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@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf