Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!udel!haven!sayshell.umd.edu!louie
From: louie@sayshell.umd.edu (Louis A. Mamakos)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso
Subject: Re: (none)
Message-ID: <1990Jun28.042325.7303@haven.umd.edu>
Date: 28 Jun 90 04:23:25 GMT
References: <9006280006.AA21384@moose.informix.com>
Sender: usenet@haven.umd.edu (USENET News Posting)
Organization: The University of Maryland, College Park
Lines: 49

In article <9006280006.AA21384@moose.informix.com> kwang@moose.UUCP (Kwang Sung) writes:

>In that sense, IETF-OSI cannot resolve more general migration strategies.

>I think USENET is the easiest network we can get. Therefore, I would like to 
>create such a newsgroup "comp.protocols.iso.migration" on USENET.

Oh, no, not again.

>Right now, 
>only 73 persons were listed for votes. Among them, 25 persons said "NO". 

Being involuntarily involved in this first "collection" of "votes", and having
my opposing message on the subject of an ISO transition USENET newsgroup taken
as a YES vote, I conclude:

	- That the "votes" taken are completely invalid and should be ignored

	- that some other than Kwang Sung actually collect the votes when the
	time comes to collect them.

>Obviously, currently there are not much traffic on "comp.protocols.iso". 

So have the discussion here.  Surely transition to ISO protocol suite is
surely of interest to the readership of this newsgroup/mailing list.

>However, it IS necessary to create such a newsgroup on USENET for the future, 
>since I am confident all of our networking fields are moving towards one OSI 
>world.

This doesn't follow from your previous statement!  Just how do you
back up this assertion?  Why is it necessary to create this newsgroup?
Somehow, you have this idea that creating a newsgroup will magically
create the traffic to address the subject.  That's not how it works,
sorry.

Phil Gross makes an excellent point.  Since you're trying to address the
transition issue, you should probably do it in a forum which addresses many
of the users that are doing "real" networking with TCP/IP now.  The IETF is
the place to do that.  I'm sorry if you don't have the resources to attend,
but that's they way it is.

If you want to play the game, you gotta do it by the rules.  The more
often you blindly suggest creating this group, the more opposed that
I, and I'm sure many other, are to it.  It's really getting old.  I've
yet to hear an a good reason why this transition discussion can't be
done in existing forums.

louie