Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!oddjob!gargoyle!ihnp4!homxb!mtuxo!mtune!petsd!pedsga!tsdiag!tom
From: tom@tsdiag.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Timewarps, virtual-cirkosis and other twitches
Message-ID: <155@tsdiag.UUCP>
Date: 22 Dec 87 21:14:20 GMT
References: <8712151436.aa15545@Huey.UDEL.EDU> <1635@faline.bellcore.com>
Reply-To: tom@tsdiag.UUCP (Tom Moulton)
Organization: CONCURRENT COMPUTER CORP. SVC Neptune NJ
Lines: 19


Phil, you of all people should not confuse an implementation problem with a
protocol problem, Dave CLEARLY states that the problem is the atrifical limit
on the number of VC's SUPPORTED BY THE ACC 5250 interface and driver.

The interface (ACC 5250) should be trashed (Dave suggests re-vamping it).

so i think your statement should correctly read:
                        JUNK ACC 5250!
not x.25
as you all to well know I prefer the basic assumptions of x.25 over the ones
of a datagramme based protocol.

but we agree that we disagree!
-- 
Thomas A. Moulton, W2VY          Life is too short to be mad about things.
Home: (201) 779-W2VY             Packet: w2vy@kd6th  Voice: 145.190 (r)
Work: (201) 492-4880 x3226       FAX:  (201) 493-9167
Concurrent Computer Corp.        uucp: ...!ihnp4!hotps!ka2qhd!w2vy