Re: TCP/IP Terms

To: "Bill Cunningham" <billcu at citynet.net>
Subject: Re: TCP/IP Terms
From: Bill Sommerfeld <sommerfeld at orchard.arlington.ma.us>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 10:05:11 -0400
Cc: "Michel Py" <michel at ARNEILL-PY.SACRAMENTO.CA.US>, "Bob Braden" <braden at ISI.EDU>, ietf at ietf.org
In-reply-to: Message from "Bill Cunningham" <billcu@citynet.net> of "Mon, 30 Sep 2002 00:34:46 EDT." <000f01c2683a$b53a8ba0$6344903f@a>
Reply-to: sommerfeld at orchard.arlington.ma.us
Sender: owner-ietf at ietf.org

I fail to see why this is such a pressing issue.  To be completely
unambiguous, you need to name the protocol.  That identifies the
layer, and then "packet" or "datagram" or what-have-you is
unambiguous.

						- Bill

References:
- Re: TCP/IP Terms
  - From: Bill Cunningham

Prev by Date: Re: TCP/IP Terms
Next by Date: TCP/IP Terms
Previous by thread: Re: TCP/IP Terms
Next by thread: TCP/IP Terms
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: TCP/IP Terms

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.