I've posted it a little early because I'm excited but here is my reading and analysis of RFC-1, the very first official Request for Comments document and an important piece of internet history.

write.as/365-rfcs/rfc-1

I'm doing one of these a day for a year. You can follow along at @365-rfcs. I'll only be posting the really noteworthy ones on this account.

RFC-5 was an early (eventually abandoned) proposal for delivering rich applications over ARPANET. Specifically it was conceived as a way to connect to Doug Englebart's "mother of all demos" computing system remotely from a more typical OS! My writeup:

write.as/365-rfcs/rfc-5

You can follow along with my series commenting on the first 365 RFCs here @365-rfcs

RFC-7 led me down an unexpected computer history rabbit hole where I learned about GORDO, an operating system that was quickly renamed to... SEX. Yeah.

write.as/365-rfcs/rfc-7

You can follow along with my series commenting on the first 365 RFCs here @365-rfcs

RFC-15 is an important one: it's the initial proposal for Telnet! The first version of this program was written in late 1969 and it's a tool that I still occasionally use today, which is really amazing when you think about it.

write.as/365-rfcs/rfc-15

You can follow along with my series commenting on the first 365 RFCs here @365-rfcs

Okay, RFC-20 is here! This is the RFC that says "we are going to use ASCII for communicating between computers". Read on to learn about what a character encoding even IS and why it still affects our day to day internet experience. It'll be a very%20fun%20read, I promise.

write.as/365-rfcs/rfc-20

You can follow along with my series commenting on the first 365 RFCs here @365-rfcs

I contacted the Computer History Museum and paid them a small fee to have them scan the first 9 RFCs. I'm happy to say those scans are now online.

My post with interesting excerpts and things I learned looking at the scans: write.as/365-rfcs/update-scans

The listing of the scans in their catalog, with a link to the PDF: computerhistory.org/collection

You can follow along with my series commenting on the first 365 RFCs here @365-rfcs

Follow

In my comments on RFC-32 I go on a digression about how much I love the 555 timer integrated circuit chip. Also, computer clock nerds, please check my work and make sure I did the right calculations and estimates. I'm not so fluent in this stuff.

write.as/365-rfcs/rfc-32

You can follow along with my series commenting on the first 365 RFCs here @365-rfcs

Okay, so: based on my research I believe that RFC-69, from September 1970, is literally the first example of an internet person doing a reply-all and saying "please unsubscribe me from your list".

This is, of course, nice.

write.as/365-rfcs/rfc-69

@darius Surely 10E7 is not a hex value, but equivalent to 10e+7 = 10*10^7 = 100 billion? Although “1 part per 100 billion” error sounds too good, then.

@ryantouk That would not be the correct accuracy for a relatively inexpensive crystal clock, yeah.

@darius WAIT 10e+7 is 100 million, not billion, which is now 1000x more feasible. Oops!

@ryantouk yup, still it means 1 ms of clock drift a day which seems... overly ambitious

@darius 10e7 seems likely to be scientific notation: e7 == 10^7.

@darius kinda ambiguous, so I would tend to look for what the authors used in other documents. If they used scientific notation a lot, then that tips it. (I love this project so much, btw!)

@darius great read.

my arduino loses dozens of seconds per day so 1ms seems crazy for 1970. so i was googling around for this odd accuracy thing and i think it's not a percentage of error per day but the frequency error. but then i'm not sure how to interpret this either. found this ham radio blog using the same terminology febo.com/pages/stability/

@oberhamsi @darius Commercially-available TXCOs could do +/-5 pp 10^7 stability over a very wide temperature range at that point. That was available by the mid- to late-sixties. 1 pp 10^7 for an indoor stationary mount wouldn't have been out of the realm of normal.

@jond @oberhamsi @darius Yeah, I find that believable, after some research. If not a TCXO, then an OCXO for sure. Though I am not sure what can be considered "low cost" at the time.

I am also of the opinion that the 10E7 thing is a typo, and it is indeed meant to be 1E7, since 10E7 is neither normalized nor is the exponent aligned to a multiple of 3. I have personally made typos like that.

@jond @oberhamsi @darius Also, sorry for the lingo.

TCXO = Temperature Compensated Crystal Oscillator
OCXO = Oven Controlled Crystal Oscillator

@dratini0 @jond @oberhamsi @darius I thought that was strange too. Would have expected 1E8 or 100E6.

@darius I would really like to go back in time and tell that person that in nearly 50 years' time, someone will explain their unsubscribe request to the internet at large (which is a thing now), and will also make a sex joke about it.

@darius That's amazing. So the next question is, did that actually get distributed or did they just assign it a number and file it, later to be dug back out when they put them online?

@freakazoid It was copied and distributed. I've handled one of the originals personally.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Friend Camp

The decentralized web is about trust. You should only join Friend Camp if you personally trust Darius Kazemi with your social media data. You probably only have that level of trust if we are IRL friends or have been internet friends for a long time. Generally speaking this is a small, closed community. In the end, Darius is the arbiter of what is allowed here. If you don't have a good idea of the kind of behavior that flies with Darius, again, you probably shouldn't join this instance. In the interest of specificity, we do have a code of conduct and privacy policy which you should read.

Friend Camp features several modifications that were requested by our users.

  • you can log in via any subdomain, which means you can log in to multiple accounts in the same browser session (for example, log in once on friend.camp and then as another user on alt.friend.camp)
  • they are no longer called "toots", they are now "posts"
  • if you have a locked account and you get a follow request, a reminder appears under your "post" button (on normal Mastodon mobile it is otherwise buried in a sub-menu and you might not see it for a long time)
  • the emoji dropdown is a neutral smiley face instead of the cry-laughing smiley
  • @mentions are rendered as "@user" for a Friend Camp user and "@user@domain" for remote users. This helps clear up when you follow two people who have the same username on different servers.
  • there is a "never ask me again" checkbox on the confirmation for clearing your notifications -- more info here
  • images in a CW'ed post are collapsed behind the CW. When you expand the CW, you can see the whole image immediately. more info here
  • When an mp3 link is in a post, we also embed an inline mp3 player. git commit here
  • 500 characters of profile text git commit here, requested by @deerful

Important Bit from the Privacy Docs

If you want decent privacy (the info doesn't leave this server), the only way to do that is to set your account to private, only accept friend requests from other friend.camp users, and only ever @ mention other friend.camp users. Once you start talking to people on other servers, all bets are off. Any private message you send to someone on another server could be looked at by the admin of a different server. This is kind of like email: if you are on a private email server, and you send an unencrypted email to a gmail account, congrats, Google now has the content of that email. But also, you do this every day, so, hey. The internet!

Our beautiful icon is based on photo3idea_studio from www.flaticon.com, licensed CC 3.0 BY. It has been modified by @casey@friend.camp!