🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Aug26.091153.25702@cl.cam.ac.uk> ag129@cl.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) writes:
>The only question in my mind is "Why OSI and not SNA".

OSI and TCP/IP products solve different problems than SNA products.  I
see very little overlap between those two markets.  To the extent they
overlap, it's because TCP/IP and OSI can do the same job as SNA.  I
don't recall anyone (until now?) thinking that SNA products could do the
job that OSI and TCP/IP products do.

OSI and TCP/IP, on the other hand, solve exactly the same problems.
Technically, their markets overlap exactly.  Politically, though, some
people have used governmental force to inflict the various GOSIPs on
the market, creating a niche where OSI products can be sold without
competition from the TCP/IP market.

>Novell's protocols even at the informal level that the Internet uses...

If you knew me a little better, you'd know it's laughable that you'd
try to draw me into defending Novell's protocols.  Anyway, i'll brush
you off by saying that the IPX protocol suite solves problems in yet
another market, so it's as irrelevant to the conversation as SNA.
Feel free to argue for as long as you want about whether or not IPX is
a good solution for its market, although the people in this news group
probably aren't very interested.
						don provan
						donp@novell.com