Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!van-bc!sl From: sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: Re: Networks considered harmful Message-ID: <105@van-bc.UUCP> Date: 20 Dec 89 22:42:51 GMT References: <8912190403.AA05387@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <100@van-bc.UUCP> <9153@asylum.SF.CA.US> Reply-To: sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) Organization: Wimsey Associates Lines: 30 In article <9153@asylum.SF.CA.US> sharon@asylum.UUCP (Sharon Fisher) writes: }In article <100@van-bc.UUCP> sl@van-bc.UUCP (Stuart Lynne) writes: }The idea behind the connection coprocessor was great. Unfortunately, }while Intel released the specs to software vendors, so you could send }messages from within software, they made it difficult for hardware }vendors to get specs. This meant that you could only do this if both }you and the destination had Intel boards. So it hasn't been very }successful. Also, some people haven't been thrilled with the }technical specs of the Intel board; I'll think about it and try to }remember what they've said. Yes, the EIA committee's looking at an FTP spec are apparently not looking at the Intel spec's. I was just pointing to what I think is an interesting integration of the functions at the user level. I call it push button data communications. In other words, supply a file name and a phone number; the computer does the rest while you get onto other things. We've had it in Unix for a while. Except that with Unix your system administrator has to pre-configure the network software to be able to connect properly. With the fax based systems, you can deal with other systems, just with a phone number. No setup required (except that you might need tell your software whether to expect a real fax machine at the other end, or a smart pc based fax system). -- Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca ubc-cs!van-bc!sl 604-937-7532(voice) 604-939-4768(fax)