`
`Barry M. Leiner, Vinton G. Cerf, David D. Clark,
`Robert E. Kahn, Leonard Kleinrock, Daniel C.
`Lynch, Jon Postel, Larry G. Roberts, Stephen
`Wolff.
`
`Introduction
`
`The Internet has revolutionized the computer and communications world like nothing before. The
`invention of the telegraph, telephone, radio, and computer set the stage for this unprecedented
`integration of capabilities. The Internet is at once a world-wide broadcasting capability, a
`mechanism for information dissemination, and a medium for collaboration and interaction between
`
`individuals and their computers without regard for geographic location. The Internet represents
`one of the most successful examples of the benefits of sustained investment and commitment to
`research and development of information infrastructure. Beginning with the early research in
`packet switching, the govemment, industry and academia have been partners in evolving and
`deploying this exciting new technology. Today, terms like "b|einer@computer.org" and
`"http:/Iwww.acm.org" trip lightly off the tongue of the random person on the street.1
`
`This is intended to be a brief, necessarily cursory and incomplete history. Much material currently
`exists about the Internet, covering history, technology, and usage. A trip to almost any bookstore
`will find shelves of material written about the Internet:
`
`In this paper,3 several of us involved in the development and evolution of the Internet share our
`views of its origins and history. This history revolves around four distinct aspects. There is the
`technological evolution that began with earty research on packet switching and the ARPANET
`(and related technologies), and where current research continues to expand the horizons of the
`infrastructure along several dimensions, such as scale, performance, and higher-level
`functionality. There is the operations and management aspect of a global and complex operational
`infrastructure. There is the social aspect, which resulted in a broad community of Intemauts
`working together to create and evolve the technology. And there is the commercialization aspect,
`resulting in an extremely effective transition of research results into a broadly deployed and
`available information infrastructure.
`
`The Internet today is a widespread information infrastructure, the initial prototype of what is often
`called the National (or Global or Galactic) Information Infrastructure. Its history is complex and
`involves many aspects - technological, organizational, and community. And its influence reaches
`not only to the technical fields of computer communications but throughout society as we move
`toward increasing use of online tools to accomplish electronic commerce, information acquisition,
`and community operations.
`
`The Internet is at
`
`once a world-wide
`
`broadcasting
`
`capability, a
`mechanism for
`
`information
`
`dissemination, and a
`medium for
`
`collaboration and
`
`interaction between
`
`individuals and their
`
`computers without
`regard for geographic
`locafion.
`
`wvvw. i nternetsociety.org
`
`
`
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 1
`
`
`
`Origins of the Internet
`The first recorded description of the social interactions that could be enabled through networking
`was a series of memos written by J.C.R. Licklider of MIT in August 1962 discussing his "Galactic
`Network" concept. He envisioned a globally interconnected set of computers through which
`everyone could quickly access data and programs from any site. In spirit, the concept was very
`much like the Internet of today. Licklider was the first head of the computer research program at
`
`DARPA,‘ starting in October 1962. While at DARPA he convinced his successors at DARPA, Ivan
`Sutherland, Bob Taylor, and MIT researcher Lawrence G. Roberts, of the importance of this
`networking concept.
`
`Leonard Kleinrock at MIT published the first paper on packet switching theory in July 1961 and the
`first book on the subject in 1964. Kleinrock convinced Roberts of the theoretical feasibility of
`communications using packets rather than circuits, which was a major step along the path
`towards computer networking. The other key step was to make the computers talk together. To
`explore this, in 1965 working with Thomas Merrill, Roberts connected the TX-2 computer in Mass.
`to the Q-32 in California with a low speed dial-up telephone line creating the first (however small)
`wide-area computer network ever built. The result of this experiment was the realization that the
`time-shared computers could work well together, running programs and retrieving data as
`necessary on the remote machine, but that the circuit switched telephone system was totally
`inadequate for the job. K|einrock's conviction of the need for packet switching was confirmed.
`
`In late 1966 Roberts went to DARPA to develop the computer network concept and quickly put
`together his plan for the "ARPANET", publishing it in 1967. At the conference where he presented
`the paper, there was also a paper on a packet network concept from the UK by Donald Davies
`and Roger Scantlebury of NPL. Scantlebury told Roberts about the NPL work as well as that of
`Paul Baran and others at RAND. The RAND group had written a paper on packet switching
`networks for secure voice in the military in 1964. It happened that the work at MIT (1961-1967), at
`RAND (1962-1965), and at NPL (1964-1967) had all proceeded in parallel without any of the
`researchers knowing about the other work. The word "packet" was adopted from the work at NPL
`and the proposed line speed to be used in the ARPANET design was upgraded from 2.4 kbps to
`50 kbps.5
`
`In August 1968, after Roberts and the DARPA funded community had refined the overall structure
`and specifications for the ARPANET, an RFQ was released by DARPA for the development of
`one of the key components, the packet switches called Interface Message Processors (|MP's).
`The RFQ was won in December 1968 by a group headed by Frank Heart at Bolt Beranek and
`Newman (BBN). As the BBN team worked on the |MP's with Bob Kahn playing a major role in the
`overall ARPANET architectural design, the network topology and economics were designed and
`optimized by Roberts working with Howard Frank and his team at Network Analysis Corporation,
`and the network measurement system was prepared by K|einrock's team at UCLA.°
`
`Due to K|einrock‘s early development of packet switching theory and his focus on analysis, design
`and measurement, his Network Measurement Center at UCLA was selected to be the first node
`on the ARPANET. All this came together in September 1969 when BBN installed the first IMP at
`UCLA and the first host computer was connected. Doug Enge|bart's project on "Augmentation of
`Human |nte||ect" (which included NLS, an early hypertext system) at Stanford Research Institute
`(SRI) provided a second node. SRI supported the Network Information Center, led by Elizabeth
`(Jake) Feinler and including functions such as maintaining tables of host name to address
`mapping as well as a directory of the RFC's.
`
`www. i nternetsociety.org
`
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 2
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 2
`
`
`
`One month later, when SRI was connected to the ARPANET, the first host-to-host message was
`sent from K|einrock's laboratory to SRI. Two more nodes were added at UC Santa Barbara and
`University of Utah. These last two nodes incorporated application visualization projects, with Glen
`Culler and Burton Fried at UCSB investigating methods for display of mathematical functions
`using storage displays to deal with the problem of refresh over the net, and Robert Taylor and
`Ivan Sutherland at Utah investigating methods of 3-D representations over the net. Thus, by the
`end of 1969, four host computers were connected together into the initial ARPANET, and the
`budding Internet was off the ground. Even at this early stage, it should be noted that the
`networking research incorporated both work on the underlying network and work on how to utilize
`the network. This tradition continues to this day.
`
`Computers were added quickly to the ARPANET during the following years, and work proceeded
`on completing a functionally complete Host-to-Host protocol and other network software. In
`December 1970 the Network Working Group (NWG) working under S. Crocker finished the initial
`ARPAN ET Host-to-Host protocol, called the Network Control Protocol (NCP). As the ARPANET
`sites completed implementing NCP during the period 1971-1972, the network users finally could
`begin to develop applications.
`
`In October 1972, Kahn organized a large, very successful demonstration of the ARPANET at the
`International Computer Communication Conference (ICCC). This was the first public
`demonstration of this new network technology to the public. It was also in 1972 that the initial "hot"
`application, electronic mail, was introduced. In March Ray Tomlinson at BBN wrote the basic
`email message send and read software, motivated by the need of the ARPANET developers for
`an easy coordination mechanism. In July, Roberts expanded its utility by writing the first email
`utility program to list, selectively read, file, fonrvard, and respond to messages. From there email
`took off as the largest network application for over a decade. This was a harbinger of the kind of
`activity we see on the World Wide Web today, namely, the enormous growth of all kinds of
`"peop|e-to-peop|e" traffic.
`
`The Initial lnternetting Concepts
`The original ARPANET grew into the Internet. Internet was based on the idea that there would be
`multiple independent networks of rather arbitrary design, beginning with the ARPANET as the
`pioneering packet switching network, but soon to include packet satellite networks, ground-based
`packet radio networks and other networks. The Internet as we now know it embodies a key
`underlying technical idea, namely that of open architecture networking. In this approach, the
`choice of any individual network technology was not dictated by a particular network architecture
`but rather could be selected freely by a provider and made to interwork with the other networks
`through a meta-level "|nternetvvorking Architecture". Up until that time there was only one general
`method for federating networks. This was the traditional circuit switching method where networks
`would interconnect at the circuit level, passing individual bits on a synchronous basis along a
`portion of an end-to-end circuit between a pair of end locations. Recall that Kleinrock had shown
`in 1961 that packet switching was a more efficient switching method. Along with packet switching,
`special purpose interconnection arrangements between networks were another possibility. While
`there were other limited ways to interconnect different networks, they required that one be used
`as a component of the other, rather than acting as a peer of the other in offering end-to-end
`service.
`
`In an open-architecture network, the individual networks may be separately designed and
`developed and each may have its own unique interface which it may offer to users and/or other
`providers. including other Internet providers. Each network can be designed in accordance with
`
`www. i nternetsociety.org
`
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 3
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 3
`
`
`
`the specific environment and user requirements of that network. There are generally no
`constraints on the types of network that can be included or on their geographic scope, although
`certain pragmatic considerations will dictate what makes sense to offer.
`
`The idea of open-architecture networking was first introduced by Kahn shortly after having arrived
`at DARPA in 1972. This work was originally part of the packet radio program, but subsequently
`became a separate program in its own right. At the time, the program was called "lnternetting".
`Key to making the packet radio system work was a reliable end-end protocol that could maintain
`effective communication in the face of jamming and other radio interference, or withstand
`intermittent blackout such as caused by being in a tunnel or blocked by the local terrain. Kahn first
`contemplated developing a protocol local only to the packet radio network, since that would avoid
`having to deal with the multitude of different operating systems, and continuing to use NCP.
`
`However, NCP did not have the ability to address networks (and machines) further downstream
`than a destination IMP on the ARPANET and thus some change to NCP would also be required.
`(The assumption was that the ARPANET was not changeable in this regard). NCP relied on
`ARPANET to provide end-to-end reliability. If any packets were lost, the protocol (and presumably
`any applications it supported) would come to a grinding halt. In this model NCP had no end-end
`host error control, since the ARPANET was to be the only network in existence and it would be so
`reliable that no error control would be required on the part of the hosts. Thus, Kahn decided to
`develop a new version of the protocol which could meet the needs of an open-architecture
`network environment. This protocol would eventually be called the Transmission Control
`Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP). While NCP tended to act like a device driver, the new protocol
`would be more like a communications protocol.
`
`Four ground rules were critical to Kahn's early thinking:
`
`-
`
`o
`
`-
`
`-
`
`Each distinct network would have to stand on its own and no internal changes could be
`required to any such network to connect it to the Internet.
`Communications would be on a best effort basis. If a packet didn't make it to the final
`destination, it would shortly be retransmitted from the source.
`Black boxes would be used to connect the networks; these would later be called gateways
`and routers. There would be no information retained by the gateways about the individual
`flows of packets passing through them, thereby keeping them simple and avoiding
`complicated adaptation and recovery from various failure modes.
`There would be no global control at the operations level.
`
`Other key issues that needed to be addressed were:
`
`0
`
`o
`
`-
`
`o
`
`o
`
`Algorithms to prevent lost packets from permanently disabling communications and enabling
`them to be successfully retransmitted from the source.
`Providing for host-to-host "pipelining" so that multiple packets could be enroute from source
`to destination at the discretion of the participating hosts, if the intermediate networks allowed
`it.
`
`Gateway functions to allow it to forward packets appropriately. This included interpreting IP
`headers for routing, handling interfaces, breaking packets into smaller pieces if necessary,
`etc.
`
`The need for end-end checksums, reassembly of packets from fragments and detection of
`duplicates, if any.
`The need for global addressing
`
`www. i nternetsociety.org
`
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 4
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 4
`
`
`
`-
`-
`c
`
`Techniques for host-to-host flow control.
`Interfacing with the various operating systems
`There were also other concerns, such as implementation efficiency, internetwork
`performance, but these were secondary considerations at first.
`
`Kahn began work on a communications-oriented set of operating system principles while at BBN
`and documented some of his early thoughts in an internal BBN memorandum entitled
`"Communications Principles for Operating Systems". At this point he realized it would be
`necessary to learn the implementation details of each operating system to have a chance to
`embed any new protocols in an efficient way. Thus, in the spring of 1973, after starting the
`internetting effort, he asked Vint Cerf (then at Stanford) to work with him on the detailed design of
`the protocol. Cerf had been intimately involved in the original NCP design and development and
`already had the knowledge about interfacing to existing operating systems. So armed with Kahn's
`architectural approach to the communications side and with Cerf‘s NCP experience, they teamed
`up to spell out the details of what became TCPIIP.
`
`The give and take was highly productive and the first written version’ of the resulting approach
`was distributed at a special meeting of the International Network Working Group (INWG) which
`had been set up at a conference at Sussex University in September 1973. Cerf had been invited
`to chair this group and used the occasion to hold a meeting of INWG members who were heavily
`represented at the Sussex Conference.
`
`Some basic approaches emerged from this collaboration between Kahn and Cerf:
`
`0
`
`-
`
`o
`
`-
`
`Communication between two processes would logically consist of a very long stream of bytes
`(they called them octets). The position of any octet in the stream would be used to identify it.
`Flow control would be done by using sliding windows and acknowledgments (acks). The
`destination could select when to acknowledge and each ack returned would be cumulative for
`all packets received to that point.
`It was left open as to exactly how the source and destination would agree on the parameters
`of the windowing to be used. Defaults were used initially.
`Although Ethernet was under development at Xerox PARC at that time, the proliferation of
`LANs were not envisioned at the time, much less PCs and workstations. The original model
`was national level networks like ARPANET of which only a relatively small number were
`expected to exist. Thus a 32 bit IP address was used of which the first 3 bits signified the
`network and the remaining 24 bits designated the host on that network. This assumption, that
`256 networks would be sufficient for the foreseeable future, was clearly in need of
`reconsideration when LANs began to appear in the late 1970s.
`
`The original Cerf/Kahn paper on the Internet described one protocol, called TCP, which provided
`all the transport and fonrvarding services in the lntemet. Kahn had intended that the TCP protocol
`support a range of transport services, from the totally reliable sequenced delivery of data (virtual
`circuit model) to a datagram service in which the application made direct use of the underlying
`network service, which might imply occasional lost, corrupted or reordered packets. However, the
`initial effort to implement TCP resulted in a version that only allowed for virtual circuits. This model
`worked fine for file transfer and remote login applications, but some of the early work on advanced
`network applications, in particular packet voice in the 1970s, made clear that in some cases
`packet losses should not be corrected by TCP, but should be left to the application to deal with.
`This led to a reorganization of the original TCP into two protocols, the simple IP which provided
`only for addressing and forwarding of individual packets, and the separate TCP, which was
`
`www. i nternetsociety.org
`
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 5
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 5
`
`
`
`concerned with service features such as flow control and recovery from lost packets. For those
`applications that did not want the services of TCP, an alternative called the User Datagram
`Protocol (UDP) was added in order to provide direct access to the basic service of IP.
`
`A major initial motivation for both the ARPANET and the Internet was resource sharing - for
`example allowing users on the packet radio networks to access the time sharing systems attached
`to the ARPANET. Connecting the two together was far more economical that duplicating these
`very expensive computers. However, while file transfer and remote login (Telnet) were very
`important applications, electronic mail has probably had the most significant impact of the
`innovations from that era. Email provided a new model of how people could communicate with
`each other, and changed the nature of collaboration, first in the building of the Internet itself (as is
`discussed below) and later for much of society.
`
`There were other applications proposed in the early days of the Internet, including packet based
`voice communication (the precursor of Internet telephony), various models of file and disk sharing,
`and early "worm" programs that showed the concept of agents (and, of course, viruses). A key
`concept of the Internet is that it was not designed for just one application, but as a general
`infrastructure on which new applications could be conceived, as illustrated later by the emergence
`of the World Wide Web. It is the general purpose nature of the service provided by TCP and IP
`that makes this possible.
`
`Proving the Ideas
`DARPA let three contracts to Stanford (Cerf), BBN (Ray Tomlinson) and UCL (Peter Kirstein) to
`implement TCP/IP (it was simply called TCP in the Cerf/Kahn paper but contained both
`components). The Stanford team, led by Cerf, produced the detailed specification and within
`about a year there were three independent implementations of TCP that could interoperate.
`
`This was the beginning of long term experimentation and development to evolve and mature the
`Internet concepts and technology. Beginning with the first three networks (ARPANET, Packet
`Radio, and Packet Satellite) and their initial research communities, the experimental environment
`has grown to incorporate essentially every form of network and a very broad-based research and
`development community. [REK78] With each expansion has come new challenges.
`
`The early implementations of TCP were done for large time sharing systems such as Tenex and
`TOPS 20. When desktop computers first appeared, it was thought by some that TCP was too big
`and complex to run on a personal computer. David Clark and his research group at MIT set out to
`show that a compact and simple implementation of TCP was possible. They produced an
`implementation, first for the Xerox Alto (the early personal workstation developed at Xerox PARC)
`and then for the IBM PC. That implementation was fully interoperable with other TCPs, but was
`tailored to the application suite and performance objectives of the personal computer, and showed
`that workstations, as well as large time-sharing systems, could be a part of the Internet. In 1976,
`Kleinrock published the first book on the ARPANET. It included an emphasis on the complexity of
`protocols and the pitfalls they often introduce. This book was influential in spreading the lore of
`packet switching networks to a very wide community.
`
`Widespread development of LANS, PCs and workstations in the 1980s allowed the nascent
`Internet to flourish. Ethernet technology, developed by Bob Metcalfe at Xerox PARC in 1973, is
`now probably the dominant network technology in the Internet and PCs and workstations the
`dominant computers. This change from having a few networks with a modest number of time-
`shared hosts (the original ARPANET model) to having many networks has resulted in a number of
`
`www. i nternetsociety.org
`
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 6
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 6
`
`
`
`new concepts and changes to the underlying technology. First, it resulted in the definition of three
`network classes (A, B, and C) to accommodate the range of networks. Class A represented large
`national scale networks (small number of networks with large numbers of hosts); Class B
`represented regional scale networks; and Class C represented local area networks (large number
`of networks with relatively few hosts).
`
`A major shift occurred as a result of the increase in scale of the Internet and its associated
`management issues. To make it easy for people to use the network, hosts were assigned names,
`so that it was not necessary to remember the numeric addresses. Originally, there were a fairly
`limited number of hosts, so it was feasible to maintain a single table of all the hosts and their
`associated names and addresses. The shift to having a large number of independently managed
`networks (e.g., LANs) meant that having a single table of hosts was no longer feasible, and the
`Domain Name System (DNS) was invented by Paul Mockapetris of USCIISI. The DNS permitted a
`scalable distributed mechanism for resolving hierarchical host names (e.g. wvvw.acm.org) into an
`Internet address.
`
`The increase in the size of the Internet also challenged the capabilities of the routers. Originally,
`there was a single distributed algorithm for routing that was implemented unifonnly by all the
`routers in the Internet. As the number of networks in the Internet exploded, this initial design could
`not expand as necessary, so it was replaced by a hierarchical model of routing, with an Interior
`Gateway Protocol (IGP) used inside each region of the Internet, and an Exterior Gateway Protocol
`(EGP) used to tie the regions together. This design permitted different regions to use a different
`IGP, so that different requirements for cost, rapid reconfiguration, robustness and scale could be
`accommodated. Not only the routing algorithm, but the size of the addressing tables, stressed the
`capacity of the routers. New approaches for address aggregation, in particular classless inter-
`domain routing (CIDR), have recently been introduced to control the size of router tables.
`
`As the Internet evolved, one of the major challenges was how to propagate the changes to the
`software, particularly the host software. DARPA supported UC Berkeley to investigate
`modifications to the Unix operating system, including incorporating TCP/IP developed at BBN.
`Although Berkeley later rewrote the BBN code to more efficiently fit into the Unix system and
`kernel, the incorporation of TCP/IP into the Unix BSD system releases proved to be a critical
`element in dispersion of the protocols to the research community. Much of the CS research
`community began to use Unix BSD for their day-to-day computing environment. Looking back, the
`strategy of incorporating Internet protocols into a supported operating system for the research
`community was one of the key elements in the successful widespread adoption of the Internet.
`
`One of the more interesting challenges was the transition of the ARPANET host protocol from
`NCP to TCP/IP as of January 1, 1983. This was a "flag-day" style transition, requiring all hosts to
`convert simultaneously or be left having to communicate via rather ad-hoc mechanisms. This
`transition was carefully planned within the community over several years before it actually took
`place and went surprisingly smoothly (but resulted in a distribution of buttons saying ''I survived
`the TCP/IP transition").
`
`TCP/IP was adopted as a defense standard three years earlier in 1980. This enabled defense to
`begin sharing in the DARPA Internet technology base and led directly to the eventual partitioning
`of the military and non- military communities. By 1983, ARPANET was being used by a significant
`number of defense R&D and operational organizations. The transition of ARPANET from NCP to
`TCP/IP permitted it to be split into a MILNET supporting operational requirements and an
`ARPANET supporting research needs.
`
`www. i nternetsociety.org
`
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 7
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 7
`
`
`
`Thus, by 1985, Internet was already well established as a technology supporting a broad
`community of researchers and developers, and was beginning to be used by other communities
`for daily computer communications. Electronic mail was being used broadly across several
`communities, often with different systems, but interconnection between different mail systems was
`demonstrating the utility of broad based electronic communications between people.
`
`Transition to Widespread Infrastructure
`At the same time that the Intemet technology was being experimentally validated and widely used
`amongst a subset of computer science researchers, other networks and networking technologies
`were being pursued. The usefulness of computer networking - especially electronic mail -
`demonstrated by DARPA and Department of Defense contractors on the ARPANET was not lost
`on other communities and disciplines, so that by the mid-1970s computer networks had begun to
`spring up wherever funding could be found for the purpose. The U.S. Department of Energy (DoE)
`established MFENet for its researchers in Magnetic Fusion Energy, whereupon DoE's High
`Energy Physicists responded by building HEPNet. NASA Space Physicists followed with SPAN,
`and Rick Adrion, David Farber, and Larry Landweber established CSNET for the (academic and
`industrial) Computer Science community with an initial grant from the U.S. National Science
`Foundation (NSF). AT&T's free-wheeling dissemination of the UNIX computer operating system
`spawned USENET, based on UNIX‘ built-in UUCP communication protocols, and in 1981 Ira
`Fuchs and Greydon Freeman devised BITNET, which linked academic mainframe computers in
`an "email as card images" paradigm.
`
`With the exception of BITNET and USENET, these early networks (including ARPANET) were
`purpose-built - i.e., they were intended for, and largely restricted to, closed communities of
`scholars; there was hence little pressure for the individual networks to be compatible and, indeed,
`they largely were not. In addition, alternate technologies were being pursued in the commercial
`sector, including XNS from Xerox, DECNet, and IBM's SNA.8 It remained for the British JANET
`(1984) and U.S. NSFNET (1985) programs to explicitly announce their intent to serve the entire
`higher education community, regardless of discipline. Indeed, a condition for a U.S. university to
`receive NSF funding for an Internet connection was that "... the connection must be made
`available to ALL qualified users on campus."
`
`In 1985, Dennis Jennings came from Ireland to spend a year at NSF leading the NSFNET
`program. He worked with the community to help NSF make a critical decision - that TCPIIP would
`be mandatory for the NSFNET program. When Steve Wolff took over the NSFNET program in
`1986, he recognized the need for a wide area networking infrastructure to support the general
`academic and research community, along with the need to develop a strategy for establishing
`such infrastructure on a basis ultimately independent of direct federal funding. Policies and
`strategies were adopted (see below) to achieve that end.
`
`NSF also elected to support DARPA‘s existing Internet organizational infrastructure, hierarchically
`arranged under the (then) Internet Activities Board (IAB). The public declaration of this choice was
`the joint authorship by the lAB‘s Internet Engineering and Architecture Task Forces and by NSF's
`Network Technical Advisory Group of RFC 985 (Requirements for Internet Gateways ), which
`formally ensured interoperability of DARPA‘s and NSF's pieces of the Internet.
`
`In addition to the selection of TCPIIP for the NSFNET program, Federal agencies made and
`implemented several other policy decisions which shaped the Internet of today.
`
`www. i nternetsociety.org
`
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 8
`Google Exhibit 1027, p. 8
`
`
`
`-
`
`0
`
`o
`
`0
`
`-
`
`-
`
`-
`
`0
`
`Federal agencies shared the cost of common infrastructure, such as trans-oceanic circuits.
`They also jointly supported "managed interconnection points" for interagency traffic; the
`Federal Internet Exchanges (FIX-E and FIX-W) built for this purpose served as models for the
`Network Access Points and ''*IX'' facilities that are prominent features of today's Internet
`architecture.
`
`To coordinate this sharing, the Federal Networking Councils was formed. The FNC also
`cooperated with other international organizations, such as RARE in Europe, through the
`Coordinating Committee on Intercontinental Research Networking, CCIRN, to coordinate
`Internet support of the research community worldwide.
`This sharing and cooperation between agencies on Internet-related issues had a long history.
`An unprecedented 1981 agreement between Farber, acting for CSNET and the NSF, and
`DARPA's Kahn, permitted CSNET traffic to share ARPANET infrastructure on a statistical and
`no-metered-settlements basis.
`
`Subsequently, in a similar mode, the NSF encouraged its regional (initially academic)
`networks of the NSFNET to seek commercial, non-academic customers, expand their
`facilities to serve them, and exploit the resulting economies of scale to lower subscription
`costs for all.
`
`On the NSFNET Backbone - the national-scale segment of the NSFNET - NSF enforced an
`"Acceptable Use Policy" (AUP) which prohibited Backbone usage for purposes "not in support
`of Research and Education." The predictable (and intended) result of encouraging
`commercial network traffic at the local and regional level, while denying its access to national-
`scale transport, was to stimulate the emergence and/or growth of "private", competitive, long-
`haul networks such as PSI, UUNET, ANS CO+RE, and (later) others. This process of
`privately-financed augmentation for commercial uses was thrashed out starting in 1988 in a
`series of NSF-initiated conferences at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government on "The
`Commercialization and Privatization of the Internet" - and on the "com-priv" list on the net
`itself.
`
`In 1988, a National Research Council committee, chaired by Kleinrock and with Kahn and
`Cla