Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cos!grieve
From: grieve@cos.com (David Grieve)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso
Subject: Re: Simple, low-level ISO protocols?
Message-ID: <31589@cos.com>
Date: 12 Jun 90 12:19:12 GMT
References: <21689@estelle.udel.EDU>
Reply-To: grieve@cos.UUCP (David Grieve)
Distribution: na
Organization: Corporation for Open Systems, McLean, VA
Lines: 26

In article <21689@estelle.udel.EDU> new@ee.udel.edu (Darren New) writes:
[stuff deleted]
>in OSI.  For example, it looks like ARP, BOOTP, and TFTP could
>all comfortably fit in a smallish boot rom, whereas FTAM could
>not reasonably be expected to do so.  My question is whether
[more deleted]

I'm not sure what you mean by "smallish", but I've seen
FTAM and MHS on an IBM AT (clone or otherwise) as well as on
a MacIntosh. There are single board 7 layer solutions for OSI
out there though I don't know what they cost (and because
of who I work for, am not able to mention - disclaimer or no).

>local hard disks or whatever (expensive).  Is it really the case
>that simple trivial applications are really difficult under OSI,
>or have they just not been standardized, or have I just not
>heard of them?     

No one ever said OSI was trivial but I think what you get from
it is more utility and robustness.

-- 
grieve@cos.com OR  {uunet,  decuac, sun!sundc, hadron, hqda-ai}!cos!grieve
DISCLAIMER:  Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the
Corporation for Open Systems, its members, or any standards body. 
Typos are intellectual property of the author.