Path: utzoo!yunexus!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!umich!samsung!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!lll-winken!uunet!intercon!news
From: amanda@mermaid.intercon.com (Amanda Walker)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Namespace clashes (was: What is the IAB?)
Message-ID: <26653876.1395@intercon.com>
Date: 31 May 90 15:29:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: intercon.26653876.1395
References: <9005310005.aa26406@SPARK.BRL.MIL>
Sender: usenet@intercon.com (USENET The Magnificent)
Reply-To: amanda@mermaid.intercon.com (Amanda Walker)
Organization: InterCon Systems Corporation, Herndon, VA
Lines: 19

In article <9005310005.aa26406@SPARK.BRL.MIL>, reschly@BRL.MIL ("Robert J.
Reschly Jr.") writes:
> I read Marty's note about CMOT being
> advanced to DIS; thinking, "Yeah, it did get advanced to Draft Internet
> Standard status".  I later read Amanda's note about Draft International
> Standards under the same thread; again nodding in agreement. Only when I
> read the next followup (again referring to Draft Internet Standards) did
> I tumble -- namespace clash.

I do apologize for that--I must admit that I hadn't seen the Internet version
written as a TLA recently, and so the ISO interpretation was in my mental
cache, reinforced by the fact that I think of CMOT as an ISO protocol that
some strange people just happen to run over TCP :-).

Sorry for any confusion...

--
Amanda Walker
InterCon Systems Corporation