From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Why trust root CAs ? Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: 2000年10月14日 14:59:59 GMTDavid Schwartz writes:
The paradigm for the certificate model PKI was the offline email case between parties that had no prior relationship and/or knowledge of each other (i.e. connect to the network, download email, disconnect, read email ... and perform various actions as specified by the email, even tho you had no prior knowledge of &/or relationship with the person sending the email).
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Why trust root CAs ? Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: 2000年10月14日 15:04:01 GMTpbrdhd.nojunk writes:
the public key part of the protocol is the same whether the consumer registers the same public key with one location or the same public key with 15 locations. In the case of multiple public key registration, one might be the bank and another might be the consumer's ISP. Using a common public key at both an ISP and the bank ... doesn't have the downside of somebody at the ISP doing fraudulent transactions at the bank.
deploying a common public key protocol would give the consumer a great deal of freedom and choice as to the level of security and integrity that they would like to use (software files, different tokens at different integrity levels, activation, etc)
The PIN/biometric activation ... as opposed to authorization is an issue. In the case of flowing an authorization PIN/password ... which might get compromized, it is realitively easy to get a new PIN/password. Biometric authorization in an open environment is much harder to deal with (effectively biometric authorization is a complex PIN/password that the person doesn't have to remember). In the case of biometric authorization compromize, it is much harder to issue a new body part. It is also harder to make sure that a unique body part is used for each entity that the consumer wishes to authenticate with.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Why trust root CAs ? Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: 2000年10月14日 19:32:00 GMTvjs@calcite.rhyolite.com (Vernon Schryver) writes:
even within the same business process there could be very large portion of the landscape coverage.
banks tend to have more confidence & experience with individuals that they give 10,000ドル credit card limits to compared to individuals they start out at 300ドル limits ... which can involve a broad range of different factors and the weight/importance given those factors.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Why trust root CAs ? Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: 2000年10月15日 00:15:32 GMTDavid Schwartz writes:
given that a bank can be sure that you are the person that has rights to a particular account and that you own a private key (by self-signing the corresponding public key) ... then the bank can record the associated public key for that account.
the bank recording a public key may or may not involve the bank returning a copy of a manufactured certificate. if there is a case where they would return a copy of a manufactured certificate, the original of that certificate is stored in the bank account record.
if the bank finds that the consumer is alwas returning a copy of the manufactured certificate attached to a transaction sent to the bank, then the bank can advise the consumer to do a little bit of knowledge compression ... i.e. every field that exists in the copy of the manufactured certificate that is also in the original of the manufactured certificate stored at the bank ... can be compressed from the copy of the manufactured certificate. Such compression can lead to the efficiency of attaching zero byte certificates on every transaction.
if the bank finds that the consumer is only attaching the copy of the bank's manufactured certificate to transactions sent to the bank, the bank can save the consumer extra effort by precompressing the copy of the manufactured certificate returned to the consumer (during registration) ... i.e. by providing the consumer a zero byte certificate that has been pre-compressed.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Why trust root CAs ? Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: 2000年10月15日 16:24:56 GMT"Lyalc" writes:
Protecting my own property with pin/passwords .... for access to a device I own myself .... is different than using shared-secret pin/passwords that have to be registered with one or more entities (and also different from dynamically generated per session encryption keys).
The distinction between the different types of pin/passwords (shared-secret versus private ownership) possibly is more clearly illustrated in the case of biometric shared-secret ... i.e. the electronic representation of the biometric body party is essentially a much more complex version of a pin/password that doesn't have to be remembered. In this kind of use of shared-secret pin/password in an open network ... the compromize of a traditional pin/password allows for changing the pin/password (although possibly expensive & time-consuming operation).
The use of a shared-secret biometric body part in an open network exhaserbates the problem of shared-secret pin/password compromize because of the difficulty of changing body parts. The other traditional guideline associated with shared-secret use is having a unique value for each entity that you authenticate with ... implying the use of a uniqe body part ... and hopefully you have fewer authentication partners than you have body parts supported for biometric authentication.
By comparison owning a personal hardware token that is biometrically activated has different failure and exploit modes. There is not a shared-secret biometric value that is being registered at multiple locations and transmitted over networks on every authentication operation. There is not cases of evesdropping a electronic biometric code and being able to reproduce it for fraudulent transactions at random places in the world.
In this scenerio, both the (public/private key) hardware token and the biometric value has to be stolen. The consumer is able to obtain a replacement hardware token and register its public key as needed ... not encountering the difficulty associated with having body parts replaced (associated with compromize of shared-secret biometric paradigms).
random refs:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsmore.htm#bioinfo1
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsmore.htm#bioinfo2
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsmore.htm#bioinfo3
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsmore.htm#biosigs
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsmore.htm#biosigs2
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#157
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#160
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#165
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#166
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#167
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#57
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: IBM Somers NY facility? Newsgroups: comp.lang.asm370 Date: 2000年10月17日 15:26:23 GMTlwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) writes:
last time we were there it was hdqtrs for different "groups" (i.e. various divisions had their hdqtrs at various locations around the world, divisions were collected into groups ... and somers had executives & staffs at the group level).
the other interesting building was "purchase" ... which was in the process of being built for a food company. lots of marble and big spaces.
for whatever reason it was picked up on a really good deal. however, i think that two years ago mastercard picked it up on another really good deal for their hdqtrs (they consolidated a number of different locations on manhatten).
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: History of ASCII (was Re: Why Not! Why not???) Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer,alt.folklore.computers Date: 2000年10月18日 20:58:21 GMTTom Almy writes:
The user was then expected to type login followed by their userid. If the first character translated to "l" (aka login) using the standard translate table ... it was assumed to be a standard 2741. Otherwise it would switch & try the correspondence translate table ... looking for a "l" as the first character.
from some old translate table index:
00 2741 04 correspondence 2741 08 apl 2741 0c correspondence apl 10 tty - 18 apl tty... i.e. 08 bit was used both as part of the translate table indexing but also as flag indicating APL translate command had been issued.
when i originally added tty/ascii support to cp/67 in 68 ... i had to play around with some of the non-standard ascii key assignments.
I also tried to extend the dynamic terminal type recognition so that TTY, 2471, and 1050s could dial into the same rotory bank. The ibm 2702 line controller had SAD command that controlled which line scanner was associate with which address.
On initial connect, I do something like specify the SAD for the tty line scanner and then send a who are you. If that timed out, i would specify the SAD for the 2741 line scanner and try some things.
It actually worked ... except eventually i talked to a ibm hardware engineers who said that it was out of spec. While ibm supported changing the line scanner with the SAD command, they took a short cut in the implementation and hard-wired the oscillator to each line ... i.e. "tty" lines would have an oscillator hard wired for 110 baud and "2741" lines would have an oscillator hard wired for 134.? baud.
Learning that eventually led to a 4-person project that built a plug-compatible controller out of Interdata3 (and credited with originating the ibm plug-compatible control unit business). One of the things that was supported was (relatively) high frequency strobe of incoming initial bits to dynamically determine baud rate.
random refs:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#2
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#2
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#9
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#12
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#30
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#37
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#39
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#44
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#76
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Why trust root CAs ? Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: 2000年10月18日 21:02:39 GMTpbrdhd.nojunk writes:
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Why trust root CAs ? Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: 2000年10月18日 23:49:41 GMTGreggy writes:
the frequent fallicy is ignoring the fact that customer support is required and that requires things like answering questions about pieces and components (i.e. a 1-800 number in the case something doesn't work ... who does the customer call).
in order for the call center to effectively answer calls ... they need access to the related components ... which leads a financial institution to registering the components in databases accessible by the call centers.
the per screen lay-out costs at the call center and the registration process in support of the call center frequently dominate all the costs associated with any such activity (regardless of the implementation).
of course the above only applies to real-live roll-outs and can be bypassed/ignored in the case of toy pilots, in which case other trade-off decisions can be made regarding the degree of investment in toy pilots (i.e. like punting on the issue of providing customer support).
One of the issues for toy pilots can be assumption that the early adapter participation in toy pilots will self-select ... i.e. everything goes right and the individual participates or it doesn't go right and they don't participate.
getting out a technology "with-it" press release on a toy pilot, it is possible to cut all sort of corners, possibly leaving worrying about the real implementation later after testing the water.
Furthermore, CA/certificates as being easy for customers and non-CA/certificates as being hard for customers is not a proven generalization (improved integrity doesn't have to be unnecessarily intrusive).
Skirting the requirement of expense for full customer support in association with toy pilots is probably a much better understood generalization.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Optimal replacement Algorithm Newsgroups: comp.arch Date: 2000年10月19日 15:25:32 GMTAlexis Cousein writes:
The IBM CSC simulation work had found a variaion on 2bit clock that outperformed true LRU (in simulations across wide variety of live trace data).
Basically the characteristic is that true LRU nominal outperforms FIFO ... except in situations where LRU degrades to FIFO ... and for those situations RANDOM tends to be better ... the issue then becomes recognizing when to switch back and forth between LRU and RANDOM.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Optimal replacement Algorithm Newsgroups: comp.arch Date: 2000年10月19日 20:52:07 GMTtoor@y1.jdyson.net (John S. Dyson) writes:
other adaptive characteristics were relative miss latency, relatively miss bandwidth and relative cache/storage size.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Amdahl Exits Mainframe Market Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Date: 2000年10月20日 22:46:45 GMTscotth@aspg.com (Scott Harder) writes:
From their standpoint, dumbing down MVS support would be a response to being unable to fill the positions.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Amdahl Exits Mainframe Market Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Date: 2000年10月20日 22:53:29 GMTon the otherhand ... part of a large financial infrastructure credited 100% up time (24/7) solid for over six years (now outages) to
1) ims hotstandby
2) automated operator
as various hardware & software failures were eliminated, operator mistakes
became one of the largest remaining failure causes.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#71
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Airspeed Semantics, was: not quite an sr-71, was: Re: jet in IBM ad? Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: 2000年10月21日 15:30:28 GMTerg@panix.com (Edward Green) writes:
SR-71 was early 60s ... so even 6600 would not have been available
http://209.1.224.11/CapeCanaveral/Lab/3993/SR71.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20010222210304/http://209.1.224.11/CapeCanaveral/Lab/3993/SR71.html
http://www.airspacemag.com/asm/mag/supp/fm99/oxcart.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20010204132600/http://www.airspacemag.com/asm/mag/supp/fm99/oxcart.html
6600 avail. 9/64
https://web.archive.org/web/20010218005108/http://www.isham-research.freeserve.co.uk/chrono.txt
http://www.cray.com/company/history.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20010203153300/http://www.cray.com/company/history.html
http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~history/Parallel.html
stretch & 7090 would have been available in the sr-71 timeframe and there were little or no plane design related applications available at that time.
in the f-16 timeframe had 7600, 91/95/195, misc. others
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Why trust root CAs ? Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: 2000年10月22日 21:53:21 GMT"David Thompson" writes:
x9 (financial industry standards org) overview at: http://www.x9.org
the nominal requirements given the x9a10 working group for x9.59 work item was to preserve the integrity of the financial infrastructure for all electronic retail payment (account-based) transactions with just a digital signature.
in effect only authenticated transactions are supported for these account (numbers) ... i.e. non-authenticated transactions against x9.59 account numbers may not be authorized (note today a financial institution may map multiple different account numbers with different characteristics to the same account ... so there is nothing precluding having both authenticated account number and a non-authenticated account number mapping to the same account ... and the authorization risk rules can be different based on the transaction type).
misc. details on x9.59 at https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
there is a mapping of x9.59 to iso8583 (i.e. payment cards, debit,
credit, etc)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/8583flow.htm
misc. other discussion (authenticated transactions, privacy,
name/address issues, etc)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#217
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm2.htm#straw
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm3.htm#cstech13
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/ansiepay.htm#privacy
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsmore.htm#x959demo
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aepay3.htm#sslset2
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aepay3.htm#x959risk2
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Why trust root CAs ? Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: 2000年10月22日 22:20:54 GMTAnne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
A certificate-based infrastructure represented two approaches ...
1) use certificates in an internet-only mode and truncate them at boundary between the internet and the financial infrastructure. The downside was giving up on basic security tenets like end-to-end integrity and end-to-end authentication.
2) carry the certificate ... but compress it into a manageable mode.
Now, some things cropped up:
Justification for the financial institution registering the public key were a) provide sufficient information for customer call center to handle trouble calls related to digital signature transactions and b) support relying-party-only certificates. relying-party-only certificates basically carried only an account number ... and designed by financial institutions to address liability and privacy issues.
With transactions carrying only a an appended relying-party-only certificate ... the account record has to be read ... containing the original of the certificate.
Therefor flowing any such certificate at all through the infrastructure can be viewed in one of two ways:
1) it is possible to compress out of a transaction appended certificate every field that the recepient is known to already have. Since the recepient has the original of the appended certificate, then every field in a transaction appended certificate can be removed ... resulting in a zero-byte appended certificate
2) given the consumer has a copy of the certificate, while the recepient (financial institution) has the original of the certificate that will be read when the transaction is executed, it is redundant and superfluous to bother sending back to the recepient a copy of something the recepient already has (i.e. the original registered public key along with all its binding).
So the x9.59 mapping to 8583 can viewed as either a) carrying a zero-byte appended certificate ... or b) not bothering to superfluously transmit to the financial institution a copy of some information (i.e. a public key and the public key bindings, represeted by a certificate) appended to every transaction when the financial institution has the original of that same information. In either case it minimizes the transaction payload bloat incurred by adding transaction authentication.
The X9.59 mapping to 8583 with included digital signature can provide end-to-end transaction authentication ... i.e. financial transaction instruction from the consumer to the consumer's financial institution ... with the institution responsible for authorizing and executing the financial transaction instruction is actually also authenticating the same instruction.
In prior posts, it was also pointed out that it is redundant and superfluous (as well as raising privacy issues) if parties not responsible for executing the transaction are performing extraneous authentication operations on the transaction.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: [OT] FS - IBM Future System Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Date: 2000年10月23日 04:27:54 GMTwmhblair@INTERTEX.NET (William H. Blair) writes:
a couple URLs found from alta vista
http://www.mcjones.org/System_R/SQL_Reunion_95/sqlr95-Index.html
http://www.cs.clemson.edu/~mark/acs_people.html
from
https://www.ecole.org/en/session/49-the-rise-and-fall-of-ibm
https://www.ecole.org/en/session/49-the-rise-and-fall-of-ibm
<<NOTE: above now 404, a current pointer:
https://www.ecole.org/en/session/49-the-rise-and-fall-of-ibm
IBM tried to react by launching a major project called the 'Future
System' (FS) in the early 1970's. The idea was to get so far ahead
that the competition would never be able to keep up, and to have such
a high level of integration that it would be impossible for
competitors to follow a compatible niche strategy. However, the
project failed because the objectives were too ambitious for the
available technology. Many of the ideas that were developed were
nevertheless adapted for later generations. Once IBM had acknowledged
this failure, it launched its 'box strategy', which called for
competitiveness with all the different types of compatible
sub-systems. But this proved to be difficult because of IBM's cost
structure and its R&D spending, and the strategy only resulted in a
partial narrowing of the price gap between IBM and its rivals.
... &
This first quiet warning was taken seriously: 2,500 people were
mobilised for the FS project. Those in charge had the right to choose
people from any IBM units. I was working in Paris when I was picked
out of the blue to be sent to New York. Proof of the faith people had
in IBM is that I never heard of anyone refusing to move, nor
regretting it. However, other quiet warnings were taken less
seriously.
===============================================================
as in prior postings ... my view at the time was "inmates in charge of the asylum", didn't exactly make me liked in that group ... see ref in previous postings (above) to central sq. cult film.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: [OT] FS - IBM Future System Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Date: 2000年10月23日 04:38:00 GMToh, and on the subject of "compatible" ... recent posting touching on the subject of plug-compatible ...
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: OT? Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Date: 2000年10月23日 16:57:37 GMTSteve Samson writes:
One-level store ... as tried by tss/360 a couple years prior to FS didn't work ... for one thing, the semantics between file access and virtual memory management were too primitive from at least a performance standpoint (i.e. LRU replacement algorithms didn't work well on virtual memory spaces being accessed sequentially).
The big issue for any of the OSs/VSs supporting FBA was CKD multi-track search for vtoc, pds, etc. CKD multi-track search was a technology trade-off from the mid-60s based on relative memory sizes and i/o bandwidth (trading off decreased memory utilization for increase i/o utilization). By the late-70s, the trade-off had flipped (shifted from being memory constrained to I/O constrained) ... and CKD searches were limiting system thruput. I got something like a quote from STL for 26ドルm pricetag to ship vtoc & PDS support for non-CKD operation (even showing significant performance improvement).
random refs:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/97.html#29
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#237
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#54
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#75
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#9
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#10
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: OT? Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Date: 2000年10月23日 17:03:08 GMTAnne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Competitors to SABRE? Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Date: 2000年10月23日 23:02:54 GMTehrice@his.com (Edward Rice) writes:
as an aside, 20-30% of the transactions involved directly driving the various ticket printing and other devices around the world ... however avg. peak load (for the whole system) was still several thousand per second (not per minute or per hour ... but per second).
I redid routes that addressed all ten impossible things and had something like 10times the thruput; it wasn't TPF-based (in large part because the application was implemented in a totally different way ... and not subject to various restrictions imposed by a TPF-based implementation).
TPF is also used in some transaction switching systems in the financial industry (imagine a large router in tcpip/internet genre)
random refs:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#24
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#100
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#103
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#136a
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#152
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#153
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#31
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#61
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: OT? Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Date: 2000年10月23日 23:23:11 GMTSteve Samson writes:
that is aside from various issues of actually getting the vast array of new technologies all developed, tested, integrated, and into the market in any reasonable time-frame.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Why trust root CAs ? Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: 2000年10月24日 00:03:09 GMT"Tor Rustad" writes:
SET didn't provide end-to-end authentication. It truncated authentication at the SET payment gateway and then generated an acquiring financial infrastructure transaction with a flag indicating authentication ... which eventually got to the customer's issueing financial institution.
Two years ago, somebody from VISA gave a presentation at an ISO meeting regarding the number of (SET) transactions coming into consumer issuing financial institutions with the SET authenticated flag turned on ... and they could show that there was no SET technology involved in the transaction (issue crops up in security infrastructures when there isn't end-to-end authentication and end-to-end integrity).
The X9.59 mapping to ISO8583 is done in much the same way that the SET mapping was done ... find a place in the existing ISO8583 message definition to stash the information ... so that ISO8583 doesn't have to be changed (although the 8583 work group now has a new field being defined that would specifically support this function).
If you note that the X9.59 standard doesn't really define messages
... it defines a set of fields formated for digital signature signing
and authentication. It specifically doesn't say how the fields are
transmitted on an end-to-end basis ... it just defines how the fields
have to be formated when they are signed and how the fields have to be
formated when the signature is verified. In this sense, it took a
similar approach to that of FSTC (
http://www.fstc.org &
http://www.echeck.org
) for digitally
signed electronic checks (the transmitted messages carrying the fields
may bear absolutely no resemblance to the format of the fields for
signing and authentication). And in fact, with minor changes, the
X9.59 definition (if translated to XML/FSML encoding) is usable for
echeck (i.e. the charter given the X9A10 work group was to preserve
the integrity of the financial infrastructure for all electronic
retail payment (account-based) transactions with a digital
signature).
The industry has regular message and software upgrades ... some of them dictated by regulations ... and more than a quite a few changes that are orders of magnitude larger change compared to what is needed for x9.59. The resources needed to effect the X9.59 changes, if scheduled as part of standard industry change process ... might not even show up as a real line item (lost in the noise of business as usual).
Standard business case applies to X9.59 ... benefits outweight the costs. Done as part of normal business, the technology, development, and deployment costs of X9.59 can be managed into the noise range. As cited in previous postings ... those costs however are totally dwarfed by costs of deploying real live customer call center support for new kinds of technology transactions.
One of the issues with X9.59 is that it has been defined as part of the industry financial standards process ... for implementation as part of standard production operation. In order to achieve end-to-end integrity, it doesn't define toy pilots that might be do'able for 50ドルk where the authentication and integrity may be stripped off at the internet boundary (as an aside, development, test, deployment and training for one new screen in a customer call center can easily be more than the cost of a toy pilot ... the real costs for new kinds of technology is how to provide customer support ... if done correctly, the technology issues can be managed into the noise range).
So what are compelling business issues for end-to-end authentication and integrity ... along with fraud & risk reduction?
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Why trust root CAs ? Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: 2000年10月24日 00:14:51 GMTvjs@calcite.rhyolite.com (Vernon Schryver) writes:
Part of the X9.59 work was that it could be mapped to a brand new network where all the bandwidth rules have totally changed ... and it wasn't necessary to worry about existing practical concerns. So at at the 100,000 foot level ... does a definition also carry as a prerequisite that brand-new financial infrastructure be built in order to support its deployment.
However, part of the X9.59 work was also to see how it could be mapped to existing ISO8583 financial networks where there are real bandwidth rules and transactions size issues ... and still provide end-to-end integrity and end-to-end authentication.
Part of the charter given the X9A10 work group was to preserve the integrity of the financial infrastructure for all electronic retail payments (account-based) with a digital signature. "All" would include all the existing financial infrastructures as well as the new ones that haven't been built and deployed yet (i.e. the charter wasn't to define an internet only solution or a new network only solution, it was a solution for all electronic retail account-based payments).
It is believed that the same X9.59 definition can be made to work in both kinds of environments (the existing financial infrastructures as well as the new infrastructures that haven't been built yet).
there is a line someplace about, in theory there is no difference between theory and practice, but in practice there is.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Why trust root CAs ? Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: 2000年10月24日 00:35:23 GMTAnne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: Why trust root CAs ? Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: 2000年10月24日 00:39:57 GMTAnne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: OT? Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Date: 2000年10月24日 00:48:03 GMTjmaynard@thebrain.conmicro.cx (Jay Maynard) writes:
searching alta vista for ibm houston science center ... came up with the former FSD houston location (one of the few things that didn't go when IBM sold the federal system division).
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: OT? Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Date: 2000年10月24日 00:58:14 GMTSteve Samson writes:
FS seemed to garner every new R&D idea that had been thot of ... whether it was practical or not (some line about in theory there is no difference between theory and practice ... but in practice there is). Technies not being able to sort between practical and not practical were going to take quite awhile to getting around to devising any sort of migration plan.
I think that houston prooved that the very next product out the door from IBM was going to be a 370-based product and not an FS-based product.
in any case, the focused effort that was being done instead of continueing to produce products for the existing market place was suspended(?).
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: OT? Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Date: 2000年10月24日 01:13:25 GMTSteve Samson writes:
as to FS ... I'm biased because I believe what I was shipping at the time was superior to what was defined as research in the resource management section.
my wife is biased the other way ... she reported to the guy that headed up inter-system coupling area (FS was divided into something like 13-14 sections/areas ... resource management was one of the area sections & inter-system coupling was another area/section) for FS (before she went to POK to be responsible for loosely-couple architecture). she does admit now that a lot of it was extremely blue sky (but it was fun even if not practical).
random refs:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#71
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#13
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: OT? Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Date: 2000年10月24日 01:25:19 GMTAnne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> Subject: Re: OT? Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main Date: 2000年10月24日 14:11:08 GMTAnne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
In the late '60s Les transferred to Wash DC. During FS he was head of the inter-system coupling section/area in FS. My wife worked for him. After FS was shutdown, my wife spent some time working on JES2/JES3 in g'burg and then went to POK to be responsible for loosely-coupled architecture. She did Peer-Coupled Shared Data architecture and fought for things like making trotter/3088 more than just CTCA.
About the time she was in POK, I was on the west coast and doing some
things for HONE ... both SMP kernel support and helping with
loosely-coupled support (at the time, the resulting implementation was
considered the largest single system image complex in existance).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#30
I also got to do a from scratch implementation for HYPERchannel that
looked more like what she was pushing for trotter/3088 and had some of
the characteristics from fs inter-system coupling. It was deployed by
the IMS organization in STL and Boulder.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#29
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#38
I did the rfc 1044 support in ibm's tcp/ip ... with thruput about 50*
the base implementation (again, much more characteristic of fs
inter-system coupling)
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#28
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#36
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#90
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm#0
Her Peer-Coupled Shared Data didn't really make it into the (mainframe) market
until ims hot-standby ... and now parallel sysplex.
Later when we running the skunk works that turned out HA/CMP, a lot of
the implementation was subcontracted to a company in Cambridge called
CLaM. Les had moved back to Boston and formed a company CLaM ...
initials stood for Comeau, Linscott and Miller. misc. refs:
so there could be a claim made that a lot of the work on FS
inter-system coupling did eventually migrate into products
(independent of other parts of FS showing up in as/400).
--
The 6000 group had done effectively their own version of escon
... called SLA (serial link adapter) ... it was about 10% faster than
escon and used components that were something like 1/10th the cost of
the escon components.
However, there was nobody else in the world that supported SLA ... so
at best, one 6000 box could talk to another 6000 box.
To make it more interoperable ... we con'ed the company that produced
HYPERchannel and very high-end tcp/ip routers to support a SLA card
in their product line (they had a full set of directly attached boxes
supporting a wide range of vendor supercomputers and mainframes, in
addition to high-end, high-performance routers). With their support of
SLA ... it gave the 6000 high-truput attachment directly into every
kind of computer supported by their product line.
another random hsdt ref (rios in the following ref is rs/6000)
random other hsdt refs:
--
There are various variations ... in systems with single hardware
reference bit ... the software can emulate multiple bits in software
... effectively "shifting" the value of a hardware bit into
software. Multiple bits then represent the settings of multiple sweeps
of resetting the bit (and longer reference history).
The problem with clock and other similar implementations approximating
LRU is that it degrades to FIFO under all sorts of conditions i.e. at
some point all pages have their reference bits on ... the test & reset
sweep thru all pages. At the end of that full sweep, all pages have
their reference bit off and the algorithm replaces the page it started
with. Then there is a very high probability that the next several
pages examined in the fixed order will continue to have their
reference bit off ... so the algorithm makes a sweep replacing several
pages in a fixed order.
THe '71 simulation work found that LRU appoximation algorithms as well
as simulated "true" LRU algorithm (across lots of different live load
trace data) found that LRU replacement frequently degenerated to FIFO
(LRU and FIFO were indistinguishable).
What was discovered was that with a minor coding hack ... CLOCK and
misc. other LRU approximatins could be made to degenerate to nearly
RANDOM instead of degenerating to FIFO ... i.e. in the situations that
caused true LRU to degenerate to FIFO ... RANDOM replacement performed
much better than FIFO.
My line from '71 was something to the effect that if the algorithm
couldn't distinguish between pages (effectively the situation where
nearly all page reference bits where all on or all off and led to LRU
replacement degenerating to FIFO) that it was better to choose pages
randomly for replacement than to choose pages for replacement in a
fixed order (FIFO).
In simulation, true LRU tended to avg. 10-15% better than the normal
CLOCK and other LRU approximation algorithms. The variation that had
LRU approximation degenerate to RANDOM tended on the avg. to be 10-15%
better than true LRU.
--
--
In the literature at the time, there was stuff on fixed working set
size stuff with local LRU that executed on a fixed time basis.
The problems with what was in the literature was that it was
significantly sub-optimal, overhead was independant relationship to
contention and/or demand for pages, and didn't dynamicly adapt to
different configurations & load (amount of storage, replacement
latency, queuing delay, contention, etc).
The clock-type algorithms both dynamically adapted the overhead
processing and interval to demand/contention.
I was able to show that global LRU and adaptive working set size
significantly outperformed what was in the literature at the time.
In '71, I had somewhat accidentally stumbled across LRU degenerating to
RANDOM instead of FIFO (and outperforming true LRU on the avg bas as
much as true LRU outperformed clock-like LRU approximations) when i
was trying various rearrangements of the clock code to make it much
more efficient in an SMP environment (reduce lock contention, etc with
multiple processors all contending for the page replacement
supervisor).
other random refs:
--
the 370/etc princ-of-ops was a script/gml document that was a subset
of the architecture "red-book". The architecture "red-book" had a
bunch of "conditional" sections that gave a lot of justification &
trade-offs of why things were done they way they were.
For instance, t\he original 370 architecture "red-book" gave a
complete virtual memory and addressing architecture (before virtual
memory was announced). Coming up on the time to announce 370 virtual
memory ... there was a big battle over what would be announced and
shipped. Both the 155s & 165s in the field needed significant hardware
upgrade to support relocation. One of the points finally came down to
announcing & releasing the full 370 virtual memory architecture (as
embodied in the red-book) would take a significant additional redesign
and rewire of the virtual memory retrofit for the 165 delaying the
virtual memory announcement by six months.
There was various escalation meetings with all parties concerned and
finally it was decided to go with a subset of 370 virtual memory
architecture. One of the deciding factors was that the POK SVS group
stated that SVS only had a single address space and customer
installations would peak at max. of five page I/O per second and
therefor the additional features would see no benefit in a SVS
environment.
random refs:
--
when i got to ship some of this stuff in products ... I had the
benefit of a lot of work by others in simulation plus workload
profiling that had been collected across hundreds of different
configurations & loads over a period of a number of years.
As a result was able to construct some synthetic benchmarks that could
be configured along the edges of the configuration/load envelopes,
statistical points within the nominal configuration/load envelope, and
various severe outlyers ... way beyond the edge of observed
configuration/load envelopes.
Several thousand synthetic benchmarks was then devised that covered
the observed configuration/load envelope (interior, boundary
conditions, extreme outlyers, etc) that took three months elapsed time
to execute.
The information was then used to validate all kinds of stuff I was
doing in dynamic adaptive & feedback/feedforward stuff across a broad
range of different configurations & loads ... not just page
replacement, but various thrashing controls, scheduling and
dispatching controls, "scheduling to the bottleneck" adaptation,
etc. Scheduling to the bottleneck attempting to identify the
bottleneck thruput resources and adjust scheduling based on the
consumption of bottleneck resources (which might or might not be cpu
or storage or i/o or page i/o, etc).
--
Instruction source/destination operands had various attributes
(possibly 3-5 levels of attributes). The FS microcode was responsible
for doing the magical DWIM based on the attributes. Source/Destination
operands with attributes associated with I/O was much less well
defined for the microcode "do what i mean" magic (than most other parts
of the FS architecture)
--
There was a 3mbit/sec early '80s version that didn't listen before
transmit. Analytical modeling of a 3mbit thick-net (w/o listen before
transmit) with several hundred stations I believe showed efficiencies
dropping below 30%. Part of this was due to lack of listen before
transmit. Probability of collisions was purely based on amount of
contention.
With listen before transmit, collisions become function of both
contention and network transmission latency. Worst case in thin/thick
net were/are the stations at the futherst ends of the cable (and total
distance/latency is somewhat proportional to number of stations since
it is the sum of all the segments).
Hub-based twisted pair tends to better bound the worst case latency
because it is proportional to the two longest segments and independant
of the number of segments.
I got into deep dudo including twisted-pair solutions when I
introduced 3-layer architecture to IS executives of large
multinational corporation. The 16mbit T/R guys had been using a
analytical model with 3mbit/sec ethernet w/o listen before transmit &
comparing it to 16mbit T/R (and showing around 1mbit/sec ethernet
effective thruput). Quoting the sigcomm paper made T/R guys even less
happy.
random refs:
--
"Measured Capacity of Ethernet: Myths and Reality" in proceedings of
ACM SIGCOMM, 8/16-19, 1988, V18N4
--
random refs:
--
In the late '80s, the industry did finally take a better crack at
reinventing itself. For instance, up until then the avg. development
cycle time in the US for a new product was approx. seven years (from
concept to delivery). The Japanese had shorten that to three years for
the lexus, infinity, etc, products. The result was that the Japanese
could adapt nearly two & half times faster to changing customer
circumstances (than the US). The C4(?) project helped turn out the
initial S10 in three years and also supposedly vastly improved
quality.
--
I remember 3380s coming in A & B boxes ... where (I think) "A" boxes
where "head of string" and contained the logic allowing attachment to
multiple controllers (an "A" box and three "B" boxes for 16 drives in
a string?).
The I/O architecture had misc problems with string switches. Standard
architecture provided for channel-busy, controller-busy, and
device-busy indications. String-switch wasn't a resource concept
provided for in the i/o architecture ... so string-switch effectively
used multiple device-busies to simulate a string-switch busy.
Data transfers & things like search operations would "busy" shared
resources (i.e. channel, controller, string-switch). Any device in a
string doing something like a multi-track search (worst case about 1/3
sec. for a 3330) would cause the related string-switch to be busy and
all other devices (i.e. up to 15) on the same string to be unavailable
(regardless of additional controllers or channels).
random refs (alta vista)
--
I only saw some of the C4 stuff at GM and didn't really see the other
manufactures. However, with seven year cycle, you would tend to have
2-3 concurrent overlapping efforts with staggered offset of 2-4 years
so new products were coming to market on more frequent bases. Also,
early in a cycle, you might have two or more competing teams since
predictions out seven years could be open to interpretation and you
would want to cover contingencies. Moving from 7 year cycle to 3 year
cycle might result in 80% reduction in the number of required
engineers (competitive forces w/military for the top 10-50 engineers
in the country could still be a factor tho).
I do know that i bought a malibu for over 5ドルk in '76 and it was around
13ドルk something like 8 years later (and that represented closer to the
avg. price of US car sold). Of course, inflation accounted for some of
the change but I think that during this period, finance periods
increased from 3 year to 5 year (possible indication of prices
increasing faster than wages, also would have helped precipitated the
5 year warranties that started to show up in the early '80s).
C4 addressed radical changes in the end-to-end process ... not so much
what was being done ... but how they went about doing it (as well as
the cost of doing it). Drastic reductions in cost/time also implied
reductions in number of people. I would expect that just quantity of
engineers would tend to result in longer cycles, larger number of
different models and fewer common components.
One example given C4 was corvette design because the skin/surface done
by the designers tended to have tight volume tolerances. Seven year
cycle resulted in several re-engineering & re-design activities
because of minor modifications of basic components done by other
divisions and/or suppliers (change in delco battery during the cycle
required modifications to the exterior surface).
With respect to foriegn exchange in one of the following refs, I
remember being in tokyo when exchange rate was 300/$ and since seen it
drop below 100/$ (the relative cost of their products in the US market
increased by a factor of 3 over a period of 25-30 years).
In some of the following there are references to a benefit of the
purchase of AMC to Chrysler because AMC had already started takeup of
Honda/Japanese manufacturing techniques.
misc. refs (many have since gone 404, so replaced with wayback machine URLs):
from the above iitf/nist ref:
misc pieces from the above
Also, there was extensive drive in the early '90s to get programs off
the gov. dole, extensive incentive to get gov. contractors to find
commercial funding/ooutlets for large portions of their activities,
migration to COTS offerings and other initiatives (ARPA's TRP
technology reinvestment program, startup funding to migrate all possible
gov. developed technologies into commercial sector; NIST ATP
... advanced technology program, NASA AITP, etc)
NSFNET was in large respect to demonstrate feasability of high-speed
service offering. Once that was demonstrated, it would have consistant
with all the other technology activities of the period to transition
to COTS/commercial offerings.
Other instances were a number of conferences in the early to mid-90s
where the national labs were attempting to "sell" a lot of technology
to the medical industry.
There use to be lots of technology reuse program references on the web
current alta-vista search turns up
"ARPA TRP" turns up a few more ... sample
including
the following from the above
federal technology transfer web site:
technology transfer legislative history web site (going back to 1980)
some of the entries from above
The Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer (FLC) was
organized in 1974 and formally chartered by the Federal Technology
Transfer Act of 1986 to promote and to strengthen technology
transfer nationwide. Today, more than 700 major federal laboratories
and centers and their parent departments and agencies are FLC
members.
one of the "stories" titled "The Great Government Giveaway"
and a couple more entries from the legislative history web site ...
another organization at harvard that has participated &/or assisted in studies
is the Program on Information Resources Policy
--
by comparison, a (simple grep) list of just the com domains from
Oct. 1990 domain list
it only picks up some of the non-us "coms" and doesn't pick up edu,
org, net, etc domains ... but it still lists 1742 com domains.
--
Introduction to the iAPX 432 Architecture (171821-001) copyright 1981, Intel
iAPX 432 Object Primer (171858-001, Rev. B)
iAPX 432 Interface Processor Architecture Reference Manual (171863-001)
out of the introduction
In any case, I believe that it was the government/PUCC that was
telling the phone company that it wasn't necessary to upgrade the
central office that served the cupertino area ... since nobody really
wanted things like high-speed internet access (i.e. it wouldn't be
allowed a rate increase to cover the cost of the equipment upgrade
since the existing central office equipment was good for another 20
years and nobody really cared about high-speed internet access).
As pointed out, for people that really wanted high-speed internet
access, they could really get it with the existing central office
equipment ... but instead of 512kbit access costing 49ドル/month it would
only cost something like 1200ドル/month (a silly 24 times more, after all its
just money).
--
Given a high-speed technology service demonstration of known duration
it is highly likely that commercial entities donated the majority of
the resources to make the NSFNET demonstrations a success. Possibly
motivation for this strategy was creating a demand for bandwidth that
would later be migrated to real world environment.
In the mid-80s there was enormous amounts of dark fiber putting the
telecommunication industry in real chicken & egg bind; bandwidth
intensive applications wouldn't be developed w/o lowered tariffs, but
it would take bandwidth intensive applications several years to
appear, mature, and propagate into the market place. Across the board
reduction of tariffs by factors of 5-10 times w/o corresponding
increase in use would put the industry at severe financial risk.
A solution was a controlled incubator environment (like NSFNET and
supercomputing centers) where embryonic high bandwidth applications
could emerge and acquire some maturity. Once out of the embryonic
stage, there would be migration from the incubator to the real world
(while maintaining an economically viable telecommunication industry).
The relationship between commercial contributions and gov. funding is
possibly clearer in state of cal. situation where pacbell created an
internet program for educational and non-profit institutions. Rather
than doing a special tariff for non-profit internet services ... they
tariffed the non-profit internet connections at the going rate and
then provided a grant program that non-profit institutions could apply
to and receive funding to cover the costs of their internet
connectivity (and it was probably also easier to provide supporting
documentation with regard to non-profit tax deductions).
As a result, I would claim that there was much less economic confusion
surrounding the nature of free services.
--
by 1992, the number of NSFNET sites was only up to 16 ... ref:
the people with direct access to NSFNET would have been numbered in
the tens of thousands at best (i.e. much less than the sum of all
possible individuals at each of the 16 institutions).
In general, gov grants (like NSF) are to aid in technology research
and development and not usually to create government service
buearacracies (especially that would be in competition with commercial
entities).
misc. other history
from the above reference:
Lots of production work was done with CP/67 by a wide variety of
different kinds of customers ...
misc ref:
other random refs:
--
some extracts from melinda's paper ...
also misc. other references (also refs from reply to tss posting)
--
In fact, one relatively recent observation regarding the two things
considered primarily responsible for 100% uptime of a critical
financial service since approx. 1992 were
ims hot standby (i.e. a fault fall-over technology)
automated operater (getting the human element totally
out of the loop).
random refs:
--
There was also a battle over implementing the full 370 relocation
architecture. The 165 engineers said that it would take an extra six
months to do the full 370 relocation architecture hardware for the 165
... and so there was eventually a decision made to drop various things
from the 370 virtual memory relocation architecture in order to speed
the hardware retrofit package out the door.
The 135/145 then had to have an update to the microcode load that
corresponded to the 370 relocation architecture hardware subset that
was being supported by the 155 & 165.
138 & 148 were later enhancements to the 135 & 145 (which somewhat
correspond to the 158 & 168 enhancments).
The 138/148 also introduced the concept of microcode operating system
performance assists for VS1 & VM/370. Basically the 138/148 engines
were simulating 370 instructions at about a 10:1 emulation. Much of
operating instruction code could be moved directly to microcode at one
microcode instruction for every 370 instruction (giving a 10:1
performance boots). There were also some special cases that saw much
larger than 10:1 ... typically associated with not having to
save/restore 370 registers for a subfunction (i.e. microcode could do
it using its own domain bypassing the traditional save/restore
function call paradigm if it was all within the same 370 domain).
misc. url
there was also a pentagon papers like event ... before the relocation
announcement, a copy of a document was leaked & made it to the press
that contained the description of the new relocate hardware
features. after a lengthy investigation ... eventually all the copier
machines in the company were retrofitted with little serial number
under the glass that would show up on all copies made with that
machine.
--
The aggregate of all the related 360/67 time-sharing activities
(tss/360, cp/67, etc ) may not seem significant compared to the 360
batch market which so dwarfed them ... and yet at the same time .. the
total resources poured into those "insignificant" time-sharing
activities were possibly as large as the aggregate of all other
resources going into time-sharing activities going on at the time
(independent of the issue of the effectiveness of those resources).
random refs:
--
they did a special microcode load ... which implemented in microcode
a periodic sampling event that would wake up on regular intervals and
check the PSW. A counter was incremented based on what it observed as
to the PSW activity. The table of where the CPU was spending its time
was used to compliment the work that is referenced in
In the following reference ...
the person that wrote the 145 microcode for the APL assist and the
above mentioned microcode address sampler was in the same group as the
person that I worked with to do the analysis in the indicated
reference i.e. two methods were used to do the kernel analysis, one
was a microcode address sampler and the other was software changes
that hooked into the inter-module call routine which created
time-stamped record whenever the inter-module call function was
invoked ... giving the current time value (64 370 tod clock),
call-frome/return address, and call-to address. The above
reference gives the data reduction from the software inter-module
call analysis.
--
Many of the batch efforts were also significantly independent (big
difference between the DOS & PCP efforts).
some of them had better commercial success than others.
the migration from existing commercial batch operations (things like
payroll) tended to be a lot more straight-forward (compared to the
existing batch, commercial market take-up of a new paradigm) ... and
also tended to have a significant amount of business process value
dependency associated with it (frequently much easier to see the
downside of not getting out payroll on time).
As a student, I had done a HASP hack on MVT18 that supported 2741&tty
terminals with a CMS editor syntax (which can be traced back to CTSS)
for CRJE functions (i.e. conversational remote job entry ... i.e.
editing simulated card decks that would be submitted as a file to the
batch processer ... as if the file had been created by reading cards).
IBM did go thru various CRJE-like offerings ... including TSO showing
up late in the MVT product cycle.
I would claim that it wasn't that IBM didn't offer time-sharing in
addition to batch ... but various other factors shaped the market:
1) things were still maturing and numerous factors constrained not
being able to offer batch and time-sharing as a single package (it was
even difficult to offer a single batch packaged offering ... witness
360 DOS & PCP and their descendants still around today).
2) majority of the existing market was commercial batch dataprocessing
and upgrade to a batch paradigm was more straightforward for the
majority of the market than a paradigm switch (like lots of ibsys
cobol to 360 cobol translation went on).
3) online, interactive can be viewed as quite anti-thetical to a
number of the commercial batch business processes ... where there is a
strong motivation to eliminate all human-related vaguries from
consistent delivery of the functions supported.
I've even posted a number of times
1) that the various "interactive" derived platforms tend to have an
implicit design point that if something goes wrong ... you send a
message to the person ... and the person figures out what to do (or
maybe just throw it away totally, because people wouldn't be able to
fiure it out).
2) 7x24 operations (including emerging web server industry) requires
an implicit design point that a person doesn't exist ... and that all
deviations have to be trappable programatically at several levels,
default system, application, etc. This is a design point that batch
oriented services have addressed significantly better than the
interactive-derived platforms.
3) simple example I encountered a number of instances during the late
'80s and early '90s of not being able to trap various ICMP packets at
the application level and appropriately handle ... something that was
doing in the '70s in a totally different environment providing 7x24
online, unattended services.
--
various things extracts
however, there were a number of 360/67s that had been sold to
customers on the basis of the (relatively) massive tss/360 effort
... a product which was encountering difficulties. There were some
number of CP/67 success stories which were being presented and talked
about at the various user group meetings (share & to lesser extent
guide).
Customers could strong-arm marketing & sales people to get a copy
... or could effectively bypass them ... and order cp/67 directly or
even get a copy from another customers. At the time, the software
wasn't charged for and shipped with full source as part of the
standard distribution.
I was an undergraduate at a university that went through that cycle,
had bought a 360/67 on the basis of TSS/360 time-sharing marketing
pitch ... and eventually had to do various other things because of all
the difficulties that TSS/360 was having.
Through various iterations, contact was made with the CP/67 group and
in Jan. of 1968, some of the group came out to the university to do an
"installation" (up until that CP/67 was only being used in Cambridge
by the development group and out at Lincoln Labs). Then at the spring
Share user group meeting in Houston, CP/67 had an "official" product
announcement ... using the university as a "reference" instllation.
I got to play with CP/67 through-out 1968 ... rewriting many pieces,
developing fast-path and cutting critical pathlengths by a factor of
10 (or in some cases a 100), redoing scheduling & dispathing
(introducing fair share scheduling and dynamic feedback algorithms),
redoing the virtual memory manager (new page replacement algorithms,
vastly reduced path length, a thrashing control mechanism that was an
alternative to the working set stuff in the literature at the time
... which provided significantly improved thruput), fixing a lot of
bugs associated with production systems, etc.
I also put in the TTY/ASCII terminal support ... an implementation
that Tom Van Vleck writes up as crashing his system 20-30 times in a
single day.
It was during this period that various of the people that had been
involved in CP/67 (both at Cambridge and Lincolng Labs) put together
two different start-up spin-offs for offering commercial time-sharing
services based on CP/67.
random refs:
VM/370 was the follow-on product to CP/67 adapted for the 370 product
line (conversion from 360/67 to 370 which had virtual memory on almost
all processors eventually).
I had made some observation that the internal corporate deployment of
VM/370 was rather large (for instance the majority of the internal
network nodes were vm/370 and that was larger than arpanet/internet up
thru about 1985) ... but smaller than the number of VM/370 customer
installations. I was also doing custom modifications support of VM/370
that I shipped to (mostly) a very limited number of internal sites
(although it had leaked out to ATT longlines at one point) ... The
very limited number of internal installation that I directly supported
was still larger than the total number of Multics installations.
--
This was a CERN benchmark ... however the copy of the benchmark report
that was provided to IBM was immediately classified "IBM Confidential
Restricted" (distributed on need to know basis only, the only higher
classification was registered, where each copy is numbered and
regular, frequent security audits requiring copies kept in double lock
cabinets).
The strategic forces inside IBM had moved from TSS/360 time-sharing to
MVS/TSO (sort-of time-sharing) ... with CP/67 and VM/370 always being
odd-man-out.
--
even stranger was that the hdqtrs planning & forecasting functions were
based on cp/67 (and then later vm/370). When EMEA hdqtrs moved from
the US to Paris ... I hand carried a clone over and installed it.
HONE (field, sales, & marketing support) was first implemented on
a CP/67 platform during the early '70s and then migrated to vm/370.
by the end of the 70s, HONE was primary vehicle for sales & marketing
support (world-wide) ... many orders couldn't even be placed until
they were first run thru a HONE "configurator" (and sales & marketing
were still treating the vm/370 product as non-strategic offering).
In the late '70s, the online HONE installation was possibly the
largest single system image operation in the world (supporting the
tens of thousands of field, sales, & marketing people in the US).
random refs:
--
The 370 line was later enhanced with models 138, 148, 158, and 168
(all with virtual memory).
some extracts concerning 360/40 & cp/40.
other recent postings to alt.folklore.computers
--
two issues ... 1) was the person actually presented what they were
signing and 2) how close a correlation is there between the person's
intent and the application of a signature.
in the digital world ... there is a lot larger gap in case #1 and #2.
for instance, when a person is using a pen to apply a signature to a
paper document ... the probability of that pen wondering off and
signing other pieces of paper at the same time is relatively low.
basically digital signature technology is method of authenticating
digital information ... there has to be a lot of additional
infrastructure wrapped around it to establish correlation between the
digital signature authentication technology and a person's intent.
digital signature likely reduces the probability that there is
counterfeit/fraud once the signature is applied. however, digital
signature infrastructure widesn the gap between what the person sees
and the actual signing operations (opening up new avenues for fraud).
random refs:
--
trusted computer can be something you have ... tieing intent to a
digital signature probably means more, something like each & ever
digital signature has to carry with it some way of prooving that some
combination of 3-factor authentication was used for each & every
application of that digital signature (including that a something you
have trusted computer was used for the actual operation)
--
one group implemented a extension on a 360/50 supporting virtual
machine like function using the emulation hardware base/bound support.
That and a 360/65 version ... supposedly could run on a majority of
the 360/50s & 360/65s in customer shops (it was done mostly by one
person out of the seattle boeing sales office). However, it didn't
include swapping batch regions.
The CP? (senior moment here) ... the PL/I conversational
time-sharing system done on an 360/50 base that ran on top of OS/MFT.
For performance, it also offered a 360/50 microcode enhancement
(hardware) that put a lot of the PL/I interpreter into machine
language. This may have used the base/bound hardware support also (I
don't remember for sure).
As noted in Melinda's paper, IBM had extensive support at MIT for 7094
and CTSS. After project mac went with GE ... the ibm boston
programming (on the 3rd floor of 545 technology sq) ... developed the
PL/I conversational time-sharing system for the 360/50 (that ran as
subregion under standard ibm batch system). This was almost totally
unrelated to the CP-40, CP/67, virtual machine time-sharing work that
went on at ibm cambridge scientific center on the 2nd & 4th floors of
545 technology sq.
random note, jean sammet was at the boston programming center
(
Slightly different work ... but huntsville labs. (& Brown Univ?) did
a custom version of OS/MVT (release 13 ... circa '67) that used the
360/67 relocation hardware but not for paging ... simply for managing
storage fragmentation. They had bought a two-processor 360/67 (another
of the TSS promises) with multiple 2250s (large display screen) for
online design application. The problem was that each 2250 effectively
ran as a (very) long running batch region under MVT and after some
interval ran into severe storage fragmentation problems. OS/MVT
(release 13, running on duplex 360/67) was modified to dispatch
application regions in virtual memory mode. No paging was supported,
but it greatly simplified supporting contiguous regions of application
execution code & data.
OT ... in late '68 (very early '69?_, when BCS was formed ... the
huntsville duplex was shutdown and shipped to seattle. Some of the
people may have came with it ... and I believe one of the people from
the university (brown?).
Spring break '69 I taught a 40hr cp/67 class to the core BCS technical
team (I was still an undergraduate taking classes) ... there may have
been 10 people (both BCS and ibm team assigned to BCS). BCS by that
time had possibly 30 people total (it sort of had been initially
formed as a adjunct to corporate hdqtrs data processing ... which had
primarily been payroll on a single 360/30).
By that time, supposedly airospace computing center reported to BCS;
hdqtrs was barely out of being a 360/30 ... and they joked that
aerospace during a 2-3 year period had 100ドルm worth of 360 equipment
continuely sitting in hallways at the renton data center waiting to be
installed, i.e. 360 equipment was arriving faster than ibm could
install it so it was continuely being staged in the hallways ... at
any one time, there might be 10-20 360/65 & 360/75 and associated
stuff sitting around in the hallways (i.e. goldfish swallowing a whale
... little corporate politics went on).
--
... 707 would have predated seafair ... would have still been goldcup,
if i remember right ... mid-50s was slow-moe era (slow-moe 4? and
slow-moe 5? taking first place).
--
there was simpson's brand new operator system (but i don't remember if
it was called ASPEN or not) ... sort of derivative of the RASP work he
did while at IBM (there were some litigation, and people checking the
code that there was zero RASP code, RASP was sort of a name hack on
HASP which something that simpson did in the '60s). simpson/dallas
work going on about the same time as gold. my suggestion was that the
dallas work be used as underlying platform for Au (something like the
TSS/unix thing did for AT&T ... from my standpoint there seemed to be
quite a bit of nih & competition between dallas and sunnyvale).
random refs:
--
more info on keykos
from some long forgotten archive see aspen ref in the attach ... (4th
paragraph).
Start-Up Firm To Test MVS Replacement
A big problem for (at least mainframe) operating systems has been
hardware support with device error & anomaly handling .. typically 10
or more code than the straightline device drivers & i/o
supervisor. That was in part, UTS deployment as a CP guest (vm/cms)
... relying on cp error & anomaly code. UTS platformed on the
low-level pieces of ASPEN would have been able to rely on the ASPEN
error & anomaly handling code. This would have been similar to the
TSS/Unix deployment for AT&T ... with somewhat better job of
eliminating function & pathlength duplication between the low-level
micro-kernel and the unix subsystem.
random refs:
--
misc. asp stuff from earlier this year:
misc. stuff on hasp/JES2 networking
OT:
--
one of the data elements is the hash of the order details ... but not
the actual order details.
the x9.59 standard doesn't actually specify messages ... but there has
been work on mapping the x9.59 signed data elements within existing
financial standards messages and protocols (supporting deployment of
x9.59 in both currently non-existent financial infrastructures as well
as existing financial infrastructures).
x9.59 shopping can be done via SSL web ... then sending off a purchase
request message and getting a reply. x9.59 shopping can be also done
from offline cdrom and an x9.59 purchase request email and getting an
x9.59 purchase request reply email (i.e. one requirement on the x9.59
standard definition was that it could be done in a single round-trip).
Or x9.59 shopping could be done at point-of-sale ... i.e. the x9.59
standard was not defined to be an Internet-specific standard ... but
the requirement on the work group was a standard for all electronic
account-based retail transactions preserving the integrity of the
financial infrastructure (it is rather difficult to enforce ssl-based
shopping experience when physically present in a merchant's store).
x9.59 does specify that the account number is used in "authenticated"
transactioons, i.e. non-x9.59 transactions with the x9.59
account-number are not to be approved. many/most issuers support
mapping multiple account-numbers to the same account i.e. various
implementations might include x9.59 only accounts, accounts with
mixture of x9.59 account-numbers and non-x9.59 account-numbers, family
member account-numbers, etc. Rather than having to keep the x9.59
account-number secret in order to prevent fraudulent transactions
... fraudulent x9.59 transactions are prevented by requiring that they
all be end-to-end strong integrity and authenticated.
work as also been done on authenticated X9.59-like transactions using
AVS for hardgood drop shipment ... signed transaction goes to shipper
authorizing address and gets a transaction code supplied to the
merchant. merchant applies the transaction barcode to the
package. the shipper reads the bar-code and looksup the routing code.
Eventually shipper applies real address label for final drop. The
hardgood shipping authorization can be piggybacked in the same
transaction/email with the payment instruction (which the merchant has
to forward to the shipping service for fulfillment). Again this could
be a web-based experience, something like a cdrom/email based
experience, and/or physically in the store and wanting the goods
shipped back home.
Also, x9.59 & x9.59-like definitions are privacy neutral ... not
divulging any privacy information ... while still providing end-to-end
strong integrity.
work is also going on to advance it to ISO international standard as
well as define support within existing ISO 8583 (i.e. international
payment card protocol standard). ABA (american bankers association)
servers as the secretaiat of both X9 (US) and TC68 (iso/internation)
financial standards organization.
there is also the trade-off between BBB/consumer-report certification
using certificates vis-a-vis something like an online BBB web-site.
Trust tends to come in many forms; brand, advertisement,
word-of-mouth, prior experience, certification, etc. when influencing
directing the shopping experience. One of the trust issues is that in
terms of number of transactions ... the vast majority of transactions
(possibly approaching 90+% are brand, advertisement, word-of-mouth,
and/or prior experience based-trust). For the remaining that involve
people actually performing some sort of certification checking
... various certification entities have expressed interest in on-line
web-based certification service ... since that creates a tighter
binding between them and their relying parties (the old saw about the
thing called certificates being an offline paradigm ... targeted for
operations that need to work in an offline environment).
misc. refs:
--
to some extent the existing prevalent smartcard paradigm is left over
from the mid-80s defining portable computing capability using the
technology trade-offs that existing at that point in time. to large
extent the mid-80s trade-offs that resulting in smartcard paradigm
were replaced in the early 90s with PDAs and cellphones
... i.e. mid-80s had relatively inexpensive complex computing chips
that could be packaged in portable form-factors ... but cost-effective
portable input/output capability didn't really exist.
The PDAs and cellphone technologies have largely obsoleted the
technology trade-off decisions from the mid-80s that gave rise to much
of the existing smartcard paradigm.
--
going back further ... when ibm declined to buy the university 709
(serial number was less than five, possibly three) for a museum, it
was sold for scrap (vaquely remember that it required 20ton rated air
condition unit). guy that bought it, set it up in a barn ... and would
run it on cold days with the doors open and big industrial fans.
--
--
--
then there is bluetooth for 1m-2m.
... also try search engines on iso 14443 & bluetooth
--
random refs:
from melinda's web site
--
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#71
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#13
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#2
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
OT?
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: OT?
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
Date: 2000年10月24日 14:40:28 GMT
Also, somewhat in conjunction with HA/CMP ... we worked on getting
some various forms of high-speed interconnect for the 6000 (before
starting on FCS support). We used the term HSDT (high-speed data
transport) for this part of the skunk-works (lots of stuff from fs
inter-system coupling).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#67
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#22
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#33b
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Optimal replacement Algorithm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Optimal replacement Algorithm
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Date: 2000年10月25日 14:55:19 GMT
toor@y1.jdyson.net (John S. Dyson) writes:
You'll find that FreeBSD performs nearly as will as non-prejudiced but naive
intuition might imply... Remember the first time you tried a real, LRU
scheme, was very disappointed as to it's performance? With the FreeBSD
in clock-type page replacement algorithms that approx. LRU ... pages
in storage are swept in a fixed order ... testing the (hardware) page
reference bit to see if it has been set since it was last reset
... and resetting the page reference bit. Pages that have been
touched/used since the last sweep that turned the referenced bit off
will not be selected for replacement ... pages that have not been
touched/used since the previous sweep (turning off the bit) will be
selected for replacement. Approx. to LRU is based on recently
used/touched pages will not be replaced.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Optimal replacement Algorithm
Refed: **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Optimal replacement Algorithm
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Date: 2000年10月25日 15:02:43 GMT
Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
In simulation, true LRU tended to avg. 10-15% better than the normal
CLOCK and other LRU approximation algorithms. The variation that had
LRU approximation degenerate to RANDOM tended on the avg. to be 10-15%
better than true LRU.
aka ... in the portions of an operational envelope where LRU tended to
give good results, LRU was used ... when system shifted to portion of
the operational envelope where LRU was less well suited, RANDOM was
used.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Optimal replacement Algorithm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Optimal replacement Algorithm
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Date: 2000年10月25日 16:13:41 GMT
Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
in clock-type page replacement algorithms that approx. LRU ... pages
in storage are swept in a fixed order ... testing the (hardware) page
reference bit to see if it has been set since it was last reset
I had originally done clock-type alrogithms in the late 60s that
approximated global LRU and a dyanmica adaptive working set size.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#18
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#4
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#49
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#1
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#7
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#104
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#0
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#01
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#2
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#4
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#10
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#14
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#6
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#5
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Why IBM use 31 bit addressing not 32 bit?
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Why IBM use 31 bit addressing not 32 bit?
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
Date: 2000年10月25日 16:38:02 GMT
"Hank Murphy" writes:
Well, 31-bit addressing is, what - 17 years old now? - and it's hard to know
exactly why a designer did something that long ago. However, the function
of bit zero is to carry the addressing mode (24 or 31) in the PSW and in the
24<->31 bit mode-switching instructions (BASSM, BSM). It also allows one,
if sufficient discipline is exercised WRT the use of bits 0-7, to look at an
address constant and determine the mode.
the written design justifications for 31-bit instead of 32-bit (at the
time) had things like BXLE instructions where operands sometimes were
addresses and sometimes were signed integers i.e. BXLE typically was
used to both increment and decrement stepping thru things like arrays
(aka difficulties doing signed interger operation on a unsigned 32-bit
number).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#14
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#84
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#57
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Optimal replacement Algorithm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Optimal replacement Algorithm
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Date: 2000年10月25日 20:57:55 GMT
toor@y1.jdyson.net (John S. Dyson) writes:
The FreeBSD scheme isn't perfect, but appears to be very good for
real loads (including both sequential and stats that have
ARBITRARY skewed distributions.) There are no assumptions as to
the usage distributions, unlike in the clock scheme. The adapation
to the kind-of distribution is automatic in the FreeBSD scheme. The
FreeBSD scheme doesn't depend on a gaussian or address correlated
paging stats.
yep, did a lot of stuff about thrashing controls with multiprogramming
level ... global LUR vis-a-vis local LRU ... i.e. nominally global LRU
replacement but for really ill-behaving applications ... could switch
to local LRU (or some called it "self-stealing").
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
OT?
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: OT?
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
Date: 2000年11月03日 05:43:03 GMT
Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
In the late '60s Les transferred to Wash DC. During FS he was head of
the inter-system coupling section/area in FS. My wife worked for
him. After FS was shutdown, my wife spent some time working on
JES2/JES3 in g'burg and then went to POK to be responsible for
loosely-coupled architecture. She did Peer-Coupled Shared Data
architecture and fought for things like making trotter/3088 more than
just CTCA.
some clarification from anne ... g'burg was responsible for FS
I/O. Les was responsible for FS Advanced I/O Architecture.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Ethernet efficiency (was Re: Ms employees begging for food)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Ethernet efficiency (was Re: Ms employees begging for food)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Date: 2000年11月03日 13:35:06 GMT
Lars Poulsen writes:
The notion that as ethernet wire utilization goes up, the throughput
peaks at about 30% and after that it becomes an unproductive mess
of collisions is common but incorrect. It is rooted in the assumption
that collisions are bad, abnormal things, and that once utilization
goes up, the retransmission is likely to collide again. Both of those
beliefs are wrong. THAT IS NOT HOW ETHERNET WORKS.
There was a paper in (i believe) '88 acm sigcomm proceedings that
showed for a typical hub twisted-pair with 30 concurrent machines, all
in a solid low-level loop continuously transmitting minimum sized
packets that effective thruput dropped to 8.5mbits/sec. Ethernet is
listen before transmit with collision detection afterwards (same
proceedings also had paper showing slow-start non-stable in real-world
environments).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#45
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#11
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#33
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#22
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Ethernet efficiency (was Re: Ms employees begging for food)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Ethernet efficiency (was Re: Ms employees begging for food)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.arch,comp.os.netware.misc
Date: 2000年11月03日 14:35:43 GMT
found the reference
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Famous Machines and Software that didn't
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Famous Machines and Software that didn't
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月04日 00:13:56 GMT
"David C. Barber" writes:
o IBM FS: The Future System I recall hearing of for awhile, but don't
recall the details. Hopefully someone can provide them. I was very new in
computers at the time.
this was recently raised on ibm-main mailining list.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#16
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#17
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#18
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#19
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#26
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#27
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#28
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#29
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#30
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#31
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#37
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Reason Japanese cars are assembled in the US (was Re: American bigotry)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Reason Japanese cars are assembled in the US (was Re: American bigotry)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.military,rec.autos.driving,alt.autos.honda,rec.autos.makers.toyota,rec.autos.makers.honda
Date: 2000年11月05日 15:12:08 GMT
"edward_ohare" writes:
There were some thoughts that higher US costs were largely due to higher
health care costs and because the US used a higher percentage of its
industrial and engineering capacity to build military equipment than Japan
did.
I believe that there was an article in the Wash. Post in the late '70s
(early '80s?) calling for an 100% unearned profits tax on the US
automobile industry. Supposedly before the quotas, avg. US car price
was around 6ドルk & the purpose of the quotas was to give the US
industry additional profits so that it could remake itself. With the
quotas, Japanese car makers realized that they could sell as many
luxuary cars as they could sell "cheap" cars. Both the quotas and the
shift in (Japanese) product supposedly allowed the US industry to
increase the avg. price over a relatively short period to 13ドルk. The
point of the article was that represented greater than billion dollars
in increased profits which appeared to all go to executives and
shareholders ... and they found no evidence any was re-invested in
making the industry more competitive.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
IBM 3340 help
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: IBM 3340 help
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月06日 20:34:26 GMT
John Ferrell writes:
The DASD sub system operated through more than one control device. The
interface under test needed to be selected, because the diagnostics were not
multipath capable. There was at least one OS that gave only one warning of
dropping a path. A dead path could go undetected if the operator missed the
message.
33xx "string switch" allowed a string of disks to be connected to two
different control units (3830 & 3880 controller could connect to four
different channels, a "string" of disks connected to two different
controllers allowed disk connectivity attachment for up to eight
different channels/processors).
http://www.storagetek.com/State_of_Texas/item_code_non_93921/3370_307.html
https://www.ecole.org/en/session/49-the-rise-and-fall-of-ibm
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Reason Japanese cars are assembled in the US (was Re: American bigotry)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Reason Japanese cars are assembled in the US (was Re: American bigotry)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.military,rec.autos.driving,alt.autos.honda,rec.autos.makers.honda
Date: 2000年11月06日 23:49:41 GMT
"edward_ohare" writes:
The Chrysler LH cars hit the street 22 months after they decided to build
them, and that was for a car which shared few parst with previous designs.
During the trade restrictions, Ford made heavy investment in front wheel
drive, converting all their high volume lines from rear to front drive. So
did GM. Toyota in particular lagged behind in moving to front wheel drive.
There is no doubt the US was at a competitive disadvantage, but not all this
can be blamed on the auto industry. The US has for 55 years incurred the
expense of protecting Japan's sources of oil and ores needed for its
industry, at no cost to Japan except for the indignity of being treated like
a protectorate.
What if a bunch of the engineers who worked for military contractors were
instead working for US auto makers?
Must of been having a senior momemt, wash post article on 100% unearned
profits tax had to have been early '80s not late '70s.
https://web.archive.org/web/20010204034500/http://www.media.chrysler.com/wwwhome/hist.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20010222205419/http://www.inu.net/davidstua/chrysler_case_part1.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20010217003458/http://www.michiganinbrief.org/text/appendix/append-J.htm
http://mrtraffic.com/millennium.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20000829050939/http://www.sbaer.uca.edu/docs/proceedingsII/97sma228.txt
https://web.archive.org/web/20010222203823/http://www.rindsig.dk/viden/3-sem/Rising-sun.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20010104022000/http://www.iitf.nist.gov/documents/committee/cat/breaking_barriers_conf.html
General Motors took a different tack by replacing the dissimilar
hardware and software that existed throughout the corporation and
creating an integrated system known as C4 (computer-aided design,
computer-aided manufacturing, computer-integrated manufacturing and
computer-aided engineering). As part of its C4 program, GM linked the
design, manufacturing and assembly teams that were previously unable
to communicate with each other. GM made the decision that although its
legacy systems represented a sizable capital investment, it was
important that the entire manufacturing process be overhauled to
ensure interoperability and interconnectivity among all the players on
the new network, including suppliers.
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~afuah/cases/case3.html
The Rise of Foreign Competition (1970-1980)
By the early 1970s American automakers were facing strong global
competition both at home and abroad. Japanese automakers in particular
made a significant impact on the industry by introducing smaller, less
expensive, and more fuel-efficient cars to the American market. This
coincided with the oil crisis, which resulted in higher gasoline
prices and a shift in consumer tastes toward greater fuel
efficiency. Other advantages of the Japanese automakers resulted from
their use of just-in-time (JIT) inventory controls, modern
manufacturing techniques, and quality control and management
practices.
By 1980, American carmakers had lost about one-fourth of the fastest
growing segment of the domestic market - small cars - to Japanese
producers. In response to pressure from the United States government,
Japanese automobile producers implemented voluntary export restraints
(VER) on their auto exports to United States. This VER agreement
limited Japanese imports to not more than 1.68 million vehicles per
year.
Restructuring of American Automobile Production (1980-1990)
While under the limitation of VER in the early 1980s, Japanese (and
other) automobile companies shifted their strategies to foreign direct
investment, setting up new facilities to produce cars locally in
United States. Leaders were Honda, Mazda, Nissan, and Toyota, which
collectively invested 5ドル.3 billion in North American-based automobile
assembly plants between 1982 and 1991.2 This was viewed as a response
to VER - the Japanese automobile firms wanted to circumvent the threat
of protectionist trade legislation. However, it was also a response to
higher production costs at home and the sharp rise in the value of the
Japanese Yen against the U.S. dollar during 1987, which dramatically
increased the cost of exporting both automobiles and component parts
from Japan to other markets.
To halt further erosion of their position, protect their remaining
share of the domestic market, and prepare for competition in the
global economy, the American automakers implemented programs to
duplicate the world's best manufacturing practices. This included
efforts to apply Japanese-style manufacturing practices such as JIT
inventory control and leaner production systems to reduce costs. Yet,
there were still important differences.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures,alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月07日 04:05:25 GMT
rh120@konichiwa.cc.columbia.edu (Ronda Hauben) writes:
The NREN initiative was being discussed in the early 1990's.
It claimed it would be support for a research and education networking
inititive.
That initiative somehow disappeared, and instead the NSFNET (the backbone
of the Internet in the US) was given to private interests.
A major change in Internet policy was made without any public
discussion of why this would be desirable. And it was done at
a time when there was officially the claim there would be support
for a research and education network.
The only public discussion that seems to have been held about
this happening was the online NTIA conference held by the
U.S. Dept of Commerce in November 1994. During this conference
there were many people explaining why it was not appropriate to
privatize the public US backbone to the Internet.
note that the NSFNET1 & NSFNET2 contracts were for very specific $$$
and point-to-point links between a relatively small number of
locations. By the early 90s, the non-NSFNET portions of the internet
was couple hundred times larger than the NSFNET portions. Based on
principles like efficiency of scale, COTS, etc ... it would have made
sense to transition the relative modest NSFNET pieces to the
commercial internet.
http://www.stanford.edu/group/scip/sirp/US-NII-slides.html
http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~ding/emc/emc.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20010222212533/http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~ding/emc/emc.html
http://sebulba.mindtel.com/21698/nasa/ames.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20010225040040/www.quasar.org/21698/nasa/ames.html
http://www.uscar.org/pngv/progplan/9_0.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20010217102712/http://www.uscar.org/pngv/progplan/9_0.htm
http://me.mit.edu/groups/lmp/industry.htm
http://logic.stanford.edu/cit/commercenet.html
http://nii.nist.gov/cat/tp/t940707.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20010222211057/http://nii.nist.gov/cat/tp/t940707.html
Information Infrastructure Project (IIP)
Brian explained that the IIP is part of the Kennedy School's Science,
Technology and Public Policy Program, which is directed by Lewis
Branscomb. IIP began in 1990 addressing issues in the
commercialization of the Internet and the development of the NREN. It
now encompasses a wide variety issues related to the NII.
IIP addresses issues by bringing together experts in an
interdisciplinary setting. Strategies to protect intellectual
property, industrial extension networking, CALS, public access to the
Internet, and standards are some of the topics that have been
addressed. Brian's group publishes quarterly, a two-volume Information
Infrastructure Sourcebook. The project also runs the Information
Infrastructure Forum, which is hosted in Washington by the Annenberg
Washington Program. This year they have held fora on competition
policy, interoperability, and enabling interconnection -- and next,
long term economic issues.
for "NIST ATP", alta vista turns up maximum number (20pages/200)
http://www.federallabs.org/
http://www.dtic.mil/techtransit/refroom/laws/
Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Program 1992 (PL 102-564)
Established a 3 year pilot program - Small Business Technology Transfer
(STTR), at DoD, DoE, HHS, NASA, and NSF.
Directed the Small Business Administration (SBA) to oversee and
coordinate the implementation of the STTR Program.
Designed the STTR similar to the Small Business Innovation Research
SBIR program.
Required each of the five agencies to fund cooperative R&D projects
involving a small company and a researcher at a university,
federally-funded research and development center, or nonprofit research
center.
National Department of Defense Authorization Act for 1993 (PL 102-25)
Facilitated and encouraged technology transfer to small businesses.
National Department of Defense Authorization Act for FY 1993 (PL 102-484)
Established the DoD Office of Technology Transition
Extended the streamlining of small business technology transfer
procedures for non-federal laboratory contractors.
Directed DoE to issue guidelines to facilitate technology transfer to small
businesses.
Extended the potential for CRADAs to some DoD-funded Federally Funded
Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) not owned by the
government.
National Department of Defense Authorization Act for 1994 (PL 103-160)
Broadened the definition of a laboratory to include weapons production
facilities of the DoE.
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (PL 104-113) [also
known as the "Morella Act"]
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures,alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月07日 15:45:19 GMT
Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
http://www.federallabs.org/
technology transfer legislative history web site (going back to 1980)
http://www.dtic.mil/techtransit/refroom/laws/
misc entries from the federal technology transfer web site ... with
respect to the organization:
sample listing of technology transfer success stories is at:
http://www.federallabs.org/servlet/LinkAreaFramesetServlet?LnArID=SuccessStories&LnArRegion=National
http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/0006/te3685116.htm
https://web.archive.org/web/20010109054800/http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/0006/te3685116.htm
Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (PL 96-480)[15 USC
3701-3714]
Focused on dissemination of information.
Required Federal Laboratories to take an active role in technical cooperation.
Established Offices of Research and Technology Application at major federal
laboratories.
Established the Center for the Utilization of Federal Technology (in the National
Technical Information Service).
Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 (PL 96-517)
Permitted universities, not-for-profits, and small businesses to obtain title
to inventions developed with governmental support.
Provided early on intellectual property rights protection of invention
descriptions from public dissemination and FOIA.
Allowed government-owned, government-operated (GOCO) laboratories
to grant exclusive licenses to patents.
Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986 (PL 99-502)
Made technology transfer a responsibility of all federal laboratory
scientists and engineers.
Mandated that technology transfer responsibility be considered in
employee performance evaluations.
Established principle of royalty sharing for federal inventors (15%
minimum) and set up a reward system for other innovators.
Legislated a charter for Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology
Transfer and provided a funding mechanism for that organization to carry
out its work.
Provided specific requirements, incentives and authorities for the
Federal Laboratories.
Empowered each agency to give the director of GOCO laboratories
authority to enter into cooperative R&D agreements and negotiate
licensing agreements with streamlined headquarters review.
Allowed laboratories to make advance agreements with large and small
companies on title and license to inventions resulting from Cooperative
R&D Agreements (CRDAs) with government laboratories.
Allowed Directors of GOGO laboratories to negotiate licensing
agreements for inventions made at their laboratories.
Provided for exchanging GOGO laboratory personnel, services, and
equipment with their research partners.
Made it possible to grant and waive rights to GOGO laboratory inventions
and intellectual property.
Allowed current and former federal employees to participate in
commercial development, to the extent there is no conflict of interest.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures,alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月07日 16:05:20 GMT
Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
including
http://nii.nist.gov/cat/tp/t940707.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20010222211057/http://nii.nist.gov/cat/tp/t940707.html
the following from the above
Information Infrastructure Project (IIP)
btw, the IIP web site:
http://ksgwww.harvard.edu/iip/
https://web.archive.org/web/20010124080800/http://ksgwww.harvard.edu/iip/
http://pirp.harvard.edu/
https://web.archive.org/web/20010202091600/http://pirp.harvard.edu/
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures,alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月07日 16:55:00 GMT
Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
note that the NSFNET1 & NSFNET2 contracts were for very specific $$$
and point-to-point links between a relatively small number of
locations. By the early 90s, the non-NSFNET portions of the internet
was couple hundred times larger than the NSFNET portions. Based on
principles like efficiency of scale, COTS, etc ... it would have made
sense to transition the relative modest NSFNET pieces to the
commercial internet.
a list of the (16) NSFNET backbone sites (as of jan. 1992) can be
found at:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#73
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#20
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Famous Machines and Software that didn't
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Famous Machines and Software that didn't
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月07日 22:08:56 GMT
"Charlie Gibbs" writes:
"It's a good thing the iAPX432 never caught on -
otherwise a truly horrible Intel architecture
might have taken over the world."
I was unpacking some stuff last week that had been in storage for the
past year or two and ran across:
The B5000 architecture had the right approach; it attempted to raise
the level of the archtecture using the best available programming
methodology, (c. 1960), which largely reduced to "use Algol", and the
architecture supported Algol very effectively. But in the 1970s and
1980s problems have arisen for which Algol and the programming
methodology of the early 1960s offer no solution.
These problems have led other manufactuers, whose earlier computers
had more conventional architectures, to recognize the wisdom of raising
the level of the hardware-software interface. Consider, for example,
the IBM System 38, IBM's most recent architecture. Not only have the
designers of the System 38 followed the Burroughs approach to
architecture support for high-level languages, they have also included
most of the operating system in the hardware as well. It seems
inevitable that the fundamental problems facing the computer industry
will force more and more manufactuers to take this approach.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月10日 15:42:48 GMT
Brian Inglis writes:
I live in Silicon Valley, and drive^h^h^h^h^h^h creep/park on a
freeway system which was never privatized. It is hard to imagine
where the internet would be today if a government model similar
to their model that "5 mph is a perfectly reasonable average
speed on a freeway" had prevailed. (The other brilliant
government model which I appreciate dearly in this area is the
model that it makes sense for people to spend an average of
20ドル/whatever worth of their time every day in a bridge toll line,
so that the government can collect its 2ドル toll.)
...
Wally Bass
for some reason, wally's post still hasn't shown up at the news site
here (>12 hrs after Brian's has shown up). Anyway, hi wally, long
time, no see.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月11日 16:14:24 GMT
rh120@aloha.cc.columbia.edu (Ronda Hauben) writes:
The NSFNET was public in Michigan where I got on in 1988 as
it was being paid for by US federal government and state of
Michigan funds.
By 1992 I was able to use the MERIT connection from Michigan
via the NSFNET to get access to the Cleveland Free-Net. The Cleveland
Free-Net was a free access point to Usenet, to Internet mailing
lists, etc.
i think that there is an implied assumption that the funds provided by
the federal & state governments fully covered the cost of NSFNET
backbone and/or even a majority of NSFNET backbone costs &/or that the
NSFNET backbone economic situation was stable over a period longer
than the duration of the specific NSFNET contracts (and/or was ever
intended to be).
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Al Gore and the Internet (Part 2 of 2)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月11日 16:39:39 GMT
Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
A solution was a controlled incubator environment (like NSFNET and
supercomputing centers) where embryonic high bandwidth applications
could emerge and acquire some maturity. Once out of the embryonic
stage, there would be migration from the incubator to the real world
(while maintaining an economically viable telecommunication industry).
the original NSFNET contract was signed Nov. 1987 ... ref:
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#10
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#73
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#72
In 1987, BITNET and CSNET merged to form the Corporation for Research
and Educational Networking (CREN). A key feature of CREN and its
predecessors is that they were entirely dependent on voluntary user
fees; BITNET from the beginning and CSNET after the expiration of its
initial five year NSF grant.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.arch,comp.sys.super
Date: 2000年11月15日 23:54:50 GMT
nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) writes:
In article <QgxQ5.9395$O5.224967@news.itd.umich.edu>, sarr@engin.umich.edu (Sarr J. Blumson) writes:
|> In article <8utl2n678ドル1ドル@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>,
|> Nick Maclaren wrote:
|> >
|> >Given all the extra information, I am still not sure where to
|> >categorise the 370/67's virtual memory systems on the scale of
|> >research, experimental, prototype and production :-)
|>
|> It was sold to real customers, who were asked to pay money for it.
Which is unusual for research software (though not by any means
unknown), but common for all of the others :-(
Regards,
Nick Maclaren,
University of Cambridge Computing Service,
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street, Cambridge CB2 3QG, England.
Email: nmm1@cam.ac.uk
Tel.: +44 1223 334761 Fax: +44 1223 334679
a majority of the 360/67 machines probably ran CP/67 production on it,
and a few others ran MTS (michigan terminal system). There were also
at lease two service bureaus formed in the late '60s that offered
commercial time-sharing services using modified versions of CP/67
running on 360/67s
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#1
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#6
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#0
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#15
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#16
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#30
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com, finger for pgp key
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月16日 00:01:44 GMT
lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) writes:
The IBM histories suggest that certain functions, said as dynamic
address translation, were deemed by the designers to not be cost
effective in the overall design. IBM was looking more into batch
processing, while MIT was into time sharing.
I think, given the state of the art of software and hardware at the time
(c1962) IBM was correct. Time sharing would require considerable
horsepower that wasn't available at the time. Considering the effort
to just get S/360 out the door that was enough.
see melinda's paper has a lot of history information about what was
bid on multics as well as associated 360/67 stuff
https://www.leeandmelindavarian.com/Melinda#VMHist
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#126
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#127
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#1
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#6
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#0
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#15
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#16
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#30
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com, finger for pgp key
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月16日 00:33:47 GMT
lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) writes:
The IBM histories suggest that certain functions, said as dynamic
address translation, were deemed by the designers to not be cost
effective in the overall design. IBM was looking more into batch
processing, while MIT was into time sharing.
I think, given the state of the art of software and hardware at the time
(c1962) IBM was correct. Time sharing would require considerable
horsepower that wasn't available at the time. Considering the effort
to just get S/360 out the door that was enough.
also note that while 360/67 cp/67 install base was a tiny fraction of
the total 360 install base ... it was still larger than the multics
install base. it isn't so much that the 360/67 cp/67 effort wasn't as
large or much larger than other time-sharing efforts ... it is more of
a case that the market place appetite for 360 batch services just
dwarfed everything else .. i.e. nuts & bolts data processing, payroll,
check processing, statements, inventory, etc ... regularly scheduled
production operation that doesn't have interactive requirements.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#71
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#2
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#107
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#136a
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com, finger for pgp key
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
X86 ultimate CISC? No. (was: Re: "all-out" vs less aggressive designs)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No. (was: Re: "all-out" vs less aggressive designs)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.arch,comp.sys.super
Date: 2000年11月16日 10:55:28 GMT
jot@visi.com (J. Otto Tennant) writes:
My memory is hazy, but I think that the 370/138 and 370/148 were
the first 307's with VM. Customers who bought 370/155 or 370/165
machines were mildly annoyed (to say the least) to discover
the price of the VM upgrade.
the machines were 370/135, 370/145, 370/155, and 370/165s. The 135 &
145 had the support for virtual memory as shipped (but microcode load
was required for enabling). The 155 & 165 didn't and there had to be a
hardware upgrade.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#12
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#21
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com, finger for pgp key
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.arch,comp.sys.super
Date: 2000年11月16日 11:19:27 GMT
sarr@engin.umich.edu (Sarr J. Blumson) writes:
In article <8utl2n678ドル1ドル@pegasus.csx.cam.ac.uk>,
Nick Maclaren wrote:
Given all the extra information, I am still not sure where to
categorise the 370/67's virtual memory systems on the scale of
research, experimental, prototype and production :-)
It was sold to real customers, who were asked to pay money for it.
and while TSS/360 may not have been considered an outstanding
commercial success, it wasn't because it was treated as a R&D effort
... there were significant resources poured into it ... i've heard
that mohansic lab may have peaked at between 1000-1200 people working
on TSS/360 (this may have been a precursor to FS which had even more
resources ... and never even made it to announcement).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#64
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#18
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#2
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#64
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#46
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#53
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#1
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#11
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#12
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com, finger for pgp key
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
X86 ultimate CISC? No. (was: Re: "all-out" vs less aggressive designs)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No. (was: Re: "all-out" vs less aggressive designs)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.arch,comp.sys.super
Date: 2000年11月17日 00:59:26 GMT
James Cownie writes:
IIRC this microcode trick was also used for the "APL assist" where
parts of the APL interpreter were dropped into the 148 microcode
with corresponding large performance improvements.
this was origiannl done on the 145 for the APL assist ... while the
guys that did the actual microcode assist were in endicott ... the
people that helped with the analysis of what kernel functions to drop
into microcode were the palo alto microcode group that were
responsible for implementing the APL assist (first on the 145).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#21
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com, finger for pgp key
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月17日 16:17:50 GMT
lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) writes:
What I'm trying to say was that with S/360, IBM _was_ making a
major change just with that. Adding time sharing on top of that
would have been too much--adding too much cost for too few users.
None the less, the basic architecture design of S/360 proved to be
quite adaptable for future work.
the tss/360 effort was a very large effort independent of the BPS,
TOS, DOS, PCP, MFT, MVT, etc batch oriented efforts for the 360.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月17日 23:07:49 GMT
John Ferrell writes:
There must have been some DAT developement work done with the 360/40. I have
seen notes in the logics reffering to it.
see melinda's
https://www.leeandmelindavarian.com/Melinda#VMHist
CP-40 and CMS
In the Fall of 1964, the folks in Cambridge suddenly found themselves
in the position of having to cast about for something to do next. A
few months earlier, before Project MAC was lost to GE, they had been
expecting to be in the center of IBM's time-sharing activities. Now,
inside IBM, "time-sharing" meant TSS, and that was being developed
in New York State. However, Rasmussen was very dubious about the
prospects for TSS and knew that IBM must have a credible time-sharing
system for the S/360. He decided to go ahead with his plan to build a
time-sharing system, with Bob Creasy leading what became known as the
CP-40 Project. The official objectives of the CP-40 Project were the
following:
1. The development of means for obtaining data on the
operational characteristics of both systems and application programs;
2. The analysis of this data with a view toward more efficient machine
structures and programming techniques, particularly for use in
interactive systems;
3. The provision of a multiple-console computer
system for the Center's computing requirements; and
4. The investigation of the use of associative memories in the control
of multi-user systems. 22
The project's real purpose was to build a time-sharing system, but the
other objectives were genuine, too, and they were always emphasized in
order to disguise the project's "counter-strategic" aspects.
Rasmussen consistently portrayed CP-40 as a research project to "help
the troops in Poughkeepsie" by studying the behavior of programs and
systems in a virtual memory environment. In fact, for some members of
the CP-40 team, this was the most interesting part of the project,
because they were concerned about the unknowns in the path IBM was
taking. TSS was to be a virtual memory system, but not much was really
known about virtual memory systems. Les Comeau has written: Since the
early time-sharing experiments used base and limit registers for
relocation, they had to roll in and roll out entire programs when
switching users....Virtual memory, with its paging technique, was
expected to reduce significantly the time spent waiting for an
exchange of user programs.
...
Creasy and Comeau were soon joined on the CP-40 Project by Dick
Bayles, from the MIT Computation Center, and Bob Adair, from
MITRE. Together, they began implementing the CP-40 Control Program,
which sounds familiar to anyone familiar with today's CP. Although
there were a fixed number (14) of virtual machines with a fixed
virtual memory size (256K), the Control Program managed and isolated
those virtual machines in much the way it does today. 28 The Control
Program partitioned the real disks into minidisks and controlled
virtual machine access to the disks by doing CCW translation. Unit
record I/O was handled in a spool-like fashion. Familiar CP console
functions were also provided.
This system could have been implemented on a 360/67, had there been
one available, but the Blaauw Box wasn't really a measurement
tool. Even before the design for CP-40 was hit upon, Les Comeau had
been thinking about a design for an address translator that would give
them the information they needed for the sort of research they were
planning. He was intrigued by what he had read about the associative
memories that had been built by Rex Seeber and Bruce Lindquist in
Poughkeepsie, so he went to see Seeber with his design for the
"Cambridge Address Translator" (the "CAT Box"), which was based
on the use of associative memory and had "lots of bits" for
recording various states of the paging system. Seeber liked the idea,
so Rasmussen found the money to pay for the transistors and engineers
and microcoders that were needed, and Seeber and Lindquist implemented
Comeau's translator on a S/360 Model 40.
Comeau has written:
Virtual memory on the 360/40 was achieved by placing a 64-word
associative array between the CPU address generation circuits and the
memory addressing logic. The array was activated via mode-switch logic
in the PSW and was turned off whenever a hardware interrupt occurred.
The 64 words were designed to give us a relocate mechanism for each 4K
bytes of our 256K-byte memory. Relocation was achieved by loading a
user number into the search argument register of the associative
array, turning on relocate mode, and presenting a CPU address. The
match with user number and address would result in a word selected in
the associative array. The position of the word (0-63) would yield the
high-order 6 bits of a memory address. Because of a rather loose cycle
time, this was accomplished on the 360/40 with no degradation of the
overall memory cycle.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月18日 17:48:03 GMT
nouce@multics.ruserved.com (Richard Shetron) writes:
One of the things yo have to remember is until 1977, Honeywell didn't even
acknowledge Multics existed. Salesmen weren't allowed to talk about it.
I think they sold about 20 to 25 sites this way. If a customer wanted
Multics, they basically had to strongarm Honeywell into selling a
Multics system. The rumors I heard is it could take several months and
the customer had to start talking about IBM systems in the Honeywell
office before they could buy a Multics system.
note that CP/67 faced a similar lack of support from the marketing &
sales people (even tho it was used extensively inside for
development).
http://www.lilli.com/360-67 (corrected)
https://www.multicians.org/thvv/360-67.html
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#44
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#0
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#2
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#26
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#31
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#1
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#2
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#4
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#5
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#7
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#12
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#18
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#28
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#46
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#47
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#48
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#49
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#52
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#54
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月18日 17:59:33 GMT
Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
Customers could strong-arm marketing & sales people to get a copy
... or could effectively bypass them ... and order cp/67 directly or
even get a copy from another customers. At the time, the software
wasn't charged for and shipped with full source as part of the
standard distribution.
there is the tale about CERN benchmarking VM/370-CMS against MVS/TSO
in the early '70s (CERN has been a long-time VM/370 installation
... one might even claim that the availability of GML on VM/370 at
CERN for so long was part of the genesis of HTML)
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月18日 20:35:53 GMT
sort of in the category of truth is stranger than fiction ... the
CP/67 and VM/370 products were treated as non-strategic by the sales &
marketing forces world-wide even tho a significant portion of all
internal software development was done on those platforms.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/97.html#4
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#23
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#38
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#149
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#150
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#6
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#22
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#30
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.arch,comp.sys.super
Date: 2000年11月19日 04:12:11 GMT
piercarl@sabi.Clara.co.UK (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:
The 360/67 was a "hand" modified (midrange) 360 with experimental VM
hardware bolted on, and run the original CP/67 (plus CMS) system. It
was mostly a research prototype, and FAIK very few were ever done
(IIRC the first one in Cambridge was followed by a few others).
there was a special, one of a kind 360/40 with "hand" modified virtual
memory hardware. CP/40 was initially built on this hardware. Later,
when production 360/67s became available (shared much in common with
360/65 but with relocation hardware and other features, and was a
production machine). I don't know the eventual number of 360/67s
actually shipped but i would guess over 100 but probably less than
1000.
The 370/168 was a heavy production machine, near the top of the IBM
mainframe range for a while, and had the production VM subsystem built
in, and could run the released version of VM/370 as CP/67 had been
renamed upon release as a product. Bot the 370/168 and VM/370 on it
were sold in significant numbers.
370 was initially shipped before the virtual memory
announcement. Later, when it was announced, it was available on
(nearly) every 370 model; 370/115, 370/125, 370/135, 370/145, 370/155,
& 370/165.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#59
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#56
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#58
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#60
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#61
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Cryptogram Newsletter is off the wall?
Refed: **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Cryptogram Newsletter is off the wall?
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: 2000年11月19日 16:02:14 GMT
Simon Johnson writes:
well i suppose this models reality. If a crook wants to steal the
contents of a safe. He really has two options:
1. Break the Safe
2. 'Talk' to the guy who owns the safe.
I'd put my bet that breaking the human is easier than the safe!
The problem with digital security is that there has
to be human invervention and trust somewhere (and even if there wasn't
it wouldn't be useful). We can never make things impossible for an
attacker, just harder. If we have AES vs. XOR then clearly the AES is
much more likely to be harder to compromise.
there is a much smaller gap between the paper presentation of some
information and a person writing a signature on that piece of paper
... compared to the presentation of some digital information and the
application of a digital signature to that digital information.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsmore.htm#schneier
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Cryptogram Newsletter is off the wall?
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Cryptogram Newsletter is off the wall?
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: 2000年11月19日 16:30:23 GMT
Bruce Schneier writes:
The mathematics of cryptography, no matter how strong, cannot bridge
the gap between me and my computer. Because the computer is not
trusted, I cannot rely on it to show me what it is doing or do what I
tell it to. Checking the calculation afterwards doesn't help; the
untrusted computer can't be relied upon to check the calculations
properly. It wouldn't help to verify the code, because the untrusted
computer is running the code (and probably doing the verification).
It wouldn't even help to store the digital signature key in a secure
module: the module still has to rely on the untrusted computer for
input and output.
it is likely even more complex ... 3-factor authentication talks about
something you have, something you know, & something you are.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月20日 14:54:31 GMT
Dennis Ritchie writes:
I can understand IBM's reluctance to put a full paging/VM facility
into early S/360, but it's hard to forgive the lack of even base/bounds
relocation. Even in batch operation, it made the operator's realtime
bin-packing decisions much more difficult. Once a job had started,
it had to continue in the same physical memory locations even if
it was rolled out (i.e. swapped).
while not part of the 360 architecture & instruction sets ... a large
percentage of the machines in the field had base/bound hardware
support ... that was there as part of various 14xx/7xxx emulation
hardware (which was available on large percentage of machines).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#37).
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Building so big it generates own weather?
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Building so big it generates own weather?
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.military,alt.folklore.science,alt.folklore.urban,alt.aviation.safety,alt.fan.cecil-adams,seattle.general,sci.skeptic,rec.aviation.military,sci.physics
Date: 2000年11月21日 02:32:50 GMT
grante@visi.com (Grant Edwards) writes:
In article <3a1704c2.94077266@news.primenet.com>, berkut@NOprimenet.com wrote:
However, test and demo flights do sometimes occur over populated areas.
One test piolot did a barrel roll in an early 707 over Lake Washington
during the Seafair regatta. Supposedly the VIPs on board never new
the plane rolled as the piolot was good enough to keep it in a perfect
one G rotational field But I'm sure that is an urban legend.
nope. it's true. and it was the prototype.
Even the constant 1G part?
the story i heard (about 15 years later at boeing) was that the plane
was heavily instrumented including 50 gal barrels in place of seats
and quite of bit of wiring and plumbing for doing various weight
distribution flight tests. quite a bit of that tore loose during the
roll.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Date: 2000年11月21日 15:06:55 GMT
jeffreyb@gwu.edu (Jeffrey Boulier) writes:
Could that have been a code name for UTS, a mainframe Unix? I think that
Amdahl developed it around that time. Unlike Multics, UTS is still around,
but I don't know how large its market share is anymore...
Yours Truly,
Jeffrey Boulier
gold ... for Au ... Amdahl unix. i believe it was the work of the same
person that did earlier unix port to interdata (sort of a 360
look-a-like).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#81
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#76
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#64
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月21日 15:22:25 GMT
Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
there was simpson's brand new operator system (but i don't remember if
it was called ASPEN or not) ... sort of derivative of the RASP work he
... seens like the dallas-thing was called aspen ... following is
slightly related. Key Logic's stuff is outgrowth of Tymshare's Gnosis
(I had known several of the people and got called in by M/D to due
diligence on gnosis when M/D bought tymshare ... I still have a copy
of the gnosis documentation somewhere in boxes)
http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~KeyKOS
https://web.archive.org/web/20010301032856/www.cis.upenn.edu/~KeyKOS/
From November 25, 1985 issue of Information Week
Byline: Paul E. Schindler, Jr.
Key Logic's system said to support 500 transactions per second
The first radically new IBM-mainframe operating system in years is now
being tested in Cupertino, Calif. And the company that's preparing it
for market is looking for just a few transaction-processing users to
act as beta sites.
Just seven months after its founding, Key Logic is asking prospective
users whether they want to achieve higher performance on IBM
mainframes by replacing the MVS and VM operating systems with its new
KeyKOS program.
Early benchmarks show that the firm's operating system supports as
many as 500 transactions per second. That's faster than transaction
processors from industry leaders Tandem Computers Inc., Cupertino,
Calif., and Stratus Computer Inc., Marlboro, Mass. According to the
Gartner Group Inc., a consulting firm in Stamford, Conn., Tandem
offers about 150 transactions per second, Stratus about 50, and IBM's
CICS peaks at 70 transactions per second.
Key Logic's early users will get the chance to run one of the few
alternatives to the basic IBM mainframe operating system. Although
Amdahl Corp. sells a mainframe Unix called UTS, and may someday
release a souped-up MVS-like operating system developed under the
code-name Aspen, UTS is not new to the market and Aspen is not a
radical departure.
KeyKOS is both. It offers high performance, reliability, security,
and programmer productivity, the company says. It should be ideally
suited for remote operations, since it was itself developed remotely.
According to Steve Gimnicher, Key Logic's development manager, "The
original architects never saw the machine it ran on." They were in
Cupertino developing KeyKOS by communicating with a mainframe in
Dallas.
The KeyKOS transactional operating system was written from scratch,
but it wasn't all done in the seven months Key Logic has been in
business. KeyKOS stems from a decade's work on the system at Tymnet's
Tymshare service, now part of McDonnell Douglas Corp.
Key Logic consists of 11 employees who have a total of 200 years of
experience. Despite that, says Vincent A. Busam, vice president of
development, KeyKOS isn't being generally released yet. However, the
firm is ready to support a handful of selected installations while it
improves its documentation and builds its service and support
organization.
In addition to supporting as many as 500 transactions per second on an
IBM 3083 JX, or 130 transactions per second on an IBM 4381, benchmarks
show that KeyKOS reduces elapsed time for some heavy input/output
programs by 71% compared with IBM's VM/CMS. It cuts CPU resources by
30% for the same programs.
The risk of trying KeyKOS is relatively low, since KeyKOS runs as a
guest under VM, and any VM/CMS program can run under KeyKOS. In the
guest mode, its high performance is not realized, but all
functionality can be tested.
Busam believes he knows who Key Logic's first customers will be: those
in the transaction-processing gap. Although IBM's TPF2 (formerly the
Airline Control Program) can handle as many as 1,000 transactions per
second, it is not cost-effective below 300 transactions per second.
That leaves a performance gap in the 150-to-300 transactions per
second range, where KeyKOS should fit well, Busam believes.
Gimnicher notes that there are other advantages as well, especially in
all-IBM shops that hesitate to move to a radically different
architecture.
Programmers continue to deal with the same hardware they have used
for years. In a three-week course, they can learn how to program
efficiently under KeyKOS using standard IBM programming languages.
Experience indicates that programmers writing applications for KeyKOS
produce 40% less code than do programmers for other operating systems,
including IBM's MVS and VM.
This kind of productivity is made possible by two new computing
principles upon which KeyKOS is based. The first principle deals with
communications. Programs, tasks, files, or even guest operating systems
are all known as objects that communicate via messages. Objects cannot
communicate with each other unless given the "keys" (Key Logic calls
them capabilities) to do so. This ensures both security and
reliability. A failure in one object cannot affect any other object,
ensuring continued operation.
The other principle deals with memory. As with IBM's System/38, for
example, KeyKOS treats all main memory and disk storage as one virtual
memory. Programmers do not have to deal with disk I/O routines or file
management -- KeyKOS does.
On the West Coast, analysts predict Key Logic will give IBM and
Tandem competition in the transaction-processing market. But not
everyone is so enthusiastic. Mike Braude, a Gartner Group analyst,
says: "The big problem, of course, is vendor viability." In short,
users want to know if Key Logic will be around. But users should note
that the same concern was expressed about Tandem in 1974 and Stratus in
1980.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月21日 16:28:47 GMT
Anne & Lynn Wheeler writes:
work going on about the same time as gold. my suggestion was that the
dallas work be used as underlying platform for Au (something like the
TSS/unix thing did for AT&T ... from my standpoint there seemed to be
quite a bit of nih & competition between dallas and sunnyvale).
checking some random references ... it seems that ASPEN (which was
supposedly going to be a "MVS-killer" ... but built on a page-mapped
architecture (similar to RASP) ... was killed in late '87 ... but
possibly the underlying pinnings eventually did become the base
platform for Au/uts.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#69
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
HASP vs. "Straight OS," not vs. ASP
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: HASP vs. "Straight OS," not vs. ASP
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
Date: 2000年11月22日 01:16:17 GMT
jbroido@PERSHING.COM (Jeffrey Broido) writes:
As for your point 4., I don't know about CRJE, but when I was a student
years earlier, my school used Cornell University's mainframe via CRBE. They ran
MFT and HASP, and CRBE was, indeed, supported. Also, didn't the HASP crew
more-or-less invent RJE, not to mention STR and BSC protocols? In any case, we
had over 30 remotes via BSC RJE, mostly 360/20s and 1130s, so if it didn't
support RJE, you could have fooled us. As I recall, HASP had it first and the
code was lifted, more or less intact, for ASP. Correct me if I'm wrong.
on MVT 18/HASP base ('69) ... i stripped out the HASP 2780 support (in
order to gain back some size/addressability) and put in CRJE support
with cms editor syntax ... supporting 2741s & TTYs.
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#76
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#77
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#33
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#68
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#69
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#70
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
SET; was Re: Why trust root CAs ?
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: SET; was Re: Why trust root CAs ?
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: 2000年11月22日 16:00:04 GMT
"David Thompson" writes:
as SET does prevent disclosing payment (card) information.
(The X9.59 approach has the same limitation, as I read it.)
the x9.59 standard requirement was to specify the data elements that
need signing preserve the integrity of the financial infrastructure
for all electronic retail payment (account-based) transactions.
http://www.x9.org/ US financial standards body
http://www.tc68.org/ ISO financial standards body
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/ ... some information on x9.59
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Cryptogram Newsletter is off the wall?
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Cryptogram Newsletter is off the wall?
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: 2000年11月22日 16:06:50 GMT
junk@nowhere.com (Mark Currie) writes:
Smart cards can help and a remote secure signing server may also, but the thing
that worries me is that the basic principle is the same. You are letting a
machine act as a proxy for signing. There is no biological binding such as in a
hand-written signature. Smart cards are starting to become complex machines in
their own right. They now have operating systems and they can download and
execute third party code.
note that smart cards don't have to become more complex ... they could
become much simpler ... and not allow download & execution of third
party code.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Metric System (was: case sensitivity in file names)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Metric System (was: case sensitivity in file names)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月22日 17:28:02 GMT
glass2 writes:
The story is told that one of the big, west-coast IBM locations used
to use the waste heat from their computer installation to heat the
office buildings. Then, when they upgraded to bigger, faster, more
efficient computers, there was less waste heat produced, and they
had to add auxilary heaters to keep the buildings warm.
supposedly when pc/rts (& then rs/6000) were being deployed in almaden
building ... they requested that people not turn them off at
night. the problem was that the building air condition system could
not reach equilibrium (either heating or cooling) with the thermal
swings caused by turning the machines off at night and turning them on
in the morning.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Florida is in a 30 year flashback!
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Florida is in a 30 year flashback!
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: 2000年11月23日 19:36:06 GMT
ab528@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Heinz W. Wiggeshoff) writes:
In today's Ottawa Citizen, there were pictures of Floridian vote
counters holding punched cards up to the light! I remember doing
that back when I knew the entire EBCDIC punch code.
Another trick in those days: to find the changes made in a source
program, print out the old and new versions, then hold (or tape)
them to a window and scan for differences. Of course, this method
only worked for scant hours at this time of year at my latitude.
the other trick was reading the holes in a "binary" program executable
card deck ... finding the correct card containing executable needing
changing and duping the card ... except for the code to be changed (on
an 026 or 029) and "multi-punching" the binary change into the
new/replacement card (34 year flashback).
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
8086 Segmentation (was 360 Architecture, Multics, ...)
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: 8086 Segmentation (was 360 Architecture, Multics, ...)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.arch
Date: 2000年11月23日 19:38:14 GMT
Dennis Yelle writes:
Yes. I never understood that either, but that reason was repeated
over and over again back in those days. Wow, 8 extra wires.
How expensive that would have been? Can someone explain this to me?
remember that ibm already had experience with a 68k "PC" from its
instrumentation division ... and so there was some amount of
experience at the time producing a 68k machine.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Reading wireless (vicinity) smart cards
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Reading wireless (vicinity) smart cards
Newsgroups: alt.technology.smartcards
Date: 2000年11月23日 19:41:00 GMT
rnjmorris writes:
Hello,
Can anyone point me to resources or companies dealing with the reading
of vicinity smart cards (i.e. cards which can be read at a distance of
up to 50cm away)?
I'm looking for a hardware solution for a handheld computer.
Many thanks,
Rod Morris
ISO 14443 defines proximity card standard ... actually 4-5 substandards.
http://www.iso.org
http://www.bluetooth.com
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.arch,comp.sys.super
Date: 2000年11月24日 16:09:54 GMT
jcmorris@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG (Joe Morris) writes:
Can you provide time frame for the virtual /40? From (far too
many) years ago I once had a Functional Characteristics book
for the (production) 360/40, and it contained a closeup picture
of the Operator Control Panel -- and between the POWER ON and
POWER OFF buttons in the picture was a hand-drawn outline of
a toggle switch, below which was the label "PREFIX". Sadly,
that manual is long gone to the Great Wastebasket In The Sky.
note that not only does the CP/40 survive today in the VM
implementation ... but all the (ibm) mainframe machines now have a
reduced version of it implemented directly in hardware ... referred to
as "logical partitions" (or LPARS).
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#8
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#63
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#86
https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#51
https://www.leeandmelindavarian.com/Melinda#VMHist
In the Fall of 1964, the folks in Cambridge suddenly found themselves
in the position of having to cast about for something to do next. A
few months earlier, before Project MAC was lost to GE, they had been
expecting to be in the center of IBM's time-sharing activities. Now,
inside IBM, "time-sharing" meant TSS, and that was being developed
in New York State. However, Rasmussen was very dubious about the
prospects for TSS and knew that IBM must have a credible time-sharing
system for the S/360. He decided to go ahead with his plan to build a
time-sharing system, with Bob Creasy leading what became known as the
CP-40 Project. The official objectives of the CP-40 Project were the
following:
1. The development of means for obtaining data on the operational
characteristics of both systems and application programs;
2. The analysis of this data with a view toward more efficient machine
structures and programming techniques, particularly for use in
interactive systems;
3. The provision of a multiple-console computer system for the
Center's computing requirements; and
4. The investigation of the use of associative memories in the control
of multi-user systems.
The project's real purpose was to build a time-sharing system, but the
other objectives were genuine, too, and they were always emphasized in
order to disguise the project's "counter-strategic" aspects.
Rasmussen consistently portrayed CP-40 as a research project to "help
the troops in Poughkeepsie" by studying the behavior of programs and
systems in a virtual memory environment. In fact, for some members of
the CP-40 team, this was the most interesting part of the project,
because they were concerned about the unknowns in the path IBM was
taking. TSS was to be a virtual memory system, but not much was really
known about virtual memory systems. Les Comeau has written: Since the
early time-sharing experiments used base and limit registers for
relocation, they had to roll in and roll out entire programs when
switching users....Virtual memory, with its paging technique, was
expected to reduce significantly the time spent waiting for an
exchange of user programs.
22 R.J. Adair, R.U. Bayles, L.W. Comeau, and R.J. Creasy, A Virtual
Machine System for the 360/40, IBM Cambridge Scientific Center Report
320-2007, Cambridge, Mass., May, 1966.
================
What was most significant was that the commitment to virtual memory
was backed with no successful experience. A system of that period that
had implemented virtual memory was the Ferranti Atlas computer, and
that was known not to be working well. What was frightening is that
nobody who was setting this virtual memory direction at IBM knew why
Atlas didn't work. 23
Creasy and Comeau spent the last week of 1964 24 joyfully
brainstorming the design of CP-40, a new kind of operating system, a
system that would provide not only virtual memory, but also virtual
machines. 25 They had seen that the cleanest way to protect users from
one another (and to preserve compatibility as the new System/360
design evolved) was to use the System/360 Principles of Operations
manual to describe the user's interface to the Control Program. Each
user would have a complete System/360 virtual machine (which at first
was called a "pseudo-machine"). 26
The idea of a virtual machine system had been bruited about a bit
before then, but it had never really been implemented. The idea of a
virtual S/360 was new, but what was really important about their
concept was that nobody until then had seen how elegantly a virtual
machine system could be built, with really very minor hardware changes
and not much software.
------------------------------------------------------------
23 L.W. Comeau, "CP-40, the Origin of VM/370", Proceedings of SEAS
AM82, September, 1982, p. 40.
24 Creasy had decided to build CP-40 while riding on the MTA. "I
launched the effort between Xmas 1964 and year's end, after making the
decision while on an MTA bus from Arlington to Cambridge. It was a
Tuesday, I believe." (R.J. Creasy, private communication, 1989.)
25 R.J. Creasy, General Description of the Research Time-Sharing
System with Special Emphasis on the Control Program, IBM Cambridge
SR&D Center Research Time-Sharing Computer Memorandum 1, Cambridge,
Mass., January 29, 1965. L.W. Comeau, The Philosophy and Logical
Structure of the Control Program, IBM Cambridge SR&D Center Research
Time-Sharing Computer Memorandum 2, Cambridge, Mass., April 15, 1965.
26 For the first few weeks, the CSC people referred to their concept
as a "pseudo-machine", but soon adopted the term virtual machine
after hearing Dave Sayre at IBM Research use it to describe a system
he had built for a modified 7044. Sayre's M44 system was similar to
CP-40, except for the crucial difference of not providing a control
program interface that exactly duplicated a real machine. The CP-40
team credited Sayre with having "implanted the idea that the virtual
machine concept is not necessarily less efficient than more
conventional approaches." (L. Talkington, "A Good Idea and Still
Growing", White Plains Development Center Newsletter, vol. 2, no. 3,
March, 1969.) "The system built by Dave Sayre and Bob Nelson was
about as much of a virtual machine system as CTSS---which is to say
that it was close enough to a virtual machine system to show that
'close enough' did not count. I never heard a more eloquent argument
for virtual machines than from Dave Sayre." (R.J. Creasy, private
communication, 1990.)
27 "Dick Bayles was not only a great programmer, he was also the
fastest typist I have ever seen." (W.J. Doherty, private
communication, 1990.) "When Dick Bayles sat down [at a keypunch], he
wrote code as fast as it could punch cards. Yes, the machine was
slower than Bayles composing code on the fly." (R.J. Creasy, private
communication, 1989.)
==================
One of the fun memories of the CP-40 Project was getting involved in
debugging the 360/40 microcode, which had been modified not only to
add special codes to handle the associative memory, but also had
additional microcode steps added in each instruction decoding to
ensure that the page(s) required for the operation's successful
completion were in memory (otherwise generating a page fault).
The microcode of the 360/40 comprised stacks of IBM punch card-sized
Mylar sheets with embedded wiring. Selected wires were "punched" to
indicate 1's or 0's. Midnight corrections were made by removing the
appropriate stack, finding the sheet corresponding to the word that
needed modification, and "patching" it by punching a new hole or by
"duping" it on a modified keypunch with the corrections. 32
Back during that last week of 1964, when they were happily working out
the design for the Control Program, Creasy and Comeau immediately
recognized that they would need a second system, a console monitor
system, to run in some of their virtual machines. Although they knew
that with a bit of work they would be able to run any of IBM's S/360
operating systems in a virtual machine, as contented users of CTSS
they also knew that they wouldn't be satisfied using any of the
available systems for their own development work or for the Center's
other time-sharing requirements. Rasmussen, therefore, set up another
small group under Creasy to build CMS (which was then called the
"Cambridge Monitor System"). The leader of the CMS team was John
Harmon. 33 Working with Harmon were Lyndalee Korn and Ron Brennan.
Like Multics, CMS would draw heavily on the lessons taught by
CTSS. Indeed, the CMS user interface would be very much like that of
CTSS.
Since each CMS user would have his own virtual machine, CMS would be a
single-user system, unlike CTSS. This was an important factor in the
overall simplicity and elegance of the new system. 34 Creasy has
written that one of the most important lessons they had learned from
their CTSS experience was "the necessity of modular design for system
evolution. Although [CTSS was] successful as a production system, the
interconnections and dependencies of its supervisor design made
extension and change difficult." 35
------------------------------------------------------------
32 R.U. Bayles, private communication, 1989. "The Model 40 was a
Hursley (UK) product, announced in 1964. It used the first
programmable ROS (invented by Tony Proudman, I believe) called
Transformer Read-Only Storage (developed in 1961/2). In the Model 40
the circuit on the Mylar sheets wound around 60 cores, hence allowing
the storage of 60-bit words; the Model 40 had 4096 60-bit words. It
was this re-programmable storage that made the Model 40 modifiable, as
you describe." (M.F. Cowlishaw, private communication, 1990.)
33 J.B. Harmon, General Description of the Cambridge Monitor System,
IBM Cambridge SR&D Center Research Time-Sharing Computer Memorandum 3,
Cambridge, Mass., May 12, 1965.
34 Bob Creasy has commented, "Simplicity was important because of our
limited resource. I didn't expect the design [of CMS] to hold for more
than a couple of years. We recognized the importance of multiple
processes in a single-user environment, but we could not afford the
complexity. To put it another way, we weren't smart enough to make it
simple enough." (R.J. Creasy, private communication, 1990.) 35
R.J. Creasy, "The Origin of the VM/370 Time-Sharing System", IBM
Journal of Research and Development, vol. 25, no. 5, September, 1981,
p. 485.
================
CP-40 would be far more modular than CTSS, in that it would be divided
into two independent components. In the words of Bob Creasy:
A key concept of the CP/CMS design was the bifurcation of computer
resource management and user support. In effect, the integrated design
was split into CP and CMS. CP solved the problem of multiple use by
providing separate computing environments at the machine instruction
level for each user. CMS then provided single user service
unencumbered by the problems of sharing, allocation, and
protection. 36 As the weeks went by and the real power of the virtual
machine concept unfolded before them, their excitement grew. In
discussing the decision to create exact replicas of real machines, Les
Comeau has written, "It seems now that the decision to provide a
Control Program interface that duplicated the System/360 architecture
interface was an obvious choice. Although it was, given our
measurement objective, it wasn't, given our in-house interactive
system objective." 37 He credits "the strong wills and opinions of
the group" for providing further motivation for selecting such a
well-defined interface 38 between the CP and CMS components:
I think that most designers recognize the need for good separation of
function in programming system design, but compromise becomes the rule
very early in the effort. With the particular group assembled to
build CP/CMS, the personalities reinforced that design principle,
rather than compromising it.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Cryptogram Newsletter is off the wall?
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Cryptogram Newsletter is off the wall?
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: 2000年11月24日 16:14:58 GMT
vjs@calcite.rhyolite.com (Vernon Schryver) writes:
SYN bombing is an illuminating example. Every busy web server continually
suffers from orphan TCP SYN's that cannot be distinguished from intentional
SYN attacks. Every time a random PC is disconnected just after sending
a SYN to start fetching an HTTP page, the target HTTP server will see a
TCP/IP packet that cannot be distinguished from a SYN attack. The only
distinguishing characteristic of a SYN attack is enough orphan SYN's to
cause problems, and that depends more on the nature of the system under
"attack" than on other people's intentions, good or otherwise.
some number of the orphan SYNs would go poof if there was some
way of communicating ICMP not available/reachable up the stack.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - https://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
next, previous, subject index - home