🚀 go-pugleaf

Summary: These are my comments on a message sequence which
	 I felt was counter productive.  I have appended the
	 offending comments to my response for reference.


Listening to what you want to hear, eh ?
I think it's time to look a bit more at the ambitiousness
of the project and the FACT that they have come to fruition.


The comments shown below seem to be somewhat self-serving.
Might you gentlemen, consider that there are OSI-based
applications out there already, that the DoD is moving to 
a (connectionless) form of OSI protocols and that your 
talents (and mine) are being wasted by the endless exchanges
in what should now be called the "Propaganda Wars".

The simple facts are that a wide variety of companies have
implemmented OSI protocols and more are being added.
Now that the 1988 versions of the statndards documents are
out in final draft form for ballot, the growth of interest
has exploded.  

Please don't tell me how many more implementations of 
the DoD protocols are already out there.  That is well 
known and expected given the 10 year jump in their lifecycle.

Why not spend the energy in cooperating in the evolution of
these protocols to suite that will work for all of us?
Frankly I'm tired of the bickering from "educated"
individuals.



Thanks,
            J. Gordon Beattie, Jr.
E-mail:    ihnp4!hou2d!n2dsy (Unix)  n2dsy@kd6th.a3100201.ampr
Telephone: 201-615-4168 (Office)     201-615-4669 (Office FAX)
Telephone: 201-387-8896 (Home)



The rest of this article is an excerpt from a pair of comments
that are of the type referenced above.





References: <8803261505.AA04812@wb6rqn.UUCP> <2902@korppi.tut.fi>

In article <2902@korppi.tut.fi>, jh@tut.fi (Juha Hein{nen) writes:
> In article <8803261505.AA04812@wb6rqn.UUCP> brian@wb6rqn.UUCP (Brian Lloyd) writes:
> >European attendees.  The consensus was that OSI really wasn't happening
> >and that they were all planning to go the TCP/IP route.  I guess that
> >the ISO/OSI hard-sell has created a market that only TCP can currently
> >fill.
> 
> Pretty much a correct observation.  The POLITICAL plan is to go the
> connection oriented (X.25) OSI route that doesn't care about local
> area networks (it only cares about the profits of PTT monopolies). So
> if you want to build a LAN and connect it to another LAN what else
> have you got except TCP/IP?
> -- 
> 	Juha Heinanen
> 	Tampere Univ. of Technology
> 	Finland
> 	jh@tut.fi (Internet), tut!jh (UUCP)