Article View: comp.protocols.appletalk
Article #5541Re: the comming appletalk crisis
From: kwe (Kent W. England)
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1989 19:58
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 1989 19:58
25 lines
1555 bytes
1555 bytes
Peter, I am sorry. I flamed all over you when I shouldn't have. I wish I knew exactly who at Apple to flame over, but I probably shouldn't do that either. At any rate, I will endeavor to be more polite and instructive in future as all good netnewsers should be. The even-tempered Mr. Hedrick gave the proper, reasoned response that I should have given in the first place. Please study his article carefully. wnn@dsunx1.dsrd.ornl.gov (W. N. Naegeli) mentions multicast. Of course, multicast would be an excellent way to lessen the broadcast load on the Ethernet. AppleTalk and IP could benefit from widespread implementation of multicast. Backward compatibility holds up the process. Perhaps AT has a chance to make some progress in this area? In summary, my points were: 1) AppleTalk needs much work before it will scale up well. 2) TCP/IP needs much work before it will plug and play easily. (I wish that was all I had said the first time.) Kent England, Boston University
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<28183@bu-cs.BU.EDU>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cwjcc!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!bu-cs!kweReferences:
<8902211606.AA11107@dsunx1.DSRD.ORNL.GOV>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cwjcc!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!bu-cs!kwe From: kwe@bu-cs.BU.EDU (kwe@bu-it.bu.edu (Kent W. England)) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.appletalk Subject: Re: the comming appletalk crisis Summary: I overreacted Message-ID: <28183@bu-cs.BU.EDU> Date: 21 Feb 89 19:58:59 GMT References: <8902211606.AA11107@dsunx1.DSRD.ORNL.GOV> Reply-To: kwe@buit13.bu.edu (Kent England) Followup-To: comp.protocols.appletalk Organization: Boston U. Information Technology Lines: 25