are unwrapped from the Net 1 format and rewrapped in the format for Net 2 for transmission to Host 2 (on Net 2). VIII 1970s Networking Collaboration to Develop Internet Technology Critical to the scientific process of the development of the TCP protocol was the international collaboration. Describing the role of this collaboration, Lundh writes: (T)he network technology was further refined and developed in an intimate co-operation of ten research groups during the 1970s. That co-operation resulted in the technology underlying today's Internet. (Lundh, 10) The results were documented and made readily available to anyone around the world, particularly to academic researchers. The period from 1973 to 1980 was a significant period in the history of the Internet. For Lundh, the Internet is the networking of interconnected nets. "From the initial ARPANET," he writes, "the technology was developed into a basically new computer cooperating technology, Internetworking technology. Its main constituents were defined as proposed standards around 1980." (Lundh, 10) Further important technical refinements and geographical expansion occurred in the 1980s. Early Internet development was done on a non-commercial research basis. The earliest ARPANET development was done on the basis of leased telephone lines. The research in the mid to late 1970s and into the 1980s, however, included research on Ethernet, packet radio and packet satellite forms of communication. Lundh points out that not only was the ARPANET a "laboratory", it was at the same time "an active telecom network, a resource sharing network and a forum of creative and critical people."(Lundh, 12) Lundh cites an experiment where three people were located in different geographical locations, Boston, MA in the U.S., London, England, and Kjeller, Norway. They held a demonstration conference using speech, which was observed by other researchers in a meeting at another ARPANET-TIP international site, at University College London (UCL). Lundh writes: "Each of the three sites... communicated through local area nets interconnected through gateways via ARPANET and SATNET. The packet traffic in that Internet situation (new then!) was a combination of that speech traffic together with 'natural' traffic in the Arpanet at the time." (Lundh, 13) Lundh calls this experiment in 1978, "one of the several major milestones during development of Internet technology." He also emphasizes that not only did the Internet research result in important and robust standards, but it also influenced and actually pioneered a new methodology for developing telecommunication standards. (Lundh, 13) An important aspect of the international research collaboration to create TCP/IP was the research done to create SATNET and the gateways linking SATNET to the Host computers in the different countries that were part of the early Internet research. SATNET ws a data communication network using radio transmissions relayed by satelites. IX Kahn and SATNET In a paper about this research, Spilling, Lundh and Aagesen write: "In mid 1975 the Packet Satellite Program (PSP) was initiated by DARPA with the purpose to develop a satellite-based, packet- switching communication network, to demonstrate its capabilities, and to investigate its performance factors. The research to create packet satellite technology began in the 1970s. The "most notable example of this technology" came to be known as SATNET. SATNET started operating on the Atlantic Intelsat IV satellite in late 1975. In its early development, it was part of a research project involving researchers in the U.S., the U.K, and Norway.(7) Describing the program, Kahn writes (Kahn, 1979): "Technical direction of the program beginning in September 1975 was the responsibility of Linkabit Corporation, San Diego, California." He explains that coordination of a research program involving researchers from different countries was "an important challenge." During this early period of Internet research (1975-1979) there were both ARPANET and Internet connections between the Great Britain, Norway and the U.S. The Packet Satellite Program (PSP) provides a means of understanding the transition from the ARPANET to SATNET for providing communication between diverse networking via TCP/IP. First the ARPANET was used to develop TCP/IP. Then SATNET was created as a packet satellite network, and the research on TCP/IP was transitioned from the ARPANET to SATNET for the international research collaboration. A series of Packet Satellite Program Working Papers (PSPWP) were issued to document "Ideas, specific investigations, and results and software and hardware specifications." (Spilling, Lundh, and Aagesen) Like the Packet Switching Protocol group that Lundh describes, the Packet Satellite Program (PSP) held regularly scheduled meetings, rotating through the institutions where the researchers worked. This was to encourage the exchange of ideas and the coordination of their activities. Kahn explains how the ARPANET played an important role in conducting the initial SATNET research and in coordinating the collaboration of the different research groups. He writes, "The ARPANET played a particularly important role in executing the effort as well as in coordinating it. It provided the means by which the satellite processors were down-line loaded and debugged, and the means by which SATNET itself was controlled and monitored as it was being developed." (Kahn, 1979) The communication made possible by the ARPANET was also a critical aspect of the research effort. Kahn writes (Kahn, 1979): "The message passing capability of the hosts on the ARPANET were used to keep all participants informed of technical progress, system status, often by direct reporting from the programmable satellite processors in SATNET, and to resolve questions and coordinate experiments on a day-by-day basis. Without such a capability, it is doubtful that the overall experimental program could have been carried out successfully." SATNET was used as an experimental testbed for their research. To begin with, SATNET was an integral part of the ARPANET, but as the research evolved, SATNET became a free standing separate network. The devices connecting SATNET with the ARPANET were called Gateways. Describing the importance of gateways and Kahn's foresight regarding the development of the Internet, Kirstein, who directed the early British component of the TCP/IP research writes: "Bob Kahn's real contribution here was to recognize in 1974 the conceptual need of these gateways and to design them at a level which would endure. (Kirstein, E-mail, July 3, 2002) Kahn explains why the gateways were such a significant aspect of the SATNET research development: "It was decided to pursue the internetting research using a separate minicomputer gateway in each country simultaneously connected as a Host on SATNET and as a Host on the Arpanet.... This arrangement left enough flexibility to pursue gateway related research without requiring software changes (in real-time) to SATNET or Arpanet. The gateway software could have been incorporated within the physical confines of either SATNET or Arpanet, or split between them. However, keeping it separate for the purposes of the experimental program provided maximum flexibility to the internetting researchers, many of whom were also working on SATNET, Arpanet or other ongoing network related programs without unnecessarily distracting those SATNET researchers who did not need to be deeply involved in the internetting work at that time." (Kahn, 1979) By the early 1980s there were five nations involved in the SATNET research. As Kirstein writes, SATNET included not only the U.S., Norway and Great Britain, but eventually also sites at DFVLR in Oberpfaffinghofen, Germany (near Munich), and CNUCE in Pisa, attached to the Fucino earth station in Italy. (Kirstein, E-mail, July 3, 2002) A particular problem in creating SATNET was to get the 5 nations involved in the Intelsat IV program to agree to let SATNET use the Intelsat IV satellite. Describing this problem, Spilling writes: "The start of the development and experimentation with SATNET was considerably delayed. The idea was to use one 64 kb/s channel in the so called 'Multi-destination half duplex' mode, with ground stations in Norway, England, Germany, Italy and the USA. The endpoints of this channel were terminated in equipment owned by different organizations. This was unheard of in the Intelsat/Comsat organisations, and they had no policy for handling this case, no regulations and no tariff ratings. If I remember correctly, Bob Kahn spent a long time hammering on the satellite organizations, more than a year, to have them accept this new mode of operation." (Spilling E-mail, Sept. 5, 2002) Spilling explains how the creation of SATNET was actually the creation of the INTERNET. He writes: When SATNET development was ending in 1979 and the TCP/IP protocols were matured sufficiently, SATNET was used as a means to interconnect local area networks in Norway, England, Germany, and Italy with ARPANET, which interconnected many LANs scattered all over the U.S. continent. This constellation formed the INTERNET with capital letters, interconnecting defence institutions and research institutions with military contracts, hence forming a very closed community. As you have mentioned, you needed permission from DARPA in order to connect with this community. According to Kahn, by the 1980s there was a connection between the networks of different countries using a gateway to SATNET and then a gateway to connect to the ARPANET, "This was not a link over ARPANET," he emphasizes(Kahn, E-mail, Sept 11, 2002), "It was a connection using SATNET, which was a broadcast satellite system.... This is if you like an ETHERNET IN THE SKY with drops in Norway (actually routed via Sweden) and then the U.K. and later Germany and Italy. (See Graphic IV SATNET as an Ethernet in the Sky; http://www.ais.org /~ronda/new.papers/4.pdf) X 1970s Networking Collaboration to Develop Internet Technology According to Lundh, ten groups collaborated on developing the TCP/IP protocols. The whole team, he explains, referred to itself as the "Packet Switching Protocols Working Group - PSPWG." Eight of the groups were in the USA, one in England and a small group in Norway. "The development comprised investigation of a variety of suggested methods. They were thoroughly studied theoretically and experimentally." (Lundh, 13)(8) Kirstein adds that in phases of the SATNET research, there were researchers from Germany and Italy involved and there were also meetings at their sites.(9) Communication via e-mail helped the research, along with in-person meetings held every three months that people from each group attended. Lundh credits DARPA/IPTO with providing the leadership and much of the funding for the work. The research, he emphasizes, "had the main purpose to study and develop resource-sharing networks." (Lundh, 14) The resources to be shared were the 'power' of the computers, programs and data of various types. The human users were also seen as a significant resource. "Further, and not least," writes Lundh, "it was important to create an environment where human resources could co-operate and strengthen creativity and knowledge." (Lundh, 14) XI - Meetings at rotating locations Lundh lists ten of the research groups that collaborated on Internet research in the 1970s. (Lundh, 16) 1. ARPA in Washington, DC, USA; Advanced Research Projects Agency - Information Processing Techniques Office 2. BBN in Cambridge, MA, USA; Bolt Beranek and Newman 3. SRI in Menlo Park, CA, USA; Stanford Research International 4. UCLA in Los Angeles, CA, USA; University of California 5. ISI in Marina del Rey, CA, USA; Information Sciences Institute 6. Linkabit in San Diego, CA, USA; Linkabit Corporation 7. Comsat in Gaithersburg, Maryland, USA; Comsat Corporation 8. MIT in Cambridge, MA, USA; Massachusetts Institute of Technology 9. UCL in London, England; University College London 10. NDRE in Kjeller, Norway; Norwegian Defence Research Establishment Describing the rotating meets at these different sites, Lundh writes: "The tone was open and could be heated although always friendly. A certain amount of social occasions usually took place and stimulated the smooth co-operative spirit. ... The assembled group," Lundh explains, "constituted a strong and inspiring research team." (Lundh, 17) When not assembled, "from day to day the researchers exchanged e-mail. It comprised of discussions, experimental results, comments and programs." (Lundh, 17) From 1977, the usual 2 day PSPWG was "supplemented," by a third day "Internet meeting dedicated to techniques for internet-working of different nets." (Lundh, 17) Following is a list Lundh provides of some of the rotation of meetings. These were meetings between August 1974 and February 1978. (Lundh, 17): 10-11 Aug 74 On the ferry between Stockholm, Sweden and Abo, Finland 4-5 Sep 75 Linkabit Co, San Diego, California; Host: Irwin Jacobs 12-13 Nov 75 UCL, London, England; Host: Peter Kirstein 12-14 Feb 76 DCA and ARPA, Washington, DC.; Host: Bob Kahn 29-30 Apr 76 BBN, Cambridge, Massachusetts; Host: David Walden 29-30 Jun 76 NDRE, Kjeller, Norway; Host: Yngvar Lundh 23-24 Sep 76 UCLA, Los Angeles, California; Host: Leonard Kleinrock 9-10 Dec 76 UCL, London, England; Host: Peter Kirstein 10-11 Mar 77 Comsat, Washington, DC; Host: Estil Hoversten 8-10 Jun 77 NDRE, Kjeller, Norway; Host: Yngvar Lundh 17-19 Aug 77 Linkabit, San Diego, California; Host: Irwin Jacobs 31 Oct-2 Nov 77 BBN, Cambridge, MA; Host: Bob Bressler 1-3 Feb 78 UCLA, Los Angeles, California; Host: Wesley Chu XII - ARPANET News in 1974 Critical to the collaboration was the concern for the whole. An editorial in the ARPANET News in February, 1974 explains: "Inherent in the concept of a resource sharing computer network is the idea of a cooperative, collaborative working mode. This calls for a very special 'place for people's heads', a special ability to be cognizant of and concerned for the welfare of the whole. This long-term objective and viewpoint requires a personal feeling of responsibility for the welfare of the network instead of the short-sightedness of acquisitive self-interest.... With the backing of ARPA-IPT in this endeavor... the ARPANET shows every promise of becoming the global tool for enhanced communication and understanding between nations and their scientists and people that was envisioned for it in its beginning."(10) XIII Other research networks By the early 1990s there were a number of different networks that had developed from different research collaboration. There was a unix network called uucpnet which used telephone lines and other means to transit messages in what was known as Usenet. There were other networks like X25. There were commercial networks like Telenet. A network called cnet made it possible for university sites that were not part of the Arpanet in the US and in other countries to communicate. There was the BitNET IBM network. There was a Fideonet network. (11) Also there were different forms of gateways connecting these various networks. (12) XIV The Emergence of the Netizens In 1992 a university student sent out a message on Usenet and Internet mailing lists that he had access to at his university. He wondered what were the different forms of computer network connections users had access to. Also he wondered how users used the network and what impact it had on their lives. In response to his questions, he received many responses. Hauben was excited to see the many different kinds of computer connections that made it possible for users to communicate online. He was also amazed at the many emails he received describing why users felt this new form of computer networking was an important new development and one that should be spread to users all over the world. For example, he received an email from the Physics department at Crackow university in Poland saying that they had just gotten a networking connection. He received an email from users in France explaining how emails between users in Paris had to go to the U.S. and back to France to be delivered. Also that the Internet was not readily available in France. Hauben received an email from a user at an American company saying how the company would route their emails through a nonprofit group's network rather than setting up and paying for their own networking connection. Another email explained that it was from a cosmonaut on the MIR space station and that abroard the MIR there was a connection to the Internet. Gathering these responses Hauben recognized that there were users around the world excited by the contributions to their lives represented by the networking. Even more important for them was a commitment that the network should continue to spread so that everyone would be able to be part of the continually expanding computer communications network. Many felt such a global interconnection of people around the world would be a significant contribution to global communication and to the ability of people to contribute toward finding a way to solve the problems of our society. Hauben wrote up the results of his research. Recognizing that many of the users who wrote him had a social purpose, he thought it appropriate to refer to them as net.citizens or netizens. "Net.citizen" was a common way of referring to someone online who acted as a citizen. Netizen, however, was a new word, not necessarily used for the first time, but not a term in any general use. Hauben wrote a paper "The Net and Netizens: The Impact the Net Has on People's Lives" and posted it on Usenet and on Internet mailing lists documenting his research and findings. Soon he began receiving responses from people around the world welcoming the paper and the consciousness of themselves as netizens. The word 'netizen' also spread around the world. In 1994 Hauben was co-author of a book put online, collecting his research and writing and the research and writing I had done at the time. The book was titled "Netizens and the Wonderful World of the Net." (13) XV Netizens and the EU In 1995, the EU was planning an Intergovernmental conference to be held in 1996 toward reviewing the Treaty on the European Union. The original plan in 1991 provided for a review in 1996. By 1995, contemporaneous developments pointed to the urgency of the problem. Describing the need for the review, an EU document explains: "The Maastricht treaty ratification debate revealed that there was still a degree of scepticism about European Integration. Europe is not easy for people to understand: many do not see what it is about. The same problem can also arise within an individual country, where the citizen may not always realize what problems are being followed in his or her name, or why. The distance between the citizen and the place where decisions are made, however, means that the problem is more acute in the Union." Preparing Europe for the 21st Century, p.3 The document describes the importance of democracy as "the very essence of the Union." (p. 6) One of the Treaty's basic innovations, it explains, "in terms of democracy is the concept of European citizenship." (p. 6) The objective was not to replace national citizenship with a citizenship connected to the EU, but to develop a different form of citizenship, one that would "give Europe's citizens an added benefit and strengthen their sense of belonging to the Union." The document explains that the Maastricht Treaty "makes citizenship an evolving concept, and the Commission recommends developing it to the full." A report from the "Reflections Committee" which was studying this problem, described the task as the need "to place the citizen at the centre of the European venture by endeavoring to meet his expectations and concerns, that is to say to make Europe the affair of its citizens." (Reflection Group's Report, PS/SN520/95 Reflex 21) In a paper published in 1996, after the meeting of the Intergovernmental Conference, Leszek Jesien, a researcher and advisor to the Polish government on EU integration, explores the problem of creating a European form of citizenship. "What does it mean to be [a] European citizen? On the surface, the answer seems simple," Jesien writes. "The answer given by the Treaty on [the] European Union is simple: it means to be a citizen of any member state and therefore a member of the Union." He elaborates on the other concrete characteristics that are part of the rights of a citizen in an EU country. These include, "the right to participate in municipal and European Parliament elections in the place of living"; "the right to the other country's consular protection outside the territory of the Union"; and "the right to petition the Parliament and to apply to the Ombudsman." Jesien, however, is trying to identify a broader focus for the concept of a European form of citizenship. He argues that the bedrock principle of democracy is what legitimizes a government, and that is the "principle that power can be held and governance exercised only with the consent of the governed." (p. 4) A sign that there is a lack of such legitimacy, he proposes, is when "men and women distrust the institutions of their state." (p. 4) Thus Jesien identifies as a necessary aspect of democratic legitimacy "the need to find modern ways for [the] proper expression of the political will of the citizens." Jesien is seeking to identify what the defining aspect of such a citizenship would be. After he eliminates various categories as unessential, he concludes that an essential category for a form of EU citizenship would be the ability to participate in the affairs of the EU. A relevant model Jesien proposes to consider is the phenomenon of the netizen. Jesien writes: "At the time the European Union struggles to shape the European citizenship with much effort and little success, the other citizenship -- Netizenship emerges." (Jesien, p. 15.) Jesien recommends that the European "negotiators and . . . political leaders should look at this phenomenon with sympathy and attention." (Ibid.) XVI Implications and Proposal for Further Research While there is some scholarly attention to the history of computing and the international spread of computing, there is comparably little scholarly attention to the history of the Internet.(14) Internet research began in 1973. Since then, the Internet has grown and spread around the world. The history of the development of the Internet, however is only in its beginning. Each country has the experience of early network research and the experience of overcoming the internal and external obstacles to creating and spreading the Internet to its citizens. Also each country has a history of how local computer networking first developed, and how it became connected with the global internet. The project I want to propose is a project to document the early experience in each EU country of setting the basis for the Internet. Many of the network pioneers are still alive and can be helpful in documenting these developments. They can help to find the documents that may still exist about their work and to create a historical record. This can make it possible to document both the difficulties and how they were overcome. Similarly documenting the social history of early users can help to dispel the myth that the Internet was only available to a select few in the early 1990s. In his research in the early 1990s, Hauben found that many different people around the world found a way to connect to the early networks. A special area of research is to investigate the unique nature of the Internet and the netizen as important new phenomena of our time. The netizen is the conscious social identity adopted by those online who recognize that the new online forms have the potential to create new social phenomena. Netizens are by nature those who endeavor to explore what is possible via the online development. Also they are those who feel the importance of actively participating to make this new part of our world available to all. XVII Conclusion. Lundh, Spilling, Kahn, Kirstein and the other early Internet researchers succeeded in collaborating to develop the implementation of TCP/IP that would connect different networks into an integrated Internet. The different networks would not have to give up their individual character or purpose to be part of the Internet. Internet participation supplemented and improved local computer networking. The netizen became the demonstration that being part of a larger system enriched the other aspects of one's experience. Jesien saw in the model of the Internet and the netizen a model and practice for the EU. Each member state and the citizens in each state, could maintain their local character, and yet gain from and contribute to the Union. By being able to participate in a larger entity one can develop a broader perspective than by staying limited to an isolated and local focus. But also it was important for the Internet development to recognize what functionality should be in the gateways and what functionality in the Host computers or in SATNEt. Similarly, being able to identify what aspects of EU development is appropriate for the Union and what aspects for the member state and for the citizens thereof, can help to identify the role that each can play to contribute to a broader and richer Europe. Also the Internet exists to help as a means of communication and as a means of faciliating development. The Internet, the netizen and the EU are all young. The development of all can be enhanced by learning from the others and by cherishing the fact that there is the basis for both increased communication and increased participation because of the existence of the Internet. ---- Notes (1) See Michael and Ronda Hauben, "Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet", IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, 1997. online version: http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/ (2) Michael Hauben, "The Vision of Interactive Computing and the Future" in Netizens. (3) Barry Leiner et al, "A Brief History of the Internet", Feb 20, 1998, http://www.isoc.org/internet/history/brief.html. Michael Hauben, "The Vision of Interactive Computing and the Future" in Netizens. (4) J. C. R. Licklider, "MEMORANDUM FOR: Members and Affiliates of the Intergalactic Computer Network," Subject: Topics for Discussion at the Forthcoming Meeting, April 23, 1963, ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY Washington 25, D.C. http://www.olografix.org/gubi/estate/libri/wizards/memo.html (5) Kirstein's paper was "On the Development of Computer and Data Networks in Europe", Proc. Int. Conf. on Computer Communications, Washington, 240-244, 1972. Cerf describes some of those present at the ICCC'72. He lists Donald Davies from the U.K., National Physical Laboratory, Remi Despres who was involved with the French Reseau Communication par Paquet (RCP) and later with X.25 networking, Larry Roberts and Barry Wessler, from IPTO, Gesualdo LeMoli, an Italian network researcher; Kjell Samuelson from the Swedish Royal Institute, John Wedlake from British Telecom; Peter Kirstein from University College London; Louis Pouzin who led the Cyclades/Cigale packet network research program at the Institute Recherche d'Informatique et d'Automatique (IRIA, now INRIA, in France). Roger Scantlebury from NPL with Donald Davies may also have been there and Alex McKenzie from BBN probably was there. (Cerf, "How the Internet Came to Be") (6) Ronda Hauben, "Open Architecture", in The Encyclopedia of Computers and Computer History. Raul Rojas, Editor, Fitzroy Dearborn, Chicago, 2001, vol 2, pp. 951-952. (7) Robert E. Kahn, "The Introduction of Packet Satellite Communications," in Proc NTC, November, 1979, pp. 45.1.1-45.1.6. (8) See list of the PSPWG notes in Spilling, P., Lundh Y, Aagensen F.A "Final Report". (9) Kirstein, E-mail, October 3, 2002. (10) ARPANET News, February 1974, Editorial, pp. 2-3. (11) Michael Hauben, "The Social Forces Behind the Development of Usenet," in Netizens. (12) Ibid. (13) Michael Hauben and Ronda Hauben, "Netizens and the Wonderful World of the Net," online Jan. 10, 1944. The book was published in an expanded edition in 1997 as "Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet" by IEEE Computer Society. (14) See for example: James W. Cortada, "How Did Computing Go Global? The Need for an Answer and a Research Agenda", IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, Jan-March 2004, p. 53-58; Corinna Schlombs, "Toward International Computing History," IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, January-March 2006, p. 106-107; and Nathan Ensmenger, "Power to the People: Toward a Social History of Computing," Annals of the History of Computing, Jan-March 2004, p. 96-95 *For research I have done documenting the early history and impact of the Internet, see the appendix Bibliography ARPANET News, February 1974. Issue 12 NIC 21646, http://198.92.252.3/arpanet/ Cerf, Vinton, "How the Internet Came to Be: as told to Bernard Aboba," in The Online User's Encyclopedia by Bernard Aboba, Addison-Wesley, November 1993. Cerf, V. and R. Kahn, "Towards Protocols for Internetwork Communication," IFIP/TC6.1, NIC 18764, INWG 39, Sept 13, 1973. Cerf, V. and R. Kahn, "A Protocol for Packet Network Intercommunication", IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol com-22, No. 5, May 1974. Cortada, James W., "How Did Computing Go Global? The Need for an Answer and a Research Agenda", IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, Jan-March 2004, p. 53-58. Davies Donald W., "Early Thoughts on Computer Communications", n.d. Ensmenger, Nathan, "Power to the People: Toard a Social History of Computing," Annals of the History of Computing, Jan-March 2004, p. 96-95 EU, "Preparing Europe for the 21st Century" EU, "Reflection Group's Report", Messina 2nd June 1995, SN 520/95 (Reflex 21) Hauben, Michael, "The Social Forces Behind the Development of Usenet," in Netizens. Hauben, Michael, "The Vision of Interactive Computing and the Future", in Netizens. Hauben, Michael and Ronda Hauben, "Netizens: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet", IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, 1997. Hauben, Ronda, "Open Architecture", in The Encyclopedia of Computers and Computer History. Raul Rojas, Editor, Fitzroy Dearborn, Chicago, 2001, vol 2, pp. 951-952. Hauben, Ronda, "A Protocol for Packet Network Intercommunication", in The Encyclopedia of Computers and Computer History. Raul Rojas, Editor, Fitzroy Dearborn, Chicago, 2001, vol 2, pp. 652-653. IIASA, Workshop on Data Communications, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria, September 15-19, 1975 Jesien, Leszek, "The 1996 IGC: European Citizenship Reconsidered", IDM, Studien Des Institutes fur den donauraum und mitteleuropa, Marz 1997. http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/book2005/LJesien.rtf Kahn, Robert E., "The Introduction of Packet Satellite Communications," in Proc NTC, November, 1979, pp. 45.1.1-45.1.6. Kahn, Robert E., E-mail, September 11, 2002. Kirstein, Peter and Sylvia B. Kenny, "The Uses of the ARPANET via the University College London Node," in IIASA Workshop on Data Communications, Laxenburg, Austria, 1975, pp. 53-62. Kirstein, Peter, E-mail, July 3, 2002 E-mail, October 4, 2002 Leiner, Barry, et al, "A Brief History of the Internet", Feb 20, 1998, http://www.isoc.org/internet/history/brief.html. J. C. R. Licklider, "MEMORANDUM FOR: Members and Affiliates of the Intergalactic Computer Network," Subject: Topics for Discussion at the Forthcoming Meeting, April 23, 1963, ADVANCED RESEARCH PROJECTS AGENCY Washington 25, D.C. http://www.olografix.org/gubi/estate/libri/wizards/memo.html Lundh, Yngvar, "Yngvar Lundh: Computers and Communication - Early development of Computing and Internet Technology - a Groundbreaking part of Technical History". in Telektronikk Vol 97 No 2/3 2001, pp. 3-19. Lundh, Yngvar, E-mail April 9, 2002 E-mail April 18, 2002 E-mail April 26, 2002 Pouzin, Louis, E-mail, April 28, 2003 Schlombs, Corinna, "Toward International Computing History," IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, January-March 2006, p. 106-107. Spilling, Paal, "The Internet - A Cuckoo in the Telecom Service Nest An Evolution in packet switching services," in ..... Spilling, P., "The Internet - An Evolution in Packet Switching", INDC'96 Conference, June 1996, Trondheim, Norway. Spilling, P., Lundh Y, Aagensen F.A., "Final Report on the Packet Satellite Program", Intern Rapport, E-290, FFIE, December, 1978. Spilling, Paal, "Research Proposal presented to NATO, Scientific Affairs Division by Norwegian Defence Research Establishment also on behalf of University College London and Stanford University, California concerning A Study of the Transmission Control Program, a Novel Program for Internetwork Computer Communications." 2 December 1975, NDRE. Spilling, Paal, E-mail, September 5, 2002. Winkler, Stanley, editor, Computer Communication: Impacts and Implications, the First International Conference on Computer Communication, October 24-26, 1972, Washington, D.C. Graphics graphic of SATNET http://umcc.ais.org/~ronda/new.papers/4.pdf APPENDIX Following are chapters toward a book on the international, scientific and citizen model of the origin and early development of the Internet. This is a working draft and I welcome comments on any of the chapters or on the manuscript as a whole. Part Intro: http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/misc/lick101.doc The Information Processing Techniques Office and the Birth of the Internet A Study in Governance Part I http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/arpa_ipto.txt Computer Science and the Role of Government in Creating the Internet: ARPA/IPTO (1962-1986) Creating the Needed Interface Part II http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/basicresearch.txt Basic Research for the National Defense and the U.S. Department of Defense: A Paradox? Part III http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/centers-excellence.txt Centers of Excellence and Creating Resource Sharing Networks Part IV http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/computer-communications.txt Developing the New Field of Computer Communications Part V http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/birth_internet.txt Birth of the Internet: An Architectural Conception for Solving the Multiple Network Problem Part VI http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/birth_tcp.txt The Internet: On its International Origins and Collaborative Vision Part VII http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/misc/chemnitzpap.doc The Vision of Computer Networking Communication and its Influence on East-West Relations and the GDR Part VIII http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/tcpdigest_paper.txt A Study of the ARPANET TCP/IP Digest and of the Role of Online Communication in the Transition from the ARPANET to the Internet Part IX http://umcc.ais.org/~ronda/new.papers/msghist.txt ARPANET Mailing Lists and Usenet Newsgroups Creating an Open and Scientific Process for Technology Development and Diffusion Part X http://umcc.ais.org/~ronda/new.papers/usenet_early_days.txt Early Usenet(1981-2) Creating the Broadsides for Our Day Part XI http://umcc.ais.org/~ronda/new.papers/public_sphere.txt Usenet and the Internet Providing the Technology for A New Public Sphere: The Challenge for Our Times Part XII http://umcc.ais.org/~ronda/new.papers/netizensskorea.txt The Rise of Netizen Democracy A case study of the impact of netizens on democracy in South Korea Part XIII http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/misc/paperkorea.txt The New Dynamics of Democratization in South Korea The Internet and the Emergence of the Netizen Part XIV http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/misc/koreacarothers.txt Carother's Critique of the Transition Paradigm and the 2002 Presidential Election Campaign in South Korea The Netizens and the Conservative Print Media Part XV http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/netizenit.rtf The International Origins of the Internet and the Emergence of the Netizen Is the Early Vision Still Viable? last updated June 7, 2006