Re: TCP/IP Terms

To: "Robert Elz" <kre at munnari.OZ.AU>
Subject: Re: TCP/IP Terms
From: "Bill Cunningham" <billcu at citynet.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 14:48:10 -0400
Cc: <ietf at ietf.org>
References: <000701c26892$52428400$5844903f@a> <19439.1033400635@munnari.OZ.AU>
Sender: owner-ietf at ietf.org


>
>   | I for one, don't want to see OSI overtake in any way TCP/IP, even in
>   | definitions.
>
> I'd actually much prefer for OSI to win the "war of the definitions".
> Rigid definitions tend to constrain thinking to fit into the patterns
> defined.   We're much better off just having a rough idea what things
> mean when it gets to this level.
>
> kre

I don't want to see TCP/IP be overtaken either. It's the root of the
Internet, not OSI or anything else. Maybe TCP/IP needs to be more
competative.
>
>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: TCP/IP Terms
  - From: Randy Bush

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

Re: TCP/IP Terms

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