Re: Digital Cash Escrow

At 09:17 AM 4/11/96 -0500, John Deters wrote:
  Go dig up the manuals for a
>UNIVAC 1100, Jim.  Why do you think the RFCs for IP specifically refer to
>"octets" as opposed to "bytes"?  Because (they explain) "octet" is
>unambiguous, which then infers a certain ambiguity to "byte", now, doesn't it?

Wasn't the original development of the Internet done in the middle 1960's?  
And thus, does its development pre-date the coinage of the term, "byte"?  

If that's true, doesn't this answer your question?  The terminology used for 
the definition of a standard often tends to be frozen in time.  Lacking the 
term "byte" they used "octet."  The subsequent invention of the term "byte" 
would not have displaced the original term, at least in Internet standards.

jim bell writes:
>At 09:17 AM 4/11/96 -0500, John Deters wrote:
>  Go dig up the manuals for a
>>UNIVAC 1100, Jim.  Why do you think the RFCs for IP specifically refer to
>>"octets" as opposed to "bytes"?  Because (they explain) "octet" is
>>unambiguous, which then infers a certain ambiguity to "byte", now, doesn't it?
>
>Wasn't the original development of the Internet done in the middle 1960's?  
>And thus, does its development pre-date the coinage of the term, "byte"?  
>
>If that's true, doesn't this answer your question?  The terminology used for 
>the definition of a standard often tends to be frozen in time.  Lacking the 
>term "byte" they used "octet."  The subsequent invention of the term "byte" 
>would not have displaced the original term, at least in Internet standards.

Well, the earliest RFC is dated 4/7/69.  That's not really "middle 1960's".
The term "byte" seems to date from the mid-to-late 1950's.  Try again.