List of Archived Posts
2003 Newsgroup Postings (9/7 - 10/3)
- Passwords multiply as users' rage rises
- Password / access rights check
- Seven of Nine
- Password / access rights check
- IBM Manuals from the 1940's and 1950's
- Cryptoengines with usage accounting
- The real history of comp arch: the short form
- IBM Manuals from the 1940's and 1950's
- post-doomsday computing
- OSI not quite dead yet
- OSI not quite dead yet
- AES-128 good enough for medical data?
- Seven of Nine
- Cost of patching "unsustainable"
- Seven of Nine
- IEFBR14 Problems
- OSI not quite dead yet
- Throughput vs. response time
- Threat Analysis and Threat Trees
- Throughput vs. response time
- 360 Microde Floating Point Fix
- Drivers License required for surfing?
- Seven of Nine
- Intel iAPX 432
- Intel iAPX 432
- Microsoft Internet Patch
- Microsoft Internet Patch
- Microsoft Internet Patch
- SR 15,15
- SR 15,15
- Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender
- SR 15,15 was: IEFBR14 Problems
- SR 15,15 was: IEFBR14 Problems
- MAD Programming Language
- SR 15,15 was: IEFBR14 Problems
- SR 15,15 was: IEFBR14 Problems
- S/360 undocumented instructions?
- S/360 undocumented instructions?
- Questioning risks of using the same key for authentication and encryption
- S/360 undocumented instructions?
- MAD Programming Language
- Issues in Using Virtual Address for addressing the Cache
- S/360 undocumented instructions?
- S/360 undocumented instructions?
- MAD Programming Language
- MAD Programming Language
- OSI protocol header
- Intel 860 and 960, was iAPX 432
- Thoughts on Utility Computing?
- public key vs passwd authentication?
- public key vs passwd authentication?
- public key vs passwd authentication?
- public key vs passwd authentication?
- model 91/CRJE and IKJLEW
- Thoughts on Utility Computing?
- public key vs passwd authentication?
- model 91/CRJE and IKJLEW
- wsmr-simtel20 shut down 10 years ago today
- The End of Not-Moore's Law?
- SR 15,15
- S/360 undocumented instructions?
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Passwords multiply as users' rage rises
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 04:35:14 GMT
Passwords multiply as users' rage rises
http://www.sunspot.net/news/bal-te.bz.passwords07sep07,0,5338372.story?coll=bal-home-headlines
Technology: As logins get more complex, people may be ones in need of
memory upgrade.
.... and lighter side from past discussions:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#51 OT Re: A beautiful morning in AFM.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#52 OT Re: A beautiful morning in AFM.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#53 April Fools Day
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#62 OT Re: A beautiful morning in AFM.
and a bunch of more serious discussions about shared-secret paradigms
(aka passwords, pins, etc):
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm10.htm#biometrics biometrics
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm10.htm#bio3 biometrics (addenda)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm10.htm#bio5 biometrics
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm10.htm#bio6 biometrics
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm10.htm#bio7 biometrics
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm10.htm#bio8 biometrics (addenda)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm11.htm#17 Alternative to Microsoft Passport: Sunshine vs Hai
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm11.htm#20 IBM alternative to PKI?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm12.htm#4 NEWS: 3D-Secure and Passport
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm12.htm#5 NEWS: 3D-Secure and Passport
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm12.htm#8 [3d-secure] 3D Secure and EMV
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm12.htm#57 eBay Customers Targetted by Credit Card Scam
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm12.htm#60 signing & authentication (was Credit Card Scam)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm13.htm#14 A challenge (addenda)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm13.htm#16 A challenge
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm13.htm#23 Certificate Policies (was Re: Trivial PKI Question)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm14.htm#1 Who's afraid of Mallory Wolf?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm14.htm#4 Who's afraid of Mallory Wolf?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm14.htm#23 Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm14.htm#26 Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm14.htm#28 Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm14.htm#29 Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm14.htm#30 Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm14.htm#31 Maybe It's Snake Oil All the Way Down
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm14.htm#32 An attack on paypal
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm14.htm#33 An attack on paypal
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm14.htm#34 virus attack on banks (was attack on paypal)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm14.htm#35 The real problem that https has conspicuously failed to fix
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Password / access rights check
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 14:28:23 GMT
alex221@pisem.net (Alex Prokhorov) writes:
I need to add security to my project and haven't done this before.
What I have to do is to grant different users different levels of
access to the features of the program. It is clear for me how to do it
in case of simple allowed/denied access to the program. I just create
text file with usernames and md5 hash of their passwords. But how and
where to store access options? I suppose, that access options must be
encrypted too (or maybe i'm not right?). Additionally i need an option
for the admin to arbitrarily change access options for users without
knowing their passwords. Anyone could please direct me. Thanks.
look at internet standard radius ... implementations in addition to
storing userids, authentication information, and authorization
information ... also tend to have infrastructures for managing the
information. also internet AAA (authentication, authorization, and
accounting):
http://www.aaaarch.org/index.html
pointer to current news article on passwords (shared-secrets)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003m.html#0 Passwords multiply as users' rage
some multics literature includes some discussion that security can't
be added on, it has to be designed in:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#42 Thirty Years Later: Lessons from the Multics Security Evaluation
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#44 Thirty Years Later: Lessons from the Multics Security Evaluation
some recent radius discussions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#65 Storing digital IDs on token for use with Outlook
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#59 Security in RADIUS (RFC2865)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003j.html#25 Idea for secure login
misc. past radius musings:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subpubkey.html#radius
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Seven of Nine
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2003 18:30:11 GMT
Pete Fenelon writes:
Most HR people are apparently ESFJs. There is no point of contact in the
world view between a typical developer and a typical HR type. The
developer (in broad terms) wants to be right, to be seen to be right,
and to make things work. The HR types want to be seen to be part of the
gang, to affirm that they're part of the gang, and to make everyone else
feel like part of the gang. The developer doesn't even know or care that
there's a gang. ;)
when group cohesiveness becomes the deliverable ... rather than one of
the mechanisms used to achieve deliverables ... then aggressive
accomplishment can be viewed as counter productive.
also, group cohesiveness is a refugee of the incompetent.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Password / access rights check
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 15:03:14 GMT
"Ben Mord" writes:
Vempu, I disagree that you cannot improve quality or security after
the fact (although I would agree that each bug or security hole is
typically harder to fix the later it is discovered and addressed.)
Is not peer review itself an attempt to test and often add quality
"after the fact"? Is SHA-1 not more secure than the original
version?
I think that .. from previous post
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003m.html#1 password / access rights check
the air force study with respect to multics is that it is hard to
add-on qualtiy security. it is possible to patch bugs, but software
products can be large enuf, that if things aren't done right from the
start ... you can have hundreds or tens of thousands of little bug
opportunities needing fixing that go on forever i.e. is the possibilty
that each little bug gets fixed an indication of quality security
... or is that you are having to constantly fix little bugs an
indication of poor security. There was a recent article on one of the
security web pages about how many bugs per month are too many.
a trivial example might be that it could always be possible to add on
initial authentication .... but unless there is only a single
permission granularity (you either have access to everything or you
have access to nothing), permissions may be a much more difficult
thing to add.
Unless it is designed in from the start, it is much harder to add in
fine granularity permissions that may even dynamically change based on
context. fine-grain permissions can be much more difficult to add on
after the fact.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: IBM Manuals from the 1940's and 1950's
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.lang.pl1
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 21:46:51 GMT
"John W. Kennedy" writes:
I assume that was a SABRE special?
9020 FAA air traffic control ... as opposed to SABRE/PARS/ACP/TPF/etc
There is story that CSC was trying to get a 360/50 to hardware modify
for virtual memory ... but they were all going to the FAA ... so had
to settle for 360/40 ... which is where CP/40 came from. Later when
360/67 was available ... they ported CP/40 to 360/67 and renamed it
CP/67 (which then became vm/370 ... and eventually z/VM). past cp/40
refs
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#64 ... the need for a Museum of Computer Software
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#39 VAX, M68K complex instructions (was Re: Did Intel Bite Off More Than It Can Chew?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#30 Computers in Science Fiction
more of the story can be found in melinda's historical reference:
http://www.princeton.edu/~melinda/
some number of past sabre/pars/acp/tpf threads (note: past
faa/9020 threads at very end):
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#29 Mainframes & Unix
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#24 BA Solves Y2K (Was: Re: Chinese Solve Y2K)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#100 Why won't the AS/400 die? Or, It's 1999 why do I have to learn how to use
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#136a checks (was S/390 on PowerPC?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#152 Uptime (was Re: Q: S/390 on PowerPC?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#233 Computer of the century
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#0 2000 = millennium?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#31 Computer of the century
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#94 Those who do not learn from history...
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#20 How many Megaflops and when?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#61 VM (not VMS or Virtual Machine, the IBM sort)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#65 oddly portable machines
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#21 Competitors to SABRE? Big Iron
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#22 Is a VAX a mainframe?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#20 Competitors to SABRE?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#28 Competitors to SABRE?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#32 Competitors to SABRE?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#34 Competitors to SABRE?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#37 Competitors to SABRE?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#38 Competitors to SABRE?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#48 Competitors to SABRE?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#51 Competitors to SABRE?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#58 Disk drive behavior
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#37 John Mashey's greatest hits
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#2 Block oriented I/O over IP
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001g.html#35 Did AT&T offer Unix to Digital Equipment in the 70s?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001g.html#45 Did AT&T offer Unix to Digital Equipment in the 70s?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001g.html#46 The Alpha/IA64 Hybrid
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001g.html#47 The Alpha/IA64 Hybrid
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001g.html#49 Did AT&T offer Unix to Digital Equipment in the 70s?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#76 Other oddball IBM System 360's ?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#0 TSS/360
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#9 IBM Doesn't Make Small MP's Anymore
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#2 Computers in Science Fiction
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#3 Why are Mainframe Computers really still in use at all?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#43 IBM doing anything for 50th Anniv?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#63 Hercules and System/390 - do we need it?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#83 HONE
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#28 ibm history note from vmshare
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002n.html#29 why does wait state exist?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#28 TPF
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#58 AMP vs SMP
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#48 InfiniBand Group Sharply, Evenly Divided
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#30 One Processor is bad?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#32 One Processor is bad?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#37 Lisp Machines
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003j.html#2 Fix the shuttle or fly it unmanned
some number of past 9020/faa threads:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#23 Fear of Multiprocessing?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#102 IBM 9020 computers used by FAA (was Re: EPO stories (was: HELP IT'S HOT!!!!!))
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#103 IBM 9020 computers used by FAA (was Re: EPO stories (was: HELP IT'S HOT!!!!!))
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#108 IBM 9020 computers used by FAA (was Re: EPO stories (was: HELP IT'S HOT!!!!!))
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#82 write rings
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#3 Ridiculous
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#3 First video terminal?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#9 "HAL's Legacy and the Vision of 2001: A Space Odyssey"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#15 IBM 9020 FAA/ATC Systems from 1960's
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#17 IBM 9020 FAA/ATC Systems from 1960's
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#71 IBM 9020 FAA/ATC Systems from 1960's
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#2 Most complex instructions (was Re: IBM 9020 FAA/ATC Systems from 1960's)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#3 Most complex instructions (was Re: IBM 9020 FAA/ATC Systems from 1960's)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#14 IBM 9020 FAA/ATC Systems from 1960's
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#15 IBM 9020 FAA/ATC Systems from 1960's
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002.html#36 a.f.c history checkup... (was What specifications will the standard year 2001 PC have?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#29 Computers in Science Fiction
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#16 Why are Mainframe Computers really still in use at all?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003l.html#14 Cost of patching "unsustainable"
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Cryptoengines with usage accounting
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2003 23:26:22 GMT
"Ernst Lippe" <ernstl-at-planet-dot-nl@ignore.this> writes:
I know that at least one electronic purse (Proton) had an option to
maintain an audit trail of the most recent transactions. But apart
from that, I have never seen any kind of auditing in Smart Cards or
HSM's.
There is a good reason to avoid such a feature with Smart Cards. The
memory contents of a Smart Card can only be rewritten a limited
number of times and a counter that is frequently updated will reduce
the life span of the cards.
there used to be all sorts of hoops jumped thru, technology, and
patents around minimizing number of writes to EEPROM .... a lot of
chipcards used EEPROM-based memory to maintain charge when there is no
power ... most chipcards operate with out any sort of battery ... and
7816 smartcards draw their power from the contacts when inserted into
reader ... and 14443 (contractless) smartcards draw power from the air
when they are in proximity to a reader.
the late '80s and early '90s chips had no good random source and used
EEPROM that had duty cycle in 10k writes to 30k write range.
you can get chips these days that have duty cycle with EEPROM rated
for 800k writes and above. At hundred uses times per day and ten
writes per useage, or thousand writes per day ... that has life cycle
over two years. Using it five times per day and even ten writes per
useage gives life cycle over forty years. Historically, getting writes
down to one or two per useage and five uses per day ... increases life
cycle to over 200 years.
aads chip strawman
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/x959.html#aads
slightly related (trusted hardware token reference towards end of post):
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm15.htm#6
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: The real history of comp arch: the short form
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 03:46:49 GMT
"del cecchi" writes:
At IBM the direct write ebeam systems (models not specific machines)
were named after indians. There was Poca and Hontas and Apsra.
the disk drive list ... including winchester:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#7 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
it is missing names for 2301, 2303, 2311, 2314, 2321, 3340-70, 3344,
3830, 3880-23
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: IBM Manuals from the 1940's and 1950's
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 19:16:47 GMT
Lon Stowell writes:
Somewhere in Montana is a big road sign:
Home On the Range
1 Mile
Bad news is I can't rememeber where it is, even though I
have a photo of the sign itself.
I remember all the burma-shave signs on long drives in montana.
misc burma shave websites:
http://www.mc.cc.md.us/Departments/hpolscrv/mthomas.htm
http://www.lincolnhighwayassoc.org/iowa/shaver/1930.html
http://www.lincolnhighwayassoc.org/iowa/shaver/1953.html
http://www.webcom.com/duane/bscontst.html
http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/6271/spoof003.html
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: post-doomsday computing
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2003 20:44:55 GMT
stanb45@dial.pipex.com (Stan Barr) writes:
Anyone know anything about the "Annals of Improbable Research"? It
sounds like something I should know about...some googling is
required :-)
there is mini-air mailing list (aka mini-Annuals of Improbable
Research) ... and the web site "Hot A.I.R."
http://www.improbable.com/
most recent mini-air
Subject: mini-AIR Sept 2003 -- Breakfast similarity, Murphy and the Law
PLEASE FORWARD/POST AS APPROPRIATE
================================================================
mini-Annals of Improbable Research ("mini-AIR")
Issue Number 2003-09
September, 2003
ISSN 1076-500X
Key words: improbable research, science humor, Ig Nobel, AIR, the
----------------------------------------------------------------
A free newsletter of tidbits too tiny to fit in the
Annals of Improbable Research (AIR),
the journal of inflated research and personalities
=============================================================
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: OSI not quite dead yet
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:08:13 GMT
pgut001@cs.auckland.ac.nz (Peter Gutmann) writes:
This used to be the case with the IETF when standards were written
by implementors, so you knew that when a standard was published you
could sit down and implement it and have a reasonable chance of it
talking to other implementations. Unfortunately in recent years a
number of IETF groups have gone down the OSI path, with standards
being written by professional meeting- goers who haven't written 10
lines of code in as many years. The result is, as with many of the
OSI standards, an unworkable, unimplementable mess which has little
or no chance of succeeding in the real world.
but to progress to "Draft Standard" (instead of just proposed) is to
demonstrate two interoperable implementations ... all sorts can write
internet-drafts ... which can get adopted as "proposed" and show up as
RFCs; but to make it to "Draft Standard" it then has to have the two
interoparable implementations. There are a large number of RFCs that
aren't official standards.
You can have "Internet-Drafts" which aren't yet RFCs
http://www.ietf.org/ID.html
and then there is a process that progresses them to an RFC as
"Proposed Standard". The next stage is "Draft Standard". Possibly in
the past, a larger percentage made to "Proposed Standard" that could
easily transition to "Draft Standard"(???)
see
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
and scroll down to the standards overview ... or
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietf.htm#overview
i.e. (from above):
Draft Standard Protocol
A specification from which at least two independent and interoperable
implementations from different code bases have been developed, and for
which sufficient successful operational experience has been obtained,
may be elevated to the "Draft Standard" level. For the purposes of
this section, "interoperable" means to be functionally equivalent or
interchangeable components of the system or process in which they are
used. If patented or otherwise controlled technology is required for
implementation, the separate implementations must also have resulted
from separate exercise of the licensing process. Elevation to Draft
Standard is a major advance in status, indicating a strong belief that
the specification is mature and will be useful.
....
After additional process and deliberation a "Draft Standard" may
eventually achieve "Standard" status. For a current list of
standards, see
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
and select either
Recent IETF Standards (since latest STD1)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcstd.htm#rfcstd
or
IETF Standards (from STD1)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcstd.htm#ietfstd
As part of the above lists, I include how "old" the RFC is. There are
supposedly certain requirement to make progress within 24 months.
RFC951, BOOTP has been a "Draft Standard" for 215 months (for the heck
of it, ages over 24 months, I list in bold) and RFC698, Telnet
extended ASCII option, has been "Proposed Standard" for 337 months.
RFCs are never changed. If you have a RFC that documents a "Proposed
Standard" and it gets updated as part of transition to "Draft
Standard", the updated documented will be released as a new RFC and
the previous RFC will be listed as obsoleted. An example is the
regular process of updating STD1 that lists the current standards
RFC. RFCs aren't necessarily numbered in cronological order. The email
RFC replacements numbers (for RFC821/STD10 & RFC822/STD11) were
reserved early so that they would have 2821 & 2822.
For a view of some of the inter-relations, see the overview of DNS
activity
http://www.dns.net/dnsrd/
http://www.dns.net/dnsrd/docs/id.html
http://www.dns.net/dnsrd/rfc/
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: OSI not quite dead yet
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 15:19:16 GMT
oh yes, and other agendas can go on in IETF meetings .... some past
discussion regarding VPN:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#53 Microsoft worm affecting Automatic Teller Machines
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#34 Use of SSL as a VPN
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#36 Use of SSL as a VPN
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#40 IETF meeting (Re: editors/termcap)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003l.html#23 Why more than 1 hole in FW for IPSec
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: AES-128 good enough for medical data?
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.system,sci.crypt
Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2003 20:24:44 GMT
Joe Peschel writes:
Nope? Matt, what George and I were talking about was the distributed
exhaustive key search in 1997. This was not a "academic" break.
I don't think we can consider the attacks of Biham, and, later, Matsui
breaks in that the attacks, with their attendant workload, aren't
significantly faster than brute-force.
note brute force attacks against specific keys are not against the
algorithm; although once it becomes extremely trivial to attack all
keys ... then presumably the algorithm infrastructure is at much more
risk. In general, security & risk management view security/protection
proportional to risk. If you are using a DES key to protect $500 thing
and it still takes $50,000 to attack a specific key ... you might
still consider yourself protected.
However, if you were using a DES key to protect a whole infrastructure
... then an attack on that DES key can create a systemic risk that
puts the whole infrastructure at risk ... which possibly could
represent much more at risk than the cost of an attack.
minor reference to security proportional to risk:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#61
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Seven of Nine
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:17:27 GMT
Peter Flass writes:
Unfortunately, you can run along happily for long periods without it.
Then when you discover you don't have a good backup you might as well
pack up and move to Tahiti, because you sure aren't going anywhere
else. I've read lots of horror stores, none of which I can recall the
details of just now. I always try to have several different levels of
backup (incremental, vol dump, etc.) and once I had to fall back to my
third level to rcover.
some study found half the businesses that had non-backed up disk
failures (of some category) declared bankruptcy within a month of the
filuare ... aka loosing customer/client billing information and not
having cash flow to keep going
one large telco once lost month of long distance billing that way
... but managed to avoid bankruptcy; they were taking backups every
night ... but found that there was some problem with the backup
process and there was no good data on the tapes.
i once lost some data that had been backed up in triplicate .... but
all three tapes were in the same datacenter tape library .... and the
datacenter had some procedural problem with operators mounting
randomly selected tapes as scratch.
random backup stories:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#backup
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Cost of patching "unsustainable"
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 00:51:23 GMT
eugene@cse.ucsc.edu (Eugene Miya) writes:
The one I was thinking and have thought about was the IRS
procurement away from IBM hardware to Univac hardware (troll for
Stephen F. or use comp.sys.unisys). The IRS being the main tax
(revenue) collection agency of the US Govt. They did a very naive
procurement literally presuming that all mainframe hardware was
alive. This to try to remain
minor side note (and topic drift) ... something like 92(?) percent of
the federal budget is done thru EFTPS directly into FMS. Effectively
all corporations with something like $50k or more in corporate taxes
and/or employee withholding are mandated to use EFTPS; electronic
funds transfers every week or so.
http://www.fms.treas.gov/eftps/index.html
IRS is the tax return (paper-work) processor of the US gov ... but
they see little actual money.
somewhere along the way i've heard comments about one of the
contractors on IRS modernization ... drastically underestimating the
sophistication of all that old 360 assembler code. somewhat random URL
from search engine:
http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2001/0108/web-irs-01-12-01.asp
http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2002/0304/web-irs-03-07-02.asp
http://www.informationweek.com/575/75mtirs.htm
http://www.informationweek.com/575/75mtir2.htm
http://www.senate.gov/~finance/2-2whit.htm
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/usbudget/blueprint/bud28.html
http://www.computerworld.com/governmenttopics/government/story/0,10801,81708,00.html
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Seven of Nine
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2003 22:04:05 GMT
ab528@freenet.carleton.ca (Heinz W. Wiggeshoff) writes:
No, but there was another board game of
that nature, and this brain can't recall it.
Anyone recall the first computer war games?
(This would predate the graphics era by decades.)
spacewar on pdp1 graphics screen in the 60s:
http://www.mess.org/sysinfo/pdp1.htm
http://slashdot.org/articles/02/02/28/136217.shtml?tid=127
3d tic-tac-toe on tx-0 graphics screen in the 50s
http://coyote.csusm.edu/lynniebhist/comphist.htm
and
http://memex.org/cm-archive10.html
the following from above:
Les Earnest writes:
I vaguely recall that someone at Bell Labs built a relay computer that
played tic-tac-toe sometime in the late 1940s or early 1950s. The
TX-0 computer at MIT also had a tic-tac-toe game when I started
playing with it in 1959. It displayed the board on its CRT and you
selected moves by pointing with a lite pen.
...
but tic-tac-toe wasn't war game(?).
spacewar was ported to 2250m4/1130 at cambridge science center in the
late '60s
random spacewar refs:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/97.html#2 IBM 1130 (was Re: IBM 7090--used for business or science?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#67 oddly portable machines
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#24 A question for you old guys -- IBM 1130 information
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#71 Z/90, S/390, 370/ESA (slightly off topic)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#10 5-player Spacewar?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#12 5-player Spacewar?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#13 5-player Spacewar?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#14 5-player Spacewar?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#51 Logo (was Re: 5-player Spacewar?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#8 VM: checking some myths.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001j.html#26 Help needed on conversion from VM to OS390
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#57 Amiga Rexx
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#20 6600 Console was Re: CDC6600 - just how powerful a machine was
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#22 Computer Terminal Design Over the Years
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#17 PLX
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#0 Wanted: Weird Programming Language
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#62 Re : OT: One for the historians - 360/91
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#72 OT: One for the historians - 360/91
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#28 Why only 24 bits on S/360?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#38 The PDP-1 - games machine?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#39 1130 Games WAS Re: Any DEC 340 Display System Doco ?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#7 Any DEC 340 Display System Doco ?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003i.html#27 instant messaging
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: IEFBR14 Problems...
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 13:42:10 GMT
vbandke@BSP-GMBH.COM (Volker Bandke) writes:
Well, this coincides somewhat with what I have heard, namely that a
release change necessitated the change, with a small twist: As I
heard,
in earlier releases of OS/360 programs were loaded on a page
boundary. That way a IEFBR14 would always have a RC of 0 (the last
3 nibbles of the entry point address R15 being 0). Later the entry
point could be on a doubleword boundary, and thus the return code of
IEFBR14 became somewhat "random", thus requiring a fix (SR R15,R15)
I ran OS/360 (release 6?) on 64k (16 4k pages) 360/30 ... can you
imagine wasted space of loading all programs on 4k boundary?. However,
storage protection support forced regions to 2k boundaries because of
storage key graunularity (this was way back when before some machines
forced storage keys to 4k boundary).
misc. past iefbr14 threads:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#81 Perfect Code
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#85 Perfect Code
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#96 IEFBR14 cookie from www.ibm.com
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#60 Estimate JCL overhead
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#48 The demise of compaq
one thread mentioning 4k storage protect keys
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#57 Why not an IBM zSeries workstation?
a74 workstation had 4k storage protect keys
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#55 Why not an IBM zSeries workstation?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#56 Why not an IBM zSeries workstation?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#19 Very CISC Instuctions (Was: why the machine word size ...)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#51 DARPA was: Short Watson Biography
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002d.html#4 IBM Mainframe at home
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#27 End of Moore's law and how it can influence job market
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#56 ECPS:VM DISPx instructions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003h.html#40 IBM system 370
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia 20th anv http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: OSI not quite dead yet
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:54:51 GMT
unoriginal_username@yahoo.com (Le Chaud Lapin) writes:
Yes. And unfortunately, this behavior results in large delays in
recognizing where true insight and ability lies. Delayed recognition
not only causes personal misfortune for the frustrated visionary, but
it also portends significant material consequences for the
beneficiaries of advancement. For example, in medicine, there might
be a very young researcher who retains a certain sagacity not enjoyed
by recognized experts in his/her area of research. But lack of
objectivity on the part of the recognized experts, often the comittee
members, could result in a decade or more of wasted time that
demoralizes the young researcher and reduces his/her productivity for
the remainder of his/her life.
as alluded to in previous posts ... both VPN and SSL can be considered
response to how slow it was taking ipsec to make any progress. SSL
went out in application level code ... long before anything progressed
about SSL in standards body as well as long before there were much
progress on ipsec.
minor previous posts on the subject
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#xtphsp
i would also claim that the whole cp/40, cp/67, vm/370 virtual machine
stuff ... vis-a-vis time-sharing made a lot of progress .. originally
by a small group of people. The corporate "official" time-sharing effort
supposedly had something like 1200 people working on it at its peak
... and hardly anybody has heard of it today (tss/360) ... while
cp/40 and cp/67 (along with cms) had most of it done with something
like 12 people (two orders of magnitude difference).
minor 545 tech sq. ref
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech
and some reference to early use of cp/67 by time-sharing service
bureaus:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#timeshare Misc. commercial time-sharing
in fact, i've made some claim that really new innovation is almost
always done by very, very few people ... it is when the innovation
becomes adopted that large number of other people become involve.
slightly related thread on things like system/r, relational database,
gml/sgml/htm, etc.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm15.htm#11 Resolving an identifier into a meaning
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm15.htm#12 Resolving an identifier into a meaning
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm15.htm#13 Resolving an identifier into a meaning
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm15.htm#14 Resolving an identifier into a meaning
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/aadsm15.htm#15 Resolving an identifier into a meaning
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Throughput vs. response time
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 12:23:52 GMT
nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren) writes:
There is a lot of truth in it, but it is not absolute. A fair number
of people can do more than one non-automatic thing in parallel, but
it is very rare indeed for that number to be higher than three. And,
with advancing age, the number drops off.
attempts to ban cellphone use by drivers ... claim that cellphone use
is 2nd only to alcohol use as cause of accidents.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Threat Analysis and Threat Trees
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 12:31:09 GMT
David Garnier writes:
Hello,
I work in this field and there is very little documentation available
about this, especially on the pratical side. "Secret and Lies" from
Bruce Schneier is the good start, but I guess that you already know
about it. There is also the Common Criteria documentation or the
Orange Book, but they are very verbose. I would also love to hear
about other pieces of documentation ("secure programming" books cover
another, related subject).
Otherwise the only way to make progress in this field is to learn it
from someone else.
there are the security sources that I drew our merged
security taxonomy/glossary
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/index.html#glosnote
some of the following have the selectable URLs
Security
Terms merged from: AFSEC, AJP, CC1, CC2, CC21 (CC site), CIAO, FCv1,
FIPS140, IATF V3 (IATF site), IEEE610, ITSEC, Intel, JTC1/SC27 (sc27
site), KeyAll, MSC, NIST 800-37, NCSC/TG004, NIAP, NSA Intrusion,
NSTISSC/CNSS, online security study, RFC1983, RFC2504, RFC2647,
RFC2828, TCSEC, TDI, TNI, and misc. Updated 20021108 with terms from
CIAO. Updated 20021205 with terms from 800-37 glossary.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Throughput vs. response time
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2003 19:19:29 GMT
Bernd Paysan writes:
Doing two things at once slows down your reaction time. I've done
some measurements, with two monitors being switched on after a
random amount of time, and then I had to hit a key of the associated
keyboard (left or right hand). Reaction for single expected event
was around 200ms, for two possible events (with corresponding
selective reaction) at 400ms. Note that there are a lot of people
out there that have single-event response times 400ms, but when they
want to react to two things at once, I guess they'll double their
response time, too. The time perceived as "present" is 3s, so with
200ms per task, you could handle 15 tasks percieved "at once". All
of them equally bad, with 3s response time.
there was human factors presentation at conference in dc about 1970
(mills also gave talk on super programmer) ... that had threshold
variance in being able to perceive "instant" response that ranged from
about .10 seconds to almost .25 seconds across some reprentation
population (no explanation why different people had different
thresholds).
also there was something about if the response was longer than
initially expected ... the human response was twice the system delay
(presumably up to some threshold) ... something about attention
started to wander ... and the longer the delay ... the futher
attention wandered ... and the longer it took to refocus on the
initial subject. So if response was normally .10 seconds and it
started to look like five minutes ... the person got up and went for
coffee.
random refs:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#20 How many Megaflops and when?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#64 Does the word "mainframe" still have a meaning?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#19 3270 protocol
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#48 CDC6600 - just how powerful a machine was it?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002k.html#6 IBM 327x terminals and controllers (was Re: Itanium2 power
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#22 What is timesharing, anyway?
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: 360 Microde Floating Point Fix
Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 14:18:36 GMT
Petter Gustad writes:
GECO (Geophysical Company of Norway) used 3090's at Fjerndata of
Norway for some of their seismic processing. GECO also had an Amdahl
VP1100 if memory serves me right. They were also using FPS 120B array
processors with an interface to Norsk Data computers.
misc. past 3090vector & fps refs:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#5 TF-1
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#61 TF-1
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#25 ESCON Data Transfer Rate
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#31 Hardest Mistake in Comp Arch to Fix
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#30 Weird
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#29 360/370 disk drives
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#35 Why only 24 bits on S/360?
earlier ... there was a lot of air bearing simulation work done on
disk engineering 3033 developing disk "floating head" technology.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#30 Weird
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Drivers License required for surfing?
Newsgroups: alt.comp.virus,alt.computer.security,comp.security.firewalls,comp.security.misc
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 14:35:05 GMT
"Fred_McGriff" writes:
Why not make it illegal to ship or offer for download an operating
system unless all inbound and outbound ports are closed by default?
The OS needs to be explicitly told which programs can access the
internet. This could be done during the system install for web
browsers and email clients. But, all other programs would need to be
turned on after the install.
The average use does not know as much about security as the average
OS vendor/packager. Responsibility for out the box security belongs
to the OS provider. They cannot be allowed to hide behind assertions
of limited liability -- especially when they ask for compensation.
the average user doesn't know much about repairing, building and/or
servicing a car ... the other analogy is require safe vehicle
inspection for PCs .... people get ticketed and fined for operating a
vehicle in an unsafe manner or operating an unsafe vehicle
... regardless of whether the indiviudal knows how to service a
vehicle or not.
individuals are required to carry accident insurance for their PC
... and while specific kinds of operating systems may not actually be
street illegal ... they could be sufficiently prone to certain kinds
of damage to require significanlty higher insurance permiums.
random past threads on this subject:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#27 Internet like city w/o traffic rules, traffic signs, traffic lights and traffic enforcement
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#28 Internet like city w/o traffic rules, traffic signs, traffic lights and traffic enforcement
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#29 Internet like city w/o traffic rules, traffic signs, traffic lights and traffic enforcement
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#30 Internet like city w/o traffic rules, traffic signs, traffic lights and traffic enforcement
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#31 Internet like city w/o traffic rules, traffic signs, traffic lights and traffic enforcement
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003i.html#17 Spam Bomb
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Seven of Nine
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2003 18:39:42 GMT
Steve O'Hara-Smith writes:
Tennis I think, then Breakout, then Space Invaders. Missile Command
was the first I saw built into a table.
i think the first pong i saw was possibly at ricky's on el camino in
palo alto?
possibly first time I saw space invaders was when the first chucky
cheese opened in I believe had been a supermarket (on kooser) behind
the shopping center off blossom hill road (west of almaden x-way)
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Intel iAPX 432
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 13:19:36 GMT
"Brian Catlin" writes:
Google has let me down. Does anyone know where I can find detailed
information about the 432? Other references to object-oriented CPUs
would also be appreciated.
For those too young to remember, the 432 was an extremely
complicated processor that was to be the follow-on to the 8086, but
Intel bit off more than they could chew and they couldn't get enough
performance out of it, which is too bad, because I would much rather
have seen the world go that way instead of x86.
at '79 sigops(?) at asilomar there were a number of presentations.
one item i remember was with so much high level operating system
features in silicon ... patches for silicon chips was a major problem
for 432
significant larger project was FS which was eventually canceled w/o
even being announced:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#futuresys
(there was supposedly a joke about any other company would have gone
belly-up if they had spent as much money on such an
unsuccesful/canceled project). it did see some rebirth as the s/38
.... which evolved into as/400 and now appears using power/pc chips.
not 432 books/specs online ... but some past threads with some
reference to hardcopy manuals:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#57 iAPX-432 (was: 36 to 32 bit transition
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000d.html#62 iAPX-432 (was: 36 to 32 bit transition
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#6 Ridiculous
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#48 Famous Machines and Software that didn't
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#54 FBA History Question (was: RE: What's the meaning of track overfl ow?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001g.html#36 What was object oriented in iAPX432?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#2 Minimalist design (was Re: Parity - why even or odd)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002d.html#27 iAPX432 today?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002d.html#46 IBM Mainframe at home
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#42 Blade architectures
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#60 Unisys A11 worth keeping?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002k.html#16 s/w was: How will current AI/robot stories play when AIs are
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#19 Computer Architectures
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#5 Anyone here ever use the iAPX432 ?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002q.html#11 computers and alcohol
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#5 vax6k.openecs.org rebirth
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#6 vax6k.openecs.org rebirth
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#17 diffence between itanium and alpha
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#54 Reviving Multics
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#55 Reviving Multics
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#56 Reviving Multics
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Intel iAPX 432
Newsgroups: comp.arch,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2003 19:30:27 GMT
Paul Repacholi writes:
Reflections on a Pool of Processors. Wulf, and Harbinson
HYDRA/C.mmp. Wulf, Levin, and Harbinson Capability based
Systems. Levy (not sure if this is correct UWA library has a copy)
anything on IBM S/38 Also look for stuff on the Ferranti system and
also CAP from Cambridge.
for capability-based system ... see keykos ...
http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~KeyKOS/
http://www.agorics.com/Library/keykosindex.html
random recent threads w/keykos:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003h.html#41 Segments, capabilities, buffer overrun attacks
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003i.html#15 two pi, four phase, 370 clone
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003j.html#20 A Dark Day
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#50 Slashdot: O'Reilly On The Importance Of The Mainframe Heritage
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003l.html#19 Secure OS Thoughts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003l.html#22 Secure OS Thoughts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003l.html#26 Secure OS Thoughts
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Internet Patch
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 14:05:03 GMT
efinnell@SEEBECK.UA.EDU (Edward J. Finnell, III , Ed) writes:
Sure there has, very first one was the Christmas
eMail in VM that brought down VNET worldwide. Then
there was the dark zap in open that erased the
disk that it was issued against. Inside jobs, one
accidental, one retributive for long hours and low
pay. Still see who the richest folks are! Bill,
Warren, Paul, Mark, Scott and the Walton clan.
the internal network ... from which bitnet/earn was derived:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#bitnet
was larger than internet/arpanet until about mid-85. at the time of
the cut-over to internet(working) protocol on 1/1/83 ... there were
around 240 arpanet nodes .. while the internal network was approaching
1000. Almost all of the internal nodes were VM/CMS ... in part because
of severe limitations and problems in the MVS/JES networking
capability:
1) JES had traditional homogeneous networking architecture/design
somewhat similar to arpanet (prior to internetoking protocol). JES was
so bad that different versions of JES might not even interoperate ...
there is the incident of a JES file from San Jose flowing thru the
internal network to Hursley and bringing down Hursley MVS system.
2) VM/CMS networking had essentially gateway layer from the start (and
no real practical network node limitation) the JES homogeneous support
was so bad .. there was whole body of VM network drivers that talked
to different versions of JES ... and eventually the various VM
network drivers were given the implementation task of creating
canonical JES network headers and making sure that what was delivered
to a specific JES system was at the correct format as a MVS crash
avoidance mechanism.
3) original JES network product announcement implemented network node
definitions in the psuedo device table ... which was limited to 255
defintions max; as a result a typical JES node had 200 or fewer
network definitions. at the time JES raised the network node
definition limit to 1000, the internal network was well over 1000
nodes. The JES network node limitation including trashing files if
either the destination node or the originating node wasn't in the
table ... which made it extremely difficult to use JES as any sort of
intermediate node (a local JES might have all the definitions of the
local nodes and could deliver files ... but it would still trash a
file if it originated from a node not in the definition).
one of the downsides of the bitnet/earn deployment was the vm
networking code was soon restricted to only shipping JES networking
compatible drivers ... and none of the (original) native VM network
drivers (minimizing the comparison of VM having full, interoperable,
heterogeneous networking support as compared to the much more limited
JES homogeneous networking support).
i believe the first occurance of scripting email exploit was around
'74 ... where somebody sent an email that was an exec file with the
filename of some normal system command. The CMS command lookup
(inheriied from CTSS?, early '60s) was that command lookup was
regular/consistent across all kinds of script/exec files, executables
as well as kernel calls ... it was even possible to create an exec
file on local, private filesystem that was the same name as an
internal SVC/kernel call (aka it was also possible to invoke internal
SVC/kernel calls directly from command line).
In any case, somebody could read a file from the network, place it in
their local filesystem ... and it could be an exec file with the same
filename as a system executable or even a kernel call ... which would
get invoked anytime that command was invoked.
Until the most recent activity ... exploits were approximately
1/3rd social engineering, 1/3rd buffer overlows, 1/3rd scripting
files loaded from the network.
this most recent activity is sort of a combinationt of social
engineering and network executable ... so it isn't an actual automatic
scripting exploit; requiring social engineering to convince the
recipient to manual invoke the command (somewhat was the case of the
xmas exec).
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Internet Patch
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 14:10:14 GMT
PaulW@ENET.COM (Paul Wendt) writes:
Would this "email" have been PROFS? IBM's prescient answer to
Outlook and a particularly horrid excuse for an "email" system.
PROFS was somewhat a menued (referred to at the time as "padded-cell")
front-end to what was mostly an aggregation of internal online tools.
In one case, an extremely, early, alpha level of somebody else's code
was used to handle the actual mail processing (behind the menu
front-end). In a disagreement about the origin of the code ... it was
pointed out that every profs email in the world carried the initials
of the original author in an internal control field.
minor past profs refs:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#46 Does the word "mainframe" still have a meaning?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#35 Newbie TOPS-10 7.03 question
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#39 Newbie TOPS-10 7.03 question
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#56 E-mail 30 years old this autumn
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#14 Mail system scalability (Was: Re: Itanium troubles)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#58 history of CMS
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#59 history of CMS
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#64 history of CMS
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#50 CDC6600 - just how powerful a machine was it?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#34 VSE (Was: Re: Refusal to change was Re: LE and COBOL)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#45 hyperblock drift, was filesystem structure (long warning)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003j.html#56 Goodbye PROFS
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Internet Patch
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 14:24:07 GMT
ibm-main@LDWOREN.NET (Leonard Woren) writes:
By the way, VNET was impacted much more severely than BITNET because
VNET ran on T1 and BITNET ran on 9600b. On BITNET we had time to get
the word out and corral it. Of course, I was doing email on MVS via
the UCLA/Mail program, so when I received the exec it wouldn't have
run anyway.
the internal network ran on a whole range of different speed lines
... i consider one of the original lines was between cambridge and
endicott ... supporting a project where CP/67 was enhanced to
provide/support 370 virtual machines (the new instructions were trapped
on operational exception and emulated).
the harder was that 370 virtual memory tables were significantly
different than 360/67 .... so 370 virtual memory tables had to be
remapped to 360/67 tables.
then to test that code ... a version was cp/67 was modified to run in
370 hardware (rather than 360/67 hardware). This was operational and
regularly tested a year before engineering hardware was available for
370 virtual memory.
It was used to test the original 370 engineering model with virtual
memory hardware support (something that had a knife-switch as an
IPL/boot button). Turns out the engineers had a bug ... they had
reversed the implementation of two of the B2 opccdes ... which
required patching the kernel (modified CP/67) to correctly boot on
the machine.
misc. past discussion of the cp/67 support 370 virtual memory
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#48 Rethinking Virtual Memory
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#3 What is an IBM 137/148 ???
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/97.html#27 IA64 Self Virtualizable?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#7 IBM S/360
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#33 why is there an "@" key?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#68 Mainframe operating systems
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#15 internet preceeds Gore in office.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#16 360/370 instruction cycle time
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#19 checking some myths.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#43 Withdrawal Announcement 901-218 - No More 'small machines'
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#29 HP Compaq merger, here we go again.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#39 VAX, M68K complex instructions (was Re: Did Intel Bite Off More Than It Can Chew?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#50 crossreferenced program code listings
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#0 HONE was .. Hercules and System/390 - do we need it?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#70 hone acronym (cross post)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#0 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#14 Page Table - per OS/Process
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#18 Multiple layers of virtual address translation
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: SR 15,15
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2003 20:22:39 GMT
ibm-main@LDWOREN.NET (Leonard Woren) writes:
But IBM also thought (in the 1950s) that 5 computers would serve all
of the computing needs of the United States. That's why the
computer center at UCLA was known back then as WDPC - the Western
Data Processing Center.
guess who in 1986 was predicting that there would be a maximum of 200
T1 lines in the US by 1991?, in part because a certain 37xx product
didn't support T1 and didn't really have any plans to.
this certain 37xx product supported 56kbit links and would support
multiple 56kbit in "fat pipes". When they did a survey to find out the
37xx "fat pipe" install base .. they found lots of two-56kbit fat
pipes, lots of three-56kbit fat pipes, lots of four-56kbit fat pipes
and little or no five-56kbit fat pipes.
so the conclusion was that customers didn't need the bandwidth for more
that 200kbit ... and would only be very slowly be growing to T1. Also
ignore all the 2701 T1s and the S/1 zirpel T1s.
what they apparently failed to see was that tariff for five 56kbit
lines was about the same as a full T1 (aka 1.5mbits or over 25 56kbit
lines) ... customers would just buy a T1 and used it with a product
that supported T1. An extremely cursory survey of mainframe non-37xx
configurations easily turned up 200 T1 lines in 1986 (or as many that
supposedly wouldn't be reached in total for the whole country before
1991).
it was also a little out of sync with the NSFNET1 T1 backbone (minor
ref to NSFNET1 program and award announcement):
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm#nsfnet
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/internet.htm#0
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: SR 15,15
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2003 14:03:01 GMT
IBM-MAIN@ISHAM-RESEARCH.COM (Phil Payne) writes:
One of the performance-enhancing features of IBM mainframes (since
at least the 3033) has been a thing called the "Segment Table Origin
Register Save Stack" - although it has other names. This saves
instances of the address of the segment table in use and associates
TLB entries with each one, such that when a segment table is
reloaded (after an address space switch) TLB entries can be
re-recognised as belonging to that address space, saving
retranslation.
360/67 had a single STO (segment table origin) associative array.
370/168 had 128 entry table look aside buffer with a 3bit identifier
for each entry ... for a seven-entry "STO-stack" ... i.e. 3-bits, 8
identifiers ... one for unused entries and seven for which STO the
entry was associated with.
The machines were considered to be STO-associative ... i.e. virtual
addresses and the table look aside entries were identified as being
with a specific segment table (represented by the segment table origin
address).
when segment register 1 was reloaded with different STO ... it was
checked for being in the STO-stack ... and if so, continued as that
STO; if not, one of the entries in the STO-stack was scavanged and all
the related entries in the table look aside buffer invalidated.
dual-address space was introduced for 3033. there was the various
performance trade-offs between having hardware assist moving data
between address space (as well as somewhat alleviating pressure on the
common area) against increase in the pressure/use of the entries in
the STO-stack (hardware assist for cross-memory moves was at the
expense of increasing the nominal number of STO entries needed in
normal execution period).
The increased pressure on TLB entries somewhat caused by multiple
address space instruction architecture and a STO-associative hardware
implementation ... when MVS was in large part a PTO architecture
became more & more of a problem ... aka over half the TLB entries
tended to be duplicated because half of each MVS address space was
composed of identiable page table entries.
Original 370 architecture had regular architecture that allowed for
STO-associative hardware implementation or even a STE/PTO associative
hardware implementation i.e. rather than associate each TLB entry with
a specific segment table or address space .... associate each TLB with
a specific segment table entry ... page table origin address.
MVS was somewhat of a cludge from a operating system architecture ...
that was partly left over from os/360 days with the kernel code
occupying the same address space as the application. Part of the
enormouse pressure on 24-bit address in MVS systems ... is that later
versions of MVS/370 had the kernel occupying 8mbytes of each address
space and some installations had common area growing to 4mbytes
... leaving only 4mbytes of the address space for application
execution.
discussion of common system bit from early '80s
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002m.html#0 Handling variable page sizes?
this was case of adapting the hardware to the MVS operating system
kludge ... having an environment where certain segment table entries
can be flagged as being "common" across all virtual memory address
spaces ... aka the operating system would enforce the rule that
segments flagged as common ... would be unique across all address
spaces loaded. Then TLB hardware could treat TLB entries from segments
flagged as common as not being address space unique ... they were the
same in all address spaces.
past threads on sto-stack and/or dual-address space
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#46 Rethinking Virtual Memory
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#204 Core (word usage) was anti-equipment etc
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#84 Is a VAX a mainframe?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#58 Why not an IBM zSeries workstation?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#10 360/370 instruction cycle time
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001g.html#8 Test and Set (TS) vs Compare and Swap (CS)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#13 GETMAIN R/RU (was: An IEABRC Adventure)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#40 using >=4GB of memory on a 32-bit processor
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002d.html#51 Hardest Mistake in Comp Arch to Fix
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#17 Black magic in POWER5
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#18 Black magic in POWER5
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#51 Handling variable page sizes?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#57 Handling variable page sizes?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#60 Handling variable page sizes?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002n.html#58 IBM S/370-168, 195, and 3033
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002q.html#1 Linux paging
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#13 Unused address bits
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#53 Reviving Multics
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#69 unix
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#0 Resolved: There Are No Programs With >32 Bits of Text
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#12 Page Table - per OS/Process
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#13 Page Table - per OS/Process
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#23 price ov IBM virtual address box??
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003h.html#37 Does PowerPC 970 has Tagged TLBs (Address Space Identifiers)
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Fw: Mail delivery failed: returning message to sender
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 00:36:10 GMT
richard.higson@GT.OWL.DE (Richard Higson) writes:
(HUMOUR, WARNING, a pinch of salt might be needed) Aw' co'mon Phil,
next thing we know, you'll be asking that the Manufacturers of
Operating-Systems provide road-worthy vehicules and not the Horse &
Buggy (more buggy than Horse) stuff we have to put up with at the
moment.
references to tickets for unsafe driving and/or operating unsafe
vehicle .... as well as prior threads on the subjects:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003m.html#21 Drivers License required for surfing?
it isn't question as to level of technology ... but whether it is
unsafe and/or hazard.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: SR 15,15 was: IEFBR14 Problems...
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:15:23 GMT
Gerald.Kaiser@WW-INFORMATIK.DE (Kaiser, Gerald , IRB-BS) writes:
To my knowledge BAS and BASR were introduced with the
XA-architecture introducing 31-bit-addressing to overcome the
16MB-barrier, so approx. 1982/83. 1967 was pre-VS (roughly at that
time the 360-67 was introduced, the first virtual-storage machine
for universities etc, which still was a 24-bit machine, so hardly in
need of BAS/BASR), the IBM VS-operating systems were announced in
summer 1972 and at that time BAS/BASR was definetely not introduced.
Regards, Gerald
360/67 supported both 24-bit and 32-bit addressing (not that little
31-bit stuff introduced in the 80s) ... and had BAS/BASR instructions.
360/67 multiprocessing also had channel director with access to all
channels by all processors ... something not seen again until the
80s). The channel director panel had lots of configuration switches
allowing machine to be partitioned, memory banks allocated in various
ways ... particular channels routed in specific ways, etc. The switch
settings from the channel director control panel was available via
bits defined in control registers. There was at least one model of
360/67 where the channel director configurations settings could be
changed via the same control registers (not just sensed).
The flagship operating system for 360/67 was tss/360 ... which at its
peak had compareable number of people working on it as os/360. lots of
history about ctss, multics, 360/67, modified 360/40 with virtual
memory, tss/360, cp/67 (original virtual machine operating system),
cms (originally referred to as cambridge monitor system but renamed to
conversational monitor system as part of transition to vm/370).
http://www.princeton.edu/~melinda/
during that period, cms, cp/40, cp/67 had about 1/100th as many
developers writting software for it as tss/360. all of this was
going on csc, 4th floor, 545 tech sq.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech
Also where GML originated (which has since spawned SGML, HTML, XML,
FSML, SAML, etc, etc) and the internal network.
some of information from 360/67 reference "blue card" (including
bas/basr instructions and control register assignment):
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#15 OS/360 (was LINUS for S/390)
misc. other references to 360/67 "blue card":
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#69 what is interrupt mask register?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#71 what is interrupt mask register?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#42 IBM was/is: Imitation...
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#54 WATFOR's Silver Anniversary
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003l.html#25 IBM Manuals from the 1940's and 1950's
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: SR 15,15 was: IEFBR14 Problems...
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:42:39 GMT
tjpo@AIRBORNE.COM (Patrick O'Keefe) writes:
Guess I worked for a "nobody" company. I started system programming
in 1973 and had several years before even hearing about VS.
Before that (1967-1972?) I was an operator in an IBM Datacenter and
never saw or heard of VS. (There was definitely talk about CP67,
but we didn't have a 67 so I never saw it.) The Seattle Datacenter
was certainly not on the cutting edge of anything, but there would
have been talk of VS if it had been around.
Excpet for special cases like CP67, I'm pretty sure VS operating
systems didn't make their appearance until the S/370 line in the
'70s.
Boeing formed BCS in 1969 ... I spent summer of '69 there helping
install and train some of the staff on cp/67 ... first on uniprocessor
360/67 ... and then they got the Boeing Hunstville two-processor
360/67 sent up from Hunstville. There were possibly 25 people in BCS
when I was there ... but they were in the process of trying to absorb
commercial airplane datacenters in renton, everett, wichita, etc. BCS
had been formed with hdqrts dataprocessing which, at the time, had a
single 360/30 that ran payroll & checks (so it was a big step from
a single 360/30 to possibly two of the larger datacenters in the world
at renton and everett.
One of the IBM SEs on the Boeing account (out of the Seattle branch
office) did a stripped-down CP using the "DIL" (?) instruction on
standard (non-virtual memory) machine. DIL(?) had base & bound,
contiguous storage relocation (think of it as an early form of LPARS).
I believe he did some of his testing 3rd shift on one of the machines
in the seattle datacenter (on the "first" floor).
TSS/360 was the mainstream operating system for the 360/67 and at one
point had numbers approaching that of os/360 working on it.
cp/67 was done at cambridge science center ... with something like
1/100th the number of people working on tss/360.
MTS was another virtual memory system for 360/67 done at univ. of
michigan.
Starting sometime in '70 ... the DP division started pioneering hone at
three datacenters at 1) 1133 westchester, 2) someplace in chicago, and
3) wilshire blvd. ... allowing testing of 370 operating systems on
360/67.
As previously mentioned, one of the earliest applications of the
internal network was a joint CSC/Endicott project to provide virtual
370 machine support (both non-virtual memory as well as virtual
memory) ... running on 360/67. This started out as a series of changes
to the CP/67 kernel to simulate the new (non-virtual memory) 370
instructions. This set of code was used by the emerging HONE operation
at the three DP datacenters with 360/67s. The rest of the code
provided full virtual memory 370 simulation ... and a set of
modifications to cp/67 to make it run on 370 architecture instead of
360/67 architecture (this later set of code was operational for a year
before the first engineering 370 hardware was available with virtual
memory support).
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003m.html#27 Microsoft Internet Patch
HONE was moved to 370s and US HONE operations were eventually
consolidated in Cal ... with one of the largest time-sharing service
bureau operations in the world (supporting all field and branch
people). HONE was also cloned for branch, sales, marketing, and field
support people around the world (I hand carried and installed some of
the early deployments). misc. hone refs:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hone
random mentions of MTS:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#23 MTS & LLMPS?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#25 MTS & LLMPS?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#26 MTS & LLMPS?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#15 S/360 operating systems geneaology
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#91 Ux's good points.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#61 VM (not VMS or Virtual Machine, the IBM sort)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#44 WHAT IS A MAINFRAME???
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#52 TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#0 TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#55 TSS/360
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#45 Valid reference on lunar mission data being unreadable?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#63 Hercules and System/390 - do we need it?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002n.html#54 SHARE MVT Project anniversary
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002n.html#64 PLX
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#0 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#10 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#41 SLAC 370 Pascal compiler found
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003j.html#54 June 23, 1969: IBM "unbundles" software
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#5 What is timesharing, anyway?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003l.html#30 Secure OS Thoughts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003l.html#41 Secure OS Thoughts
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: MAD Programming Language
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:13:01 GMT
Tom Van Vleck writes:
In 1965, the CTSS scheduler consisted of five modules,
SCDA, SCDB, SCDC, SCDD, and SCDE. All but one were written
in FAP. The SCDC module was written in MAD. This was the
module that picked the next user to run, and contained the
actual "scheduling algorithm." SCDC was worked on by many
people but Tom Hastings and Corby were the two names that I
remember. Because the algorithm was subject to much
tweaking, MAD was used to avoid introducing bugs. (Time
sharing scheduling was at the time an important research
topic, and CTSS was the first system to implement a
Greenberger-Corbato exponential scheduler, in which jobs
were run with a little time slice first, then exponentially
bigger slices at lower queues. In practice this caused
long running jobs to starve, so there was a scheduler
parameter QNTWAT that bumped a languishing job's priority
backup. But I digress.) In the early 70s, CTSS was still
being used by some projects while Multics matured: it was
maintained by a group at MIT Information Processing Center.
Some of the system programmers decided to rewrite SCDC in
FAP for efficiency; I prevailed on them to keep the MAD
statements as comments so we would know what was going on.
cp/67 "release 1" appeared to have had a nearly identical scheduler;
however as the number of users went up ... the processing time in the
scheduler increased non-linear. release 1 cp/67 was measuring
something like 15 percent of total processor time in this bit of code
with something like 30 logged-on users. Harold Fienlieb at Lincoln
Labs rewrote the code to a much simpler (and faster) two level system
that drastically cut the pathlength processing and was made available
in "release 2" of cp/67 in '68 (the thruput of KISS more than offset
any downside of it being simpler).
Harold then joined NCSS ... when they formed cp/67 time-sharing
service bureau ... june of '68 ... slightly related:
http://www.decosta.com/Nomad/tales/history.html
some other people from Lincoln Labs and others formed another cp/67
time-sharing service bureau (IDC) some months later. misc. previous
postings regarding time-sharing service bureau
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#timeshare
it was on harold's implementation that i did the dynamic adaptive,
fairshare, non-fairshare, pathlength, etc. stuff in late '68 and '69.
lots of old performance and scheduling posts:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#fairshare
and the "clock" replacement stuff
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#wsclock
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: SR 15,15 was: IEFBR14 Problems...
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 17:54:20 GMT
JMckown@UICIINSCTR.COM (McKown, John) writes:
Incorrect. As I recall from college (a very long time ago). The
first computer system with "VS" or "Virtual Storage" was the
Atlas. This was in 1956!
See:
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=359331&jmp=abstract&dl=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE
http://sunsite.utk.edu/math_archives/.http/hypermail/historia/oct99/0165.htm
there was some discussion of this from early cp/40 days referenced in
melinda's document:
http://www.princeton.edu/~melinda/
some past posts referrning quotes in the above about the perception
that virtual memory in atlas "didn't work":
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#52 Correct usage of "Image" ???
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#79 Unisys vs IBM mainframe comparisons
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#78 TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#10 VM: checking some myths.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#26 TECO Critique
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002.html#42 a.f.c history checkup... (was What specifications will the standard year 2001 PC have?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#72 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#0 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#1 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: SR 15,15 was: IEFBR14 Problems...
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2003 19:25:42 GMT
"Glen Herrmannsfeldt" writes:
But were the hex opcodes the same? I thought they were different,
but I am not sure.
from 360/67 blue card &:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#15 OS/360 (was LINUS for S/390)
Load Multiple Control LMC RS M, A, S, D P B8
Store Multiple Control STMC RS M, P, A, S B0
Load Real Address LRA RX M, A, S B1
Branch and Store BASR RR 0D
Branch and Store BAS RX 4D
Search List (RPQ) SLT RS P, A, S, Relo A2
and basr/bas Branch and Save instructions from
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/DZ9ZR001/7.5.9?SHELF=DZ9ZBK01&DT=20020416112421
are 0D and 4D op-codes (as in 360/67)
from above programming notes:
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/DZ9ZR001/5.3.3.1?SHELF=DZ9ZBK01&DT=20020416112421#SPTBSMNTS
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/DZ9ZR001/5.3.3.2?SHELF=DZ9ZBK01&DT=20020416112421#SPTSBIPN
http://publibz.boulder.ibm.com/cgi-bin/bookmgr_OS390/BOOKS/DZ9ZR001/5.3.3?SHELF=DZ9ZBK01&DT=20020416112421#HDR05AH24
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: S/360 undocumented instructions?
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 15:59:22 GMT
charlie@ELEKTRO.CMHNET.ORG (Charlie Smith) writes:
I don't think there were "undocumented instructions", as much as
instructions that were only present with some RPQ features. I
remember reading of early experimentation with virtual memory
implemented on a 360/44, I think maybe in a System Journal.
note that there was diagnose instruction ('83') that was priviledge
and defined as machine/model dependent. some amount of diagnostics or
other specialized service applications made use of diagnose
instruction.
cp/67 (and then vm/370) co-opted the diagnose instruction for virtual
machine useage ... i.e. defining virtual machine model depenedent
diagnose instruction (i.e. diagnose instruction operational definition
defined specific for a virtual machine model).
cambridge science center was trying to get a 360/50 to make the
hardware modifications to support virtual memory ... however because
so many 360/50s were going to FAA for the air traffic control system
... they had to settle for a 360/40 (this was all pending availability
of the official virtual memory machine ... the 360/67). cambridge
built cp/40 on the 360/40 ... and then converted it to cp/67 when
360/67 became available.
random past mention of cp/40 & virtual memoy on 360/40:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#46 Rethinking Virtual Memory
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#79 Unisys vs IBM mainframe comparisons
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#59 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#63 TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#78 TSS ancient history, was X86 ultimate CISC? designs)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#29 z900 and Virtual Machine Theory
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#10 VM: checking some myths.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#47 TSS/360
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#6 Microcode?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002b.html#64 ... the need for a Museum of Computer Software
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#8 TOPS-10 logins (Was Re: HP-2000F - want to know more about it)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#39 VAX, M68K complex instructions (was Re: Did Intel Bite Off More Than It Can Chew?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#44 cp/67 (coss-post warning)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002c.html#45 cp/67 addenda (cross-post warning)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002h.html#59 history of CMS
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002n.html#28 why does wait state exist?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#0 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#31 Lisp Machines
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#33 price ov IBM virtual address box??
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003k.html#48 Who said DAT?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003l.html#25 IBM Manuals from the 1940's and 1950's
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003m.html#4 IBM Manuals from the 1940's and 1950's
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: S/360 undocumented instructions?
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main,alt.folklore.computers
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 17:16:10 GMT
ibm-main@LDWOREN.NET (Leonard Woren) writes:
Yep; I remember in about 1972 when I was in Explorer Post 360
(really!) getting to play around with a S/370 model 145 among other
equipment at an IBM CE training center. The 145 was the model that
had a really nice implementation of alter/display on the integrated
console: you hit STOP, then hit the A/D console key, and could type
commands like "DM xxxxxx" and "AM xxxxxx" for Display Memory and
Alter Memory, "DP" and "AP" for the PSW, "DG" and "AG" for the
general registers, etc. It didn't take too long to decide to go
through the whole alphabet to see what wasn't documented. The fun
part is that most commands were rejected with "invalid command", but
AV/DV were rejected with "invalid operand". The 145's microcode
listing was on a table nearby, so we started reading it. Got to the
AV/DV commands and there was a PRINT OFF. Sigh.
I imagine that they enabled virtual storage in the ucode and changed
the nameplate on the machine to say 148. Was this available as a
field-installed MES?
370/145 had a floppy load to enable virtual memory. also they shipped
with the front panel "roller" lights having a label "XLT" in the PSW
... which raised a number of questions before virtual memory was
announced.
370/148 was much later. 148 had faster floating point and a lot more
room for microcode. virgil/tully (138/148) went with operating system
microcode assists ... for both VS/1 and VM/370. We were given that
there was about 6kbytes of microcode left to develope VM/370 microcode
assist ... and that instruction bytes translated from 370 to microcde
on about 1 for 1 ... however, for equivalent function ... the 148
microcode implementation ran approximately ten times faster than the
equivalent implementation in 370 (for a whole slew of reasons). The
VM/370 microcode assist increased performance by 1) 370 to microcode
ten times speed up (for all code) and 2) for virtual machine emulation
of priviledge instructions ... eliminating the priviledge interrupt
into the vm/370 kernel, register saving, restoring, context switch,
etc.
Note that on the high-end machines (168, 3033, etc) ... 370
instruction emulation had progressed until it was effectively
one-for-one. 370/165 had about 2.1 machine cycles per 370 instruction,
this was optimized in 370/168 until it was about 1.6 machine cycles
per 370 instruction. By 3033 it was around one for one. There were
even cases on 3033 that translation from 370 instruction stream into
microcode actually ran slower. The 3081 had situations were 370
translation into microcode ran significantly slower because the
microcode might have to be "paged" in off a picollo hard disk.
The vm/370 microcode assist on 138/148 for supervisor/kernel code
translated into microcode was referred to as ECPS. The other part was
additonal virtual machine assist of priviledge instructions by
operating systems running in virtual machine (subset of all the stuff
seen in current day LPAR support).
some past posts on the roller lights:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#204 Core (word usage) was anti-equipment etc
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002n.html#15 Tweaking old computers?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#20 price ov IBM virtual address box??
lots of past ecps refs:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#21 370 ECPS VM microcode assist
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#27 370 ECPS VM microcode assist
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#28 370 ECPS VM microcode assist
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#12 I'm overwhelmed
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#50 Does the word "mainframe" still have a meaning?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#76 Is a VAX a mainframe?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000e.html#6 Ridiculous
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#7 360/370 instruction cycle time
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#29 z900 and Virtual Machine Theory
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#83 Z/90, S/390, 370/ESA (slightly off topic)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#2 Most complex instructions (was Re: IBM 9020 FAA/ATC Systems from 1960's)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#3 Most complex instructions (was Re: IBM 9020 FAA/ATC Systems from 1960's)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#75 Computers in Science Fiction
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#57 IBM competes with Sun w/new Chips
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#80 HONE
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#5 HONE, xxx#, misc
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#51 Handling variable page sizes?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#62 Itanium2 performance data from SGI
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#15 Home mainframes
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#16 Home mainframes
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#44 Linux paging
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002p.html#48 Linux paging
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#4 vax6k.openecs.org rebirth
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#5 vax6k.openecs.org rebirth
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#6 vax6k.openecs.org rebirth
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#7 vax6k.openecs.org rebirth
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#14 vax6k.openecs.org rebirth
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#15 vax6k.openecs.org rebirth
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#16 vax6k.openecs.org rebirth
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#17 vax6k.openecs.org rebirth
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003.html#61 MIDAS
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003d.html#21 PDP10 and RISC
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003e.html#56 Reviving Multics
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#21 "Super-Cheap" Supercomputing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#43 ECPS:VM DISPx instructions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#47 ECPS:VM DISPx instructions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#52 ECPS:VM DISPx instructions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#54 ECPS:VM DISPx instructions
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003f.html#56 ECPS:VM DISPx instructions
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: Questioning risks of using the same key for authentication and encryption
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 21:11:55 GMT
"Paul Sheer" writes:
The RFC does not say anything about using the same key for
encryption and authentication. (Basically, you might encrypt with
3DES and then authenticate with MD5-MAC.)
I understand that using the same key for both is supposed to be a
bad idea. Can anyone point me to some online articles that discuss
why exactly?
two slightly related issues:
1) encryption and authentication are different business processes with
different business requirements. in a corporate or institutional
setting ... there is likely a business requirement for escrowing
encryption keys involved in encrypting data at rest (corporate
requirement for no-signle-point-of-failure and the ability to always
be able to recover corporate assets) ... while there may be a total
different business requirement that an authentication operation can
only be under under control of specific person
2) there have been some early vague notions that authentication,
digital signatures, and non-repudiation are related business
processes. "legal" digital signature and non-repudiation tend to carry
with it the requirement that not only could the signature only have
originated with a specific entity ... but that entity also intended to
"sign" some contents and furthermore demonstrates some agreement with
any terms and conditions that might be specified in the contents being
signed. encryption somewhat implies a business process that can
willy-nilly encrypt strings of bits w/o necessarily requiring any
awareness of the contents being encrypted.
the use of the same key for totally different business process
purposes can be a bad idea when there is requirement for incompatible
management of the key(s) and processes associated with the different
business purposes.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **, - **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: S/360 undocumented instructions?
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.ibm-main
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 01:54:26 GMT
edgould@AMERITECH.NET (Edward A. Gould) writes:
Memory time... didn't Cambridge also offer a solid state drum as
well?
Thing worked great except if we had a power "blip" it lost iits
brains and you had to re-init the thing and redefine the pagespace
(PLPA) we had on it.
Or am I in error?
and the 1655?
misc. past refs to the 1655:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001c.html#17 database (or b-tree) page sizes
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001l.html#53 mainframe question
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002.html#31 index searching
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#17 AS/400 and MVS - clarification please
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002l.html#40 Do any architectures use instruction count instead of timer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#15 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#17 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#55 HASP assembly: What the heck is an MVT ABEND 422?
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **
From: Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com>
Subject: Re: MAD Programming Language
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:50:56 GMT
Tom Van Vleck writes:
If quit/start got disallowed, users would find other ways to make
their jobs look interactive. For example, we discussed modifying
the compilers to demand a keyboard input every so often to make them
look "interactive." When demand for resources exceeded supply,
something had to be deferred. The quit/start trick penalized those
jobs whose owners were least impatient, probably as good as we could
do.
When we began using Multics to support itself, the scheduler had the
same feature, but the quit/start sequence caused a lot of page
faults and the community were all impatient system programmers. So
we hid the EPL compiler and only allowed a daemon process to run it.
Users submitted requests to have compilations done by the daemon,
which put the results back in the user's home directory. It was a
kludge but it worked until the GE version of PL/I became available.
cp/67 used terminal I/O as an indication of being interactive
... treating any kind of terminal i/o ... read or write ... as
indicative. terminal i/o also had the characteristic of promoting to
the top of the 10 level scheduling queue; release 1 ... sounds like it
was out of ctss.
release 2 of cp/67 simplified things into two level queue
... "interactive" and "the rest". Task placed into interactive queue
were ahead of "the rest" ... until they used a predetermined amount of
cpu ... went idle ... or had another terminal i/o.
various cpu bound applications created extremly pathological and
uncontrolled system-wide thruput characteristics.
One of the culprits was the CMS "BLIP" command which would do a
terminal I/O (that did nothing more than "wiggle" the 2741 type-ball)
after every two seconds of CPU use. A little creative hacking and the
CPU-use interval could be reduced to a couple hundred milliseconds.
For the fairshare/non-fairshare dynamic, adaptive feedback scheduling
... I implemented smooth recent CPU utilization tracking and priority
scheduling based on advisory deadlines (i.e. tasks were ordered for
dispatching by their advisory deadline ... not something close to
"interfactive" FIFO before all "the rest" FIFO). The advisory deadline
was based on a number of things, including recent resource
consumption, projected CPU use, as well as fairshare and non-fairshare
administrative specifications. Part of the whole trick was being able
to accumualte recent, smoothed resource useage ... and the advisory
deadline in shorter pathlength than the existing much more simple
minded implementation.
One of the characteristics was that live load situations became much
more predictable ... with the elimination of whole classes of
pathelogical situations. In effect, "interactive" had a slight preference
as long as the task wasn't exceeding its resource allocation. Lots
of "think time" (no recent cpu use) plus interactive was much more
predictable.
misc. past
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#fairshare
some past posts with regard to CMS "BLIP"
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#12 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#56 wrt code first, document later
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#71 Early attempts at console humor?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#72 Early attempts at console humor?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#16 Early attempts at console humor?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003c.html#18 Early attempts at console humor?
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | lynn@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Internet trivia, 20th anniv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
Refed: **