Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!apple!oliveb!pyramid!csg
From: csg@pyramid.pyramid.com (Carl S. Gutekunst)
Newsgroups: news.sysadmin
Subject: Re: Size of the Internet vs. UUCP net
Message-ID: <68215@pyramid.pyramid.com>
Date: 29 Apr 89 18:06:53 GMT
References: <1989Apr24.203137.5835@utzoo.uucp> <163@ncis.tis.llnl.gov>
Reply-To: csg@pyramid.pyramid.com (Carl S. Gutekunst)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA
Lines: 23

In article <163@ncis.tis.llnl.gov> mcb@ncis.tis.llnl.gov (Michael C. Berch) writes:
>Informal estimates by people I know who are involved with the
>Internet Advisory Board and Internet Experimental Task Force put the
>number at more like 80,000-100,000.  This is for *connected* sites.

So this includes all the hosts on a local ethernet that can reach an Internet
gateway, then? I mean, Berkeley has something over 1,000 Sun workstations, and
those all can telnet or ftp to the Internet; so that makes them "Internet"
hosts?

In which case, using the UUCP maps as a count of hosts is probably off by an
order of magnitude. AMD mentioned 600 nodes hiding behind their lone UUCP map
entry. Pyramid has over 250. There are scads of companies with fully connected
workstations and timesharing systems whose only tie to the rest of the world
is their one UUCP host. 

And of course those networks all use RFC-822 and talk SMTP.

On the other hand, I suspect that 200,000 is too small for the Internet. Sun
Microsystems has -- what -- 6,000 nodes? 10,000? How about DEC's E-net? Apple
and Intel have joined the Internet now, too. Lots of nodes there.

<csg>