Mon, 12 Sep 88 09:52:16 EDT
I did not mean to imply even that the idea of a protocol
"stack" was acceptable to both parties in the debate. Actually, I
don't mean to limit the discussion to two parties, either. (Moot,
It is a tenet of the tcp/ip community that RFCs do not (to the
degree possible) define the implementation. On the other hand, many
RFCs contain pseudocode examples.
Perhaps the best starting point for the discussion of a new
model is with the successful implementations that work well in spite
of the "official" model. What can be said about the model that these
protocols actually represent? Of course, that's the way the tcp/ip
"model" came about. It wasn't necessary to "codify" something except
in response to another group that said "Here's our model."
None of what I say is new. I was thinking that there might be
common ground among the OSI layer model, the tcp/ip articulated model,
and some new elements learned lately to fill in the obvious gaps.
Something that can serve as a vocabulary and grammar, perhaps.
Kent England, Boston University
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 09 2000 - 14:43:15 GMT