Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!chaph.usc.edu!phakt.usc.edu!tli
From: tli@phakt.usc.edu (Tony Li)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: Vote for comp.dcom.brouters
Message-ID: <7429@chaph.usc.edu>
Date: 16 Jan 90 18:59:16 GMT
References: <1263.25b1dee3@csc.anu.oz> <7400@chaph.usc.edu> <6937@pdn.paradyne.com>
Sender: news@chaph.usc.edu
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Lines: 23

In article <6937@pdn.paradyne.com> dixon@gumby.paradyne.com (0000-Tom Dixon) writes:
    >me: Perhaps a better solution is comp.dcom.mans? 
                                                ^^^^
    Whats a man?
    
A metropolitan area network.  We could also use comp.dcom.wans for
Wide Area Networks.

    I would think that comp.dcom.hardware is too general, since we want to
    limit the scope to LAN hardware.  Is comp.dcom.lans.hardware too long?
    
I don't think that it should be under the 'LAN' hierarchy at all.
While ciscos are usually connected to a LAN of some sort, they are
frequently used to build larger networks (e.g. Los Nettos, Cerfnet).

    And if comp.*.novell gets approved, then whats left for comp.dcom.lans?

Appletalk, Vines, etc.  All of the stuff that's there now.  

Tony Li - USC Computer Science Department
Internet: tli@usc.edu Uucp: usc!tli
Thus spake the master programmer: "A well written program is its own
heaven; a poorly-written program its own hell."