Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!shelby!portia!Jessica!morgan
From: morgan@Jessica.stanford.edu (RL "Bob" Morgan)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.lans
Subject: Re: Starlan/Ethernet compatibility
Message-ID: <3077@portia.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 21 Jun 89 20:02:43 GMT
References: <2009@wasatch.utah.edu> <2230006@hprnd.HP.COM> <1989Jun21.155639.21593@utzoo.uucp>
Sender: USENET News System <news@Portia.stanford.edu>
Reply-To: morgan@Jessica.UUCP (RL "Bob" Morgan)
Organization: Stanford University
Lines: 20


Henry Spencer writes:

> You know, I'd really like to see at least one vendor reply to that
> question with "we won't, since we think twisted-pair Ethernet is a
> dumb idea and totally unnecessary".  I don't expect that anyone's
> marketing department will let them get away with that, though...

Well, Henry, I invite you to come and submit a cost-effective Ethernet
design for our central campus, including connections to a few hundred
faculty offices.  If you want thin coax, remember to factor in the
cost of asbestos removal from every ceiling and crawlspace.  Don't
forget you'll also have to pass your thinnet design past the
architectural review board that won't allow molding to be run in the
hallways or in many of the rooms.  Can you see why twisted-pair
Ethernet makes sense to (some of) us?

 - RL "Bob" Morgan
   Networking Systems
   Stanford