Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!dptg!ulysses!ucbvax!TIS.COM!galvin
From: galvin@TIS.COM (James M Galvin)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: splitting tcpip
Message-ID: <8640.635695833@tis.com>
Date: 22 Feb 90 14:10:33 GMT
References: <9002211102.aa14646@Obelix.TWG.COM>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: James M Galvin <galvin@TIS.COM>
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 23


	Then again, just asking that all desktop TCP/IP productish questions be
	posted only in pc-ip would probably please both of us.

As the maintainer of the PCIP mailing list, I would like to be a bit more
precise about the use of the list.

The primary purpose of PCIP is not for discussing "low-end" TCP/IP products,
any more than the primary purpose of TCP-IP is for discussing "high-end"
TCP/IP products.  It is for the discussion of "low-end" TCP/IP, with specific
product discussions being allowed only in the context of a reply to a request
for information.

I am sure this is what Leo meant, but I wanted to make sure everyone else
understood it.  I am compelled to compliment Leo and James Van Bokkelen for
their fairness in responding to information queries on PCIP.  They both
habitually identify products in addition to their own that satisfy queries.

Jim

PS.  The list is "pcip@udel.edu", with the usual administrivia address of
"pcip-request@udel.edu".  It is also gatewayed to BITNET and USENET, as
"pcip-l@vm.byu.edu" and "comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc (??)", respectively.