Internet pioneer Paul Baran dies

Packet switching? It'll never catch on


Paul Baran, one of the pioneers of packet-switched networking, the basis for the internet, has died in his home in California aged 84.

Baran devised the concept at the RAND Corporation, working under contract to the US Air Force. The idea of dispersing data around a mesh-like topology, that required the client node to reassemble it, was considered a violation of common sense (and physics) at the time, and was to be regarded a marginal and eccentric pursuit for the next 25 years. But Baran was able to justify it to the military, arguing that a dispersed and decentralised network would continue to function after centralised networks had failed.

A British engineer who had worked with Alan Turing, Donald Davies, also came up with the same architecture at the UK’s National Physics Laboratory in 1965, independent of Baran and unaware of his work. It was Davies who coined the term “packet-switching” and whose input helped shaped the first American implementation sponsored by the US military’s R&D division ARPA.

ARPANET went live in 1969, by which time Baran had left to found a thinktank and consultancy, the Institute for the Future. He subsequently founded a slew of technology companies including Packet Technologies and Metricom, and still continued to be actively involved in founding new start-ups – the most recent being Ethernet over wireline outfit Plaster Networks, and the IP TV infrastructure company GoBackTV. “I have all the fun an 11-year-old would have,” Baran told a reporter last year.

You can find an account of a recent Baran talk here, and a longer oral history here (pdf). ®

Similar topics


Other stories you might like

  • California's attempt to protect kids online could end adults' internet anonymity
    Websites may be forced to verify ages of visitors unless changes made

    California lawmakers met in Sacramento today to discuss, among other things, proposed legislation to protect children online. The bill, AB2273, known as The California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, would require websites to verify the ages of visitors.

    Critics of the legislation contend this requirement threatens the privacy of adults and the ability to use the internet anonymously, in California and likely elsewhere, because of the role the Golden State's tech companies play on the internet.

    "First, the bill pretextually claims to protect children, but it will change the Internet for everyone," said Eric Goldman, Santa Clara University School of Law professor, in a blog post. "In order to determine who is a child, websites and apps will have to authenticate the age of ALL consumers before they can use the service. No one wants this."

    Continue reading
  • Cable cut blamed for global four-hour internet disruption
    Google Cloud, OVHcloud say everything's getting back to normal, which is a shame

    Google Cloud and other internet service providers are recovering from network issues attributed to a network cable cut that began in the Middle East and Asia just before 0700 PDT (1400 UTC).

    The cable, Asia-Africa-Europe-1 (AAE-1), is a 25,000km submarine cable operated by a telecom consortium. It connects South East Asia to Europe by way of Egypt.

    According to Doug Madory, director of internet analysis at network monitoring biz Kentik, problems with AAE-1 affected internet connectivity in various countries in East Africa, Middle East and South Asia, including Pakistan, Somalia, Djibouti, and Saudi Arabia.

    Continue reading
  • US Supreme Court puts Texas social media law on hold
    Justices Roberts, Kavanaugh, Barrett help halt enforcement of HB 20

    The US Supreme Court on Tuesday reinstated the suspension of Texas' social-media law HB 20 while litigation to have the legislation declared unconstitutional continues.

    The law, signed in September by Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R), and promptly opposed, forbids large social media companies from moderating lawful content based on a "viewpoint," such as "smoking cures cancer" or "vaccines are poison" or hateful theories of racial superiority. Its ostensible purpose is to prevent internet giants from discriminating against conservative social media posts, something that studies indicate is not happening.

    Those fighting the law – industry groups and advocacy organizations – say the rules would require large social media services such as Facebook and Twitter to distribute "lawful but awful" content – hate speech, misinformation, and other dubious material. They argue companies have a First Amendment right to exercise editorial discretion for the content distributed on their platforms.

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022