Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!mit-eddie!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!ukc!mucs!liv-cs!keith
From: keith@anduin.cs.liverpool.ac.uk (Keith Halewood)
Newsgroups: uk.misc,eunet.followup,comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Internet routing Europe - USA -} Europe...
Message-ID: <1990Sep8.162915.17059@anduin.cs.liverpool.ac.uk>
Date: 8 Sep 90 15:29:15 GMT
References: <1990Aug30.091435.1982@ircam.ircam.fr <6190@vanuata.cs.glasgow.ac.uk>  <JIM.90Sep7132657@baird.cs.strath.ac.uk>
Organization: Computer Science, Liverpool University
Lines: 13

In article <JIM.90Sep7132657@baird.cs.strath.ac.uk>, jim@cs.strath.ac.uk (Jim Reid) writes:
> 
> Yes. The JNT wouldn't like it. What you're proposing is not very
> efficient: a better (and easier) option is to put IP datagrams inside
> X.25 frames. That too would upset the JNT since you'd be running
> something other than CB on JANET.

The JNT appears to like the positively HUGE DECnet that exists over Janet and
probably beyond. Unless there is a double standard brewing, the JNT wouldn't be
in much of a 'moral' position to stop an IP over X25 service to the Internet
for any University or company willing to provide one.

Keith