Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!mcnc!ece-csc!ncrcae!ncr-sd!hp-sdd!hplabs!ucbvax!ANDREW.CMU.EDU!ddp+ From: ddp+@ANDREW.CMU.EDU (Drew Daniel Perkins) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc Subject: standard interface Message-ID: Date: Thu, 5-Nov-87 21:55:23 EST Article-I.D.: andrew.wVYGO8y00UoJytM1ca Posted: Thu Nov 5 21:55:23 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 8-Nov-87 11:22:49 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 26 I've now talked with 3 of the major groups implementing TSR TCP/IP drivers for the PC. All of them already have working TSR's in alpha/beta test, and all have developed different interfaces. None of them are very willing to abandon their interface in order to pursue a standard. So being realistic, I really don't think we can have a standard. However, all is not lost. Two of the three have already begun work on a BSD socket interface, and the third group is interested in doing so. It is my personal belief, and I think most others agree, that if they can use a BSD socket interface they will, for purposes of portability. CITI is developing a socket interface for the MAC. Most will have it for the PC. Of course UNIX already has it. Some people are concerned about it's performance, however I think that portability far outweighs the small performance hit. Therefore, I am proposing that we should develop a standard for a BSD socket interface on PC's. The standard should probably be interrupt based. Everyone is quite familiar with them. I've convinced myself and atleast one of the far call advocates that the small performance improvement of far calls vs. interrupts will get lost compared to everything else. Other issues are exactly which BSD calls should be supported, which interrupt, should it be dynamic, etc. I would also like to propose that we schedule a BOF at the TCP/IP conference in December. Comments? Drew