Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!romp!auschs!awdprime!dlsrt.austin.ibm.com!dls
From: dls@dlsrt.austin.ibm.com (David Skeen)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix
Subject: Re: Aix Running on Clones?
Message-ID: <4398@awdprime.UUCP>
Date: 29 Nov 90 17:34:30 GMT
References: <richard.659843132@fafnir.la.locus.com> <1990Nov13.150450.18758@watserv1.waterloo.edu> <1990Nov19.113340@fenway.aix.kingston.ibm.com> <4989@spdcc.SPDCC.COM> <17516@hydra.gatech.EDU> <5006@spdcc.SPDCC.COM> <11865@milton.u.washington.edu>
Sender: news@awdprime.UUCP
Reply-To: dls@dlsrt.austin.ibm.com
Distribution: comp
Organization: IBM Austin (AWD)
Lines: 18

In article <richard.659843132@fafnir.la.locus.com>, richard@locus.com
(Richard M. Mathews) writes:
> I'd be really curious to find out what it is about TCF that some people
> find "outdated and laughable."  If TCF is outdated, we should work on
> improving it.  As a user of TCF for 6 years, I consider NFS and AFS to
> be outdated and laughable.  NFS and AFS give you file system access; TCF
> gives you the whole machine.

When OSF didn't accept the TCF parts of the DEcorum proposal, the future
of TCF became somewhat clouded.  I would expect TCF functionality to be
added to OSF/DCE in the future, but when and how aren't understood.  AFS
is an integral part of OSF/DCE; there is some degree of interoperability
between DCE and NFS. For the near term, that leaves TCF as odd man out.

(This is not an official IBM position, but it is my opinion ...)

Dave Skeen
IBM Internet: dls@dlsrt.austin.ibm.com / IBM VNET: SKEEN at AUSTIN