Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!lethe!yunexus!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!wuarchive!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!ukc!stl!robobar!ronald From: ronald@robobar.co.uk (Ronald S H Khoo) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems Subject: Re: V32bis Message-ID: <1991Jan17.083410.25474@robobar.co.uk> Date: 17 Jan 91 08:34:10 GMT References: <3713.27832d53@hayes.uucp> <89275@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> <81164@sgi.sgi.com> Organization: Robobar Ltd., Perivale, Middx., ENGLAND. Lines: 20 vjs@rhyolite.wpd.sgi.com (Vernon Schryver) writes: > casey@gauss.llnl.gov (Casey Leedom) writes: > > 1. Neither HST or PEP are international standards. With the > > increasing move towards standards, especially in the typically > > provincial U.S., this is going to become a big problem > > disadvantage. > This is the arguement that said OSI would replace TCP/IP by 1985. I know > because I took the OSI pledge in 1984. I have since developed an opinion > about the accuracy any arguement based on such "circular lemming" logic. TCP v. OSI affects end<->end interoperability problems, v.32 vs. PEP only affects individual point-to-point links. The scale of the problem just isn't the same. I suppose we shall see what we shall see. Interesting times..... -- Ronald Khoo +44 81 991 1142 (O) +44 71 229 7741 (H)