> but I think we can say that it was _designed_ to survive a nuclear strike On what basis? What is the distinction between being "created" to survive a nuclear

> but I think we can say that it was _designed_ to survive a nuclear strike On what basis? What is the distinction between being "created" to survive a nuclear strike, and being "designed" to do so? > that was one of the reason that packet switching was invented (compared to the traditional, at the time, circuit switching). Yes, but I don't think it's a relevant one. Baran's papers kinda-sorta-maybe had some influence on ARPANET, but ARPANET mostly got packet-switching (and certainly the term "packet") from Donald Davies. If you look at the actual layout of ARPANET it wasn't very survivable (not much redundancy in the links) [0], compared to Baran's proposal [1]. Internetworking and "the Internet" as we know it came much later and was way beyond the point where Baran had any influence. [0]: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:ARPANET_maps https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:ARPANET_maps [1]: https://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/m.dodge/cybergeography/atlas/baran_nets_large.gif https://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/m.dodge/cyberge...