bzs@world.std.com (Barry Shein) (01/16/90)
>Which brings up an older question: it (sort of) makes sense, in a brit- >english kinda way, to name a vacuum cleaner a "Vax", but why would anyone >name a *computer* a "VAX"? Virtual Address eXtension. The story goes that it was originally designed as a box to be attached to PDP-11's to help solve the memory address squeeze on those boxes (basically 16-bit tho various tricks had been employed to extend that a little.) -- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die, Purveyors to the Trade | bzs@world.std.com 1330 Beacon St, Brookline, MA 02146, (617) 739-0202 | {xylogics,uunet}world!bzs
cfe+@andrew.cmu.edu (Craig F. Everhart) (01/17/90)
Stopgap: written at Stanford AI Lab before 1971 or so SOS (Son of Stopgap): written there in about 1972 at CMU: BILOS (Brother-in-law of Stopgap): font (``character set'') editor for the XGP, written about 1973; a bitmap editor SILOS (Sister-in-law of Stopgap): font editor for the GDP vector displays, also written about 1973; thus, a vector-graphics font editor. All dates should be taken with grains of salt; I arrived at CMU in 1974 and all these things had already been created, and Lee Erman (and others) had already brought SOS to CMU from SAIL.
thomas@mvac23.UUCP (Thomas Lapp) (01/17/90)
Why did they name it VAX? Well, as my .sig says it: VAX stands for
Virtual Address eXtension. I think it has to do with the fact that
it is an address extension to the PDP series... or maybe that it can
handle virtual address space in addition to real? I'm stabbing in the
dark here, though.
- tom
--
internet : mvac23!thomas@udel.edu or thomas%mvac23@udel.edu
uucp : {ucbvax,mcvax,psuvax1,uunet}!udel!mvac23!thomas
Europe Bitnet: THOMAS1@GRATHUN1
Location: Newark, DE, USA
Quote : Virtual Address eXtension. Is that like a 9-digit zip code?
--
The UUCP Mailerjones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) (01/17/90)
From article <153.UUL1.3#5131@mvac23.UUCP>, by thomas@mvac23.UUCP (Thomas Lapp): > > Why did they name it VAX? Well, as my .sig says it: VAX stands for > Virtual Address eXtension. I think it has to do with the fact that > it is an address extension to the PDP series... > It's not the PDP series, it's the PDP-11 series. The PDP-11 was a 16 bit machine, the PDP-8 was an unrelated 8 bit machine, the PDP-10 was an unrelated 36 bit machine, and the PDP-15 was an unrelated 18 bit machine. All were made by DEC, many used compatible hardware at some level, but there was not one PDP series in any useful sense. That aside, the PDP-11 went through many models. The high-end line of PDP-11's went as follows (in chronological order with parenthetic remarks about siblings that play no part in this story): PDP-11/20 -- the ancestral machine (OEM'd as the 11/15?) with no floating point, and no memory mapping. (the 11/15 was the OEM version of the 11/20?) PDP-11/45 -- faster, with segmented memory address mapping and a floating point unit that overlapped floating point computation with scalar computation. (the 11/40 was the OEM version of the 11/45?) (the 11/35 and 11/30 were introduced later?) PDP-11/70 -- as I understand it, this was basically a PDP-11/45 CPU with an expanded segmented memory mapping architecture and something other than the UNIBUS to connect the CPU and main memory. (the 11/05 was at about the same time?) Now for the folklore: PDP-11/78 -- a paper machine, intended to outperform the 11/70, with improved support for 32 bit operands. PDP-11/78 VAX -- The 11/78 with an improved memory mapping system allowing real demand paged virtual memory instead of the interesting but ultimately crippling idea of limiting each program to only a few segments of at most 64K bytes each (Intel, take note). VAX-11/780 -- a new name for the PDP-11/78 project, coined when it was realized that so many changes had been made to the original PDP-11 architecture that the pretense that the machine was upwards compatible was no longer credible. This is the story I heard in the 1970's, just after DEC lost its bid to sell my group at Illinois an 11/45. We got a MODCOMP IV, much more of a real 32 bit machine than any of the PDP-11's, and as far as I know, this story predates the delivery of the first VAX. Would someone from DEC please post the definitive family tree of the PDP-11 family and hang the VAX from it correctly? Doug Jones jones@herky.cs.uiowa.edu
stevedc@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Stephen D Carter) (01/17/90)
From article <457@ns-mx.uiowa.edu>, by jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879): > From article <153.UUL1.3#5131@mvac23.UUCP>, > by thomas@mvac23.UUCP (Thomas Lapp): >> > It's not the PDP series, it's the PDP-11 series. The PDP-11 was a 16 *** > bit machine, the PDP-8 was an unrelated 8 bit machine, the PDP-10 was , *** *** Eh? What's all this 'WAS'. I'm still using two for production work? Stephen D Carter, Systems Manager, The Administration, The University of Sussex, Sussex House, Falmer, BRIGHTON, BN1 9RH. UK Tel: +44 273 678203 (Direct line). Tel: +44 273 606755 (Switchboard). JANET : stevedc@uk.ac.sussex.syma ARPA : stevedc%sussex.syma@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk USENET: stevedc@syma.sussex.ac.uk UUCP : ...!mcvax!ukc!syma!stevedc BITNET: ukacrl!sussex.syma!stevedc or stevedc%sussex.syma@ukacrl
ercm20@castle.ed.ac.uk (Sam Wilson) (01/17/90)
[What does VAX stand for? Someone answered 'Virtual Address eXtension.] Virtual Address eXtension it is! The PDP 11/34 that I used to work on had an 18-bit real memory address. Some of the other 11s had 22-bit real memory addresses. The instruction set of all 11s has 16-bit addresses, referred to in the memory manager dox as the virtual address. So the virtual address space was SMALLER than the real address space, that's why, when they built the VAX as an upgrade to the 11, they decided it needed an eXtension! :-) Sam Wilson Dislaimer: Wisnae me, Jum! Edinburgh University
thomas@mvac23.UUCP (Thomas Lapp) (01/18/90)
jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes: > Would someone from DEC please post the definitive family tree of the PDP-11 > family and hang the VAX from it correctly? In industrial applications, there was also a PDP-11/xx series of computers but they had a different name (PROCESS-11?), since it was more of a process control machine. Anyone know what that was/is? - tom -- internet : mvac23!thomas@udel.edu or thomas%mvac23@udel.edu uucp : {ucbvax,mcvax,psuvax1,uunet}!udel!mvac23!thomas Europe Bitnet: THOMAS1@GRATHUN1 Location: Newark, DE, USA Quote : Virtual Address eXtension. Is that like a 9-digit zip code? -- The UUCP Mailer
toma@tekgvs.LABS.TEK.COM (Tom Almy) (01/19/90)
In article <457@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes: > VAX-11/780 -- a new name for the PDP-11/78 project, coined when it > was realized that so many changes had been made to > the original PDP-11 architecture that the pretense > that the machine was upwards compatible was no longer > credible. But it was upward compatible -- the VAX had a PDP-11 emulation mode which I made heavy use of. Also (and this is subject to dispute) the original VMS operating system ran in PDP-11 emulation mode. Well, maybe parts of it did. At any rate, we used UNIX. Tom Almy toma@tekgvs.labs.tek.com Standard Disclaimers Apply
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (01/19/90)
In article <457@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes: > (the 11/15 was the OEM version of the 11/20?) Correct. > (the 11/40 was the OEM version of the 11/45?) Nope, quite unrelated. (The 45's number has always been a bit of a mystery.) The 40 was a cheaper, slower, cut-down 45 -- the new "mid-range" model to replace the 20 -- and originated the brain-dead low-end version of the MMU. > (the 11/35 and 11/30 were introduced later?) The 35 was an OEM 40. Never heard of a 30. > PDP-11/70 -- as I understand it, this was basically a PDP-11/45 > CPU with an expanded segmented memory mapping > architecture and something other than the UNIBUS > to connect the CPU and main memory. There was a 45 hiding inside, but the MMU was new (faster as well as wider), there was a cache, there was a wider memory bus, and there were provisions for fast I/O devices going direct into memory without going through the Unibus. (These were often referred to as "Massbus" devices, but technically the Massbus was DEC's odd controller-to-peripheral bus rather than the controller-to-memory bus.) > (the 11/05 was at about the same time?) No, the 05 and the 45 were simultaneous -- 05 at low end, 45 at high end. > PDP-11/78 -- a paper machine, intended to outperform the 11/70, > with improved support for 32 bit operands. There were also several 11/7x models, never released, that were basically multiprocessor 70s. -- 1972: Saturn V #15 flight-ready| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 1990: birds nesting in engines | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
meissner@curley.osf.org (Michael Meissner) (01/19/90)
In article <1990Jan18.193530.22427@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes: >In article <457@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes: >> (the 11/15 was the OEM version of the 11/20?) > >Correct. > >> (the 11/40 was the OEM version of the 11/45?) > >Nope, quite unrelated. (The 45's number has always been a bit of a >mystery.) The 40 was a cheaper, slower, cut-down 45 -- the new "mid-range" >model to replace the 20 -- and originated the brain-dead low-end version >of the MMU. The '40 also had a completely different floating point unit. I remember well watching a V6 PDP-11/40 emulate the PDP-11/45 floating point via SIGFPU (you could watch the console lights to tell when a stat program was running). I remember one summer writing standalone code that needed to run on an LSI11-03, PDP-11/40, and a simulated PDP-11/70 running on a K?-10, and the only way I could mask out interrupts between each of the different PDP's was to push an address to jump to and the new interrupt mask on the stack and do a return from interrupt instruction (yech!). Michael Meissner email: meissner@osf.org phone: 617-621-8861 Open Software Foundation, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA Catproof is an oxymoron, Childproof is nearly so
ctp@cs.utexas.edu (Clyde T. Poole) (01/19/90)
Just for the record, TECO stands for Tape Editor and COrrector as it
was originally desigened to be a character editor for paper tapes.
ctp
-----
Clyde T. Poole -- Technical Coordinator, Facilities and Equipment
Univ. of Texas at Austin ARPA/CS/NSFnet: ctp@cs.utexas.edu
Dept. of Computer Sciences UUCP: {uunet,harvard}!cs.utexas.edu!ctp
Taylor Hall 2.124 BITNET: ctp@UTADNX SPAN: UTSPAN::UTADNX::CTP
Austin, TX 78712-1188 VOICE: (512) 471-9551 FAX: (512) 471-0548ted@tahoe.unr.edu (Ted Sarbin) (01/19/90)
In article <457@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes: >From article <153.UUL1.3#5131@mvac23.UUCP>, >by thomas@mvac23.UUCP (Thomas Lapp): >> >> Why did they name it VAX? Well, as my .sig says it: VAX stands for >> >It's not the PDP series, it's the PDP-11 series. The PDP-11 was a 16 >bit machine, the PDP-8 was an unrelated 8 bit machine, the PDP-10 was ^^^ The PDP-8 (and its predecessor the PDP-5) were 12-bit machines! >an unrelated 36 bit machine, and the PDP-15 was an unrelated 18 bit > >That aside, the PDP-11 went through many models. The high-end line of >PDP-11's went as follows (in chronological order with parenthetic remarks >about siblings that play no part in this story): > > PDP-11/20 -- the ancestral machine (OEM'd as the 11/15?) > with no floating point, and no memory mapping. Actually, the 11/20 had a memory mapping option called the KT11A. It was very complex, and made a basically slow machine much slower. Almost no one understood it and very few KT11As were sold. > PDP-11/45 -- faster, with segmented memory address mapping > and a floating point unit that overlapped > floating point computation with scalar > computation. > (the 11/40 was the OEM version of the 11/45?) The PDP-11/40 was NOT an OEM version of the 11/45. The OEM version of the 11/45 was the 11/45. The 11/40 was a microprogrammed, machine which was slower than the 11/45 but much faster than the 11/20. It had a memory mapping system which was a subset of the 11/45's. No second register set and no supervisor mode. It had its own floating point hardware. > (the 11/35 and 11/30 were introduced later?) The 11/35 was the OEM version of the 11/40 > PDP-11/70 -- as I understand it, this was basically a PDP-11/45 > CPU with an expanded segmented memory mapping > architecture and something other than the UNIBUS > to connect the CPU and main memory. It started out to be an 11/45 CPU but by the time the project was done there were stustantial differences. There was a cache betweent he CPU and the high speed bus. There was also a unibus mapping unit so that peripherals which only knew about 18bit addresses could be used with the 22bit addresses of the 11/70. There also were four mass bus adapters which provided a more efficient way for peripherals to access memory than over the unibus(tm). > (the 11/05 was at about the same time?) No, much earlier. The 11/05 replaced the 11/20 for OEMs. > >Now for the folklore: > PDP-11/10 -- announced at the same time as the PDP-11/20. Was an 11/20 like machine with 256 words of ram and 1k words of fusible link rom. Fortunately, none were ever sold. (There was later a low end end-user machine based on the 11/05 called the 11/10.) > > Doug Jones > jones@herky.cs.uiowa.edu Inappropriate text to fool postnews so that this will be posted. .. .. .. .. .. .. Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Y VAX? [was : TECO on a DEC-System 10] Summary: Expires: References: <153.UUL1.3#5131@mvac23.UUCP> <457@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> Sender: Reply-To: ted@tahoe.unr.edu (Ted Sarbin) Followup-To: Distribution: Organization: University of Nevada Reno Keywords: In article <457@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes: >From article <153.UUL1.3#5131@mvac23.UUCP>, >by thomas@mvac23.UUCP (Thomas Lapp): >> >> Why did they name it VAX? Well, as my .sig says it: VAX stands for >> >It's not the PDP series, it's the PDP-11 series. The PDP-11 was a 16 >bit machine, the PDP-8 was an unrelated 8 bit machine, the PDP-10 was ^^^ The PDP-8 (and its predecessor the PDP-5) was a 12-bit machine! >an unrelated 36 bit machine, and the PDP-15 was an unrelated 18 bit >machine. All were made by DEC, many used compatible hardware at some >level, but there was not one PDP series in any useful sense. > >That aside, the PDP-11 went through many models. The high-end line of >PDP-11's went as follows (in chronological order with parenthetic remarks >about siblings that play no part in this story): > > PDP-11/20 -- the ancestral machine (OEM'd as the 11/15?) > with no floating point, and no memory mapping. Actually, the 11/20 had a memory mapping option called the KT11A. It was very complex, and made a basically slow machine much slower. Almost no one understood it and very few KT11As were sold. > PDP-11/45 -- faster, with segmented memory address mapping > and a floating point unit that overlapped > floating point computation with scalar > computation. > (the 11/40 was the OEM version of the 11/45?) The PDP-11/40 was NOT an OEM version of the 11/45. The OEM version of the 11/45 was the 11/45. The 11/40 was a microprogrammed machine which was slower than the 11/45 but much faster than the 11/20. It had a memory mapping system which was a subset of the 11/45's. No second register set and no supervisor mode. It had its own floating point instruction set which also turned up on the LSI-11. > (the 11/35 and 11/30 were introduced later?) The 11/35 was the OEM version of the 11/40. > PDP-11/70 -- as I understand it, this was basically a PDP-11/45 > CPU with an expanded segmented memory mapping > architecture and something other than the UNIBUS > to connect the CPU and main memory. It started out to be an 11/45 CPU but by the time the project was done there were stustantial differences. There was a cache betweent he CPU and the high speed bus. There was also a unibus mapping unit so that peripherals which only knew about 18bit addresses could be used with the 22bit addresses of the 11/70. There also were four mass bus adapters which provided a more efficient way for peripherals to access memory than over the unibus(tm). > (the 11/05 was at about the same time?) No, much earlier. The 11/05 replaced the 11/20 for OEMs. > >Now for the folklore: > PDP-11/10 -- announced at the same time as the PDP-11/20. Was an 11/20 like machine with 256 words of ram and 1k words of fusible link rom. Fortunately, none were ever sold. (There was later a low-end end-user machine based on the 11/05 called the 11/10.) > > Doug Jones > jones@herky.cs.uiowa.edu
henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) (01/20/90)
In article <3479@tahoe.unr.edu> ted@tahoe.unr.edu (Ted Sarbin) writes: >The PDP-11/40 was NOT an OEM version of the 11/45. The OEM version of >the 11/45 was the 11/45. The 11/40 was a microprogrammed, machine >which was slower than the 11/45 ... Basically correct but slightly misleading. The 11/20 was the *only* non-microprogrammed 11, and indeed its design compromises account for some of the 11's oddities (e.g. INC and ADD #1 don't set condition codes the same way). The next generation -- 05 aka 10, 40, and 45 -- were all microcoded. -- 1972: Saturn V #15 flight-ready| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology 1990: birds nesting in engines | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu
gis@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Brian L. Stuart) (01/20/90)
In article <457@ns-mx.uiowa.edu> jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) writes: > [stuff already amply followed up] > Would someone from DEC please post the definitive family tree of the PDP-11 > family and hang the VAX from it correctly? Well, I'm not affiliated with DEC so I can't call this definitive, but it comes from C.G. Bell, et al's "Computer Engineering" so I consider it pretty reliable. By the way, you asked for it (well just the PDP-11 part) so here goes.... Year 18-bitters 12-bitters 16-bitters 36-bitters 1960 PDP-1 ------------------------------------------------------- | \ 1962 PDP-4 <--- LINC -------- \ 1963 | PDP-5 \ \ | 1964 PDP-7 | \ \ PDP-6 1965 | PDP-8 --\ | \ | 1966 | PDP-8/S LINC-8 | | 1967 | | | | KA10 1968 PDP-9 PDP-8/I,L | | | 1969 | | PDP-12 | | 1970 PDP-15 | PDP-14 PDP-11(/20) | 1971 | PDP-8/E / | \ | 1972 PDP-15/76 PDP-8/M - PDP-11/05 | PDP-11/45 -- KI10 1973 | / | PDP-11/40 | \ | | / | | | \ | 1975 PDP-8/A PDP-11/03 PDP-11/04 | | PDP-11/70 KL10 1976 | PDP-11/34 | PDP-11/55 | KL20 1977 VT78 | PDP-11/60 | 1978 PDP-11/34C VAX-11/780 A few notes: 1) The book was copyrighted 1978 so none of the later machines are mentioned, including 11/23, 11/24, 11/44, 11/73, 11/84 and later VAXen. 2) It's not really completely accurate to hang the VAX off of the 11/70, but: "As the PDP-11/70 design progressed, it was realized that for some large applications there would soon be a bad mismatch between the 64-Kbyte name space and the 4-Mbyte memory space."... "Thus, in 1974, architectural work began on extending the virtual address space of the PDP-11. Several proposals were made."... [The PDP-11/72 and/or PDP-11/74 that others have mentioned may be among these.] "In April 1975, work on a 32-bit architecture was started on VAX-11, with the goal of building a machine which was culturally compatible with PDP-11. The initial group, called VAXA, consisted of Gordon Bell, Peter Conklin, Dave Cutler, Bill Demmer, Tom Hastings, Richy Lary, Dave Rodgers, Stever Rothman, and Bill Strecker as the principle architect." [from Bell, et al., quoted without permission] While the VAX is always included in the PDP-11 family, I think that there are some good arguments for it being its own family, especially since they no longer include the PDP-11 compatibility mode. What do you think? 3) The PDP-11/03 is also known as the LSI-11 which was later updated to the LSI-11/2. (Technically it uses the LSI-11 processor and the system is known as the PDP-11/03). 4) It is interesting to note that the most successful family (the 11s) is the only family that wasn't really ancestrally related to any preceding family, but was done from scratch applying lessons learned from all others. (The original LINC was designed at MIT and DECs LINCs were based on it.) 5) The K?10 and KL20 processors were used in the DECSystem10 and DECSystem20 models and were sometimes referred to as the PDP-10. This is one area of DEC lore that I'm not real clear on. Could someone help add the details here? 6) The astute (and patient) reader will notice some missing machines: the PDP-2, PDP-3 and PDP-13. The PDP-2 was a number reserved for as 24 bit machine that was never build or, as far as I know, designed. The PDP-3 was designed as a 36 bit machine, but DEC never built it. but: "In 1960 a customer (Scientific Engineering Institute, Waltham, Massachusetts) built a PDP-3. It was later dismantled and given to M.I.T.; as of 1974, it was up and running in Oregon." As for the PDP-13? Triskaidekaphobia perhaps? Does anyone else know the story on this one? Ok, time for a little trivia (as if most of this weren't already). Now, no good computer information would be complete unless it involved 16 machines. So who remembers or knows about the PDP-16? Hint: it was fundamentally different from the PDPs 1-15. Brian L. Stuart Department of Computer Science Purdue University
mrc@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (Mark Crispin) (01/20/90)
In article <6551@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> gis@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Brian L. Stuart) writes: >1964 PDP-6 >1967 KA10 >1972 KI10 >1975 KL10 >1976 KL20 There was no such thing as the KL20, see below. Also: 1978 KS10, a small machine of approximately KA10 performance. DEC built four other 36-bit processors, but none ever saw customer ship. These were a machine I believe was called Unicorn (I know nothing about it other than the name), the Dolphin (a high end machine killed due to "VAX jealousy"), the KO10/Minnow (a desktop machine killed due to "VAX jealousy"), and the KC10/Jupiter (killed due to engineering incompetance which took the entire product line down with it). Xerox built at least two machines, called Maxc, for internal use. These were similar to a KA10 with a BBN pager. Foonly built a series of processors of approximately KS10 performance, with the exception of the F-1 which was reportedly the fastest machine of this architecture ever built. Systems Concepts built a series of processors of approximately 3 times KL10 performance. Besides their speed, they also consumed less power (about 750 watts) than any other machine of this architecture. >5) The K?10 and KL20 processors were used in the DECSystem10 and DECSystem20 > models and were sometimes referred to as the PDP-10. This is one > area of DEC lore that I'm not real clear on. Could someone help > add the details here? There was never such a thing as a KL20. The machines often mistakenly referred to (perhaps even in Gordon Bell's book) as KL20's were really KL10's with different exterior packaging. There were several models of KL10's. From the programmer's point of view, they all could be grouped together into two pseudo-models. "Model A" did not have extended addressing (30 bit address space of which 23 bits were implemented) while "Model B" did. Only "Model B" could run versions of TOPS-20 after 5.1, although DEC stopped supporting TOPS-20 for "Model A" after 4.1. From the user programmer's point of view, the KS10 was identical to a "Model A" KL10. The name PDP-10 refers to any CPU of the KA10/KI10/KL10/KS10 family; it is sometimes also used to refer to the machines of other manufacturers. The name "DECsystem-10" refers to a system composed of a PDP-10 CPU, a set of peripherals, and the TOPS-10 operating system. The name "DECSYSTEM-20" refers to a system composed of a KL10 or KS10 model PDP-10 CPU, a set of peripherals, and the TOPS-20 operating system. The reason for the difference in case is that DEC was sued by Singer, which at that time made a thing called a "system-10", for trademark violation. The settlement involved DEC promising not to use lower case "system" any more. _____ ____ ---+--- /-\ Mark Crispin Atheist & Proud _|_|_ _|_ || ___|__ / / 6158 Lariat Loop NE R90/6 pilot |_|_|_| /|\-++- |=====| / / Bainbridge Island, WA "Gaijin! Gaijin!" --|-- | |||| |_____| / \ USA 98110-2098 "Gaijin ha doko ka?" /|\ | |/\| _______ / \ +1 (206) 842-2385 "Niichan ha gaijin." / | \ | |__| / \ / \ mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU "Chigau. Gaijin ja nai. kisha no kisha ga kisha de kisha-shita Omae ha gaijin darou." sumomo mo momo, momo mo momo, momo ni mo iroiro aru "Iie, boku ha nihonjin." uraniwa ni wa niwa, niwa ni wa niwa niwatori ga iru "Souka. Yappari gaijin!"