Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!samsung!usc!chaph.usc.edu!phakt.usc.edu!tli From: tli@phakt.usc.edu (Tony Li) Newsgroups: news.groups Subject: Re: Call for discussion: comp.sys.cisco Keywords: dcom, brouters, repeaters, net analysis Message-ID: <7430@chaph.usc.edu> Date: 16 Jan 90 19:02:26 GMT References: <3223@zehntel.UUCP> Sender: news@chaph.usc.edu Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA Lines: 15 In article peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes: Comp.sys.cisco makes about as much sense as comp.dcom.telebit. Why not make a broader group first (comp.dcom.routers?) and then think about splitting off a vendor-specific group? Because there's already a good hunk of traffic on the vendor specific mailing list. Unfortunately, comp.dcom.routers is more specific than it needs to be. There's a lot more to networking hardware than just routers... 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."