> > | 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. > >
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Valdis . Kletnieks
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Dave Crocker
- TCP/IP Terms Bill Cunningham
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Bob Braden
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Bill Cunningham
- RE: TCP/IP Terms Michel Py
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Bill Cunningham
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Bill Sommerfeld
- TCP/IP Terms Bill Cunningham
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Robert Elz
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Bill Cunningham
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Randy Bush
- RE: TCP/IP Terms Michel Py
- RE: TCP/IP Terms Michel Py
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Bill Cunningham
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Joe Touch
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Ari Ollikainen
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Bill Cunningham
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Graham Klyne
- RE: TCP/IP Terms Christian Huitema
- Re: TCP/IP Terms Brian Bisaillon
