Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ccicpg!miket
From: miket@ccicpg.UUCP (Mike Tracy)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: 802 (.2).3 TCP/IP
Message-ID: <30098@ccicpg.UUCP>
Date: 20 May 88 17:48:01 GMT
References: <14933@sgi.SGI.COM>
Reply-To: miket@ccicpg.UUCP (Mike Tracy)
Distribution: na
Organization: CCI CPG, Irvine CA
Lines: 26


in article <14933@sgi.SGI.COM>, vjs@rhyolite.SGI.COM (Vernon Schryver) says:
> 
> In article <1080@thumper.bellcore.com>, karn@thumper.bellcore.com (Phil R. Karn) writes:
>> I see only one easy answer to the gratuitous compatibility problems
>> imposed by 802.3: IGNORE IT!  ...
> 
> Yes, but...some vendors are already supporting it.  I'm told by some of
> our customers that Gould/SEL machines can do either 'Ethernet 1 or
> 802.3' (meaning either lengths or types), depending on boot-time
> configuration, and cannot send even raw ethernet packets of one kind
> when configured for the other.  

Are you sure they don't mean ethenet 2 ?  Many vendors claim to be 802.3
compatable but actually are only compatable up to the frame format.
All of the electrical stuff, CSMA/CD, etc. is 802.3 but they use they
standard ethernet frame format (i.e. type instead of length).
Probably, if they are running Unix, they are ethernet 2.  Otherwise, it
makes it hard to talk to other Unix boxes. :->


-- 
Michael D. Tracy	CCI Computers 
(714)458-7282		9801 Muirlands Boulevard
			Irvine, CA 92718
uunet!ccicpg!miket