
20 Years, One Standard: The Story of TCP/IP (2003) - behoove
http://www.cbi.umn.edu/iterations/spira.html
======
eternalban
ahem: Pouzin [1][3][4].

    
    
       Cerf: Incidentally, just for the record, the sliding window 
       flow control for TCP came straight out of discussions with 
       Louie Pouzin [ph?] and his people at INRIA.  So, in fact, 
       Gerard Le Lann [ph?], who was part of Louis Pouzin’s lab, 
       came to Stanford University in 1974 and participated in a 
       lot of the design work, and I remember Bob Metcalfe and 
       Le Lann and I sortof lying down of the living room in my house 
       in Palo Alto on this giant piece of paper, trying to sketch 
       what the state diagrams were for these protocols. 
    
       Nielson: Louis Pouzin arises all over the place? 
    
       Cerf: Absolutely. [2]
    

[1]:
[http://www.historyofcomputercommunications.info/Book/6/6.3-C...](http://www.historyofcomputercommunications.info/Book/6/6.3-CYCLADESNetworkLouisPouzin1-72.html)

[2]:[http://archive.computerhistory.org/resources/access/text/201...](http://archive.computerhistory.org/resources/access/text/2012/04/102658186-05-01-acc.pdf)

[3]:[http://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/155666](http://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/155666)

[4]:[http://pouzinsociety.org/about](http://pouzinsociety.org/about)

------
esaym

      Hello, would you like to hear a TCP joke?
      Yes, I'd like to hear a TCP joke.
      OK, I'll tell you a TCP joke.
      OK, I'll hear a TCP joke.
      Are you ready to hear a TCP joke?
      Yes, I am ready to hear a TCP joke.
      OK, I'm about to send the TCP joke. It will last 10 seconds, it has two characters, it does not have a setting, it ends with punchline.
      OK, I'm ready to hear the TCP joke that will last 10 seconds, has two characters, does not have a setting and will end with a punchline.
      I'm sorry, your connection has timed out... ...Hello, would you like to hear a TCP joke?

~~~
tarsinge
In the same vein I know a joke about UDP but you may not get it

~~~
CPLX
Yes, yes. And I would like to tell an HTTP joke but I'm feeling slightly
insecure about it.

------
kccqzy
Possibly not very on topic, but it might not be wise to call TCP a single
standard when it has become to complex nowadays. The tangled mess of RFCs
describing TCP has become so complex that an RFC is written to provide a
roadmap of TCP[0]. And that roadmap references more than 150 other RFCs.

[0]:
[https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7414](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7414)

~~~
simoncion
> And that roadmap references more than 150 other RFCs.

I count eight RFCs in the "Core Functionality" section. [0] I count ~26 RFCs
in the "Strongly Encouraged Enhancements" section. [1]

The remaining referenced RFCs are:

* Experimental extensions to TCP

* _IANA_ guidelines to follow when one is _extending_ TCP

* Documents referenced _only_ because of their historical significance

* Documents that provide implementation insights derived from TCP implementers' war stories over the years

Between eight and ~thirty-four RFCs is a damn sight smaller than "more than
150".

[0] This section is stuff that _must_ be implemented to speak TCP.

[1] That section is stuff that improves the performance and/or security of TCP
implementations, but is not required to interoperate with other TCP
implementations.

