Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!apple!sun-barr!newstop!exodus!lvs.Eng.Sun.COM!karl
From: karl@lvs.Eng.Sun.COM (Karl Auerbach)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: TELNET versus LAT
Message-ID: <6423@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: 22 Jan 91 23:51:55 GMT
References: <9101151656.AA04342@decpa.pa.dec.com> <9101161700.AA19338@sonny.proteon.com>
Sender: news@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
Lines: 18

In article <9101161700.AA19338@sonny.proteon.com> jas@proteon.com (John A. Shriver) writes:
>But could a protocol be designed that had the advantages of LAT
>(multiple streams in one packet, rate limiting, etc.) that ran over a
>network protocol (such as DECnet routing without NSP), or had adaptive
>timeouts?  I strongly suspect that the answer would be yes.

Yes, but -- DEC has a patent on LAT.  I suspect that some of their
lawyers may object to a new protocol that uses some of
dally-in-hope-of-more-data techniques embedded in LAT.

(Please don't flame me for DEC's patent.  Personally, I think that the
LAT idea wasn't novel at the time.  [For example, one of the reason
that municipal busses run on schedules is to get a full load of
passengers.  And the Nagle algorithms used in TCP/IP try to collect
reasonable payloads into packets before launching them into the
ether.]  But I'm not at the patent office.)

			--karl--