TCP/IP Terms

To: <ietf at ietf.org>
Subject: TCP/IP Terms
From: "Bill Cunningham" <billcu at citynet.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 11:01:56 -0400
Sender: owner-ietf at ietf.org

I think the main goal is to compete with OSI's much more defined model. I
for one, don't want to see OSI overtake in any way TCP/IP, even in
definitions. But Bill S. is correct, all you have to do is mention the layer
and protocol. But there are so many new protocol's out there now, as I've
mentioned before PPP is an example written since rfc 1122-23. It is now its
own suite, with a family of link and network control protocols.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: TCP/IP Terms
  - From: Lloyd Wood
- Re: TCP/IP Terms
  - From: Robert Elz

Prev by Date: Re: TCP/IP Terms
Next by Date: RE: TCP/IP Terms
Previous by thread: Re: TCP/IP Terms
Next by thread: Re: 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.

TCP/IP Terms

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