Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!rutgers!sunybcs!bingvaxu!leah!uwmcsd1!ig!jade!ucbvax!UMD5.UMD.EDU!jac
From: jac@UMD5.UMD.EDU ("Joseph A. Cimmino Jr.")
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Re: Netbios driver for KA9q tcp code.
Message-ID: <8710262345.AA06946@umd5.UMD.EDU>
Date: Mon, 26-Oct-87 18:45:36 EST
Article-I.D.: umd5.8710262345.AA06946
Posted: Mon Oct 26 18:45:36 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 29-Oct-87 07:07:27 EST
References: <8710261446.aa02929@Louie.UDEL.EDU>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 11

If I understand you correctly, you're mentioning two methods of encapsulating
TCP/IP on top of NetBios.  Versus the RFC-1001/2 encapsulation of NetBios on
TCP/IP.  Do the two methods interoperate?  Since you mention Int 5c, I also
presume that it is LAN independent.  The performance would suffer going through
a NetBios then a direct NetWare or IBM ASI (TRN & PCN/II) interface.  If both
interoperate, is there a specification available?  Thanks.
------------------------------
Joseph A. Cimmino, Jr.    University of Maryland, Systems    jac@umd5.umd.edu
1+ 301 454 2946                   PC/IP Group              cimminoj@umdd.bitnet

Bertolt Brecht:  You made your bed, so you lie in it.