Re[2]: Call for participation -- Is OSI really useful?

D_P_Sanford <@mwmgate1.mitre.org:D_P_Sanford@caasd1> Wed, 01 June 1994 18:19 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07085; 1 Jun 94 14:19 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07080; 1 Jun 94 14:19 EDT
Received: from sun2.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa26259; 1 Jun 94 14:19 EDT
Via: uk.ac.ulcc.vmsfe; Wed, 1 Jun 1994 17:57:24 +0100
Via: UK.AC.NSFNET-RELAY; Wed, 1 Jun 94 17:35 GMT
Received: from mwunix.mitre.org by sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk with Internet SMTP id <sg.16732-0@sun3.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk>; Wed, 1 Jun 1994 17:34:05 +0100
Return-Path: D_P_Sanford%CAASD1@MWMGATE1.mitre.org
Received: from mwmgate2.mitre.org (mwmgate2.mitre.org [128.29.155.13]) by mwunix.mitre.org (8.6.4/8.6.4) with SMTP id MAA20899 for <@mwunix.mitre.org:THINOSI@ulcc.ac.uk>; Wed, 1 Jun 1994 12:25:59 -0400
Message-Id: <199406011625.MAA20899@mwunix.mitre.org>
Date: Wed, 01 Jun 1994 12:25:28 -0400
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: D_P_Sanford <D_P_Sanford@caasd1>
To: John Day <Day@bbn.com>, Simon E Spero <ses@tipper.oit.unc.edu>
cc: laurae@laurae.ar.telenex.com, 73543.1077@compuserve.com, agrawala@cs.umd.edu, Baker@forty2.enet.dec.com, baos@oss.com, bob@uci.com, colin <colin@intelsat>, conrad@oss.com, cpd@one.com, dallas@forty2.enet.dec.com, DBRITT@nctsemh-npt.navy.mil, dchoi@vax2.cstp.umkc.edu, devon!ed-kelly@mhs.attmail.com, dicksc@uci.com, dicksw@uci.com, dyons@arch4.att.com, eric@isci.com, ews@ctt.bellcore.com, frank@cos.com, gray@osi.ncsl.nist.gov, heather@tandem.com, jmhunt@atlsita.org, kk@arinc.com, kuiper@osison.osiware.bc.ca, lee@vax2.cstp.umkc.edu, lee@huachuca-jitcosi.army.mil, lee@ntd.comsat.com, lowe@osf.org, lrajchel@attmail.com, markh@rsvl.unisys.com, mkao@cup.hp.com, p.furniss@ulcc.ac.uk, quigley@cup.hp.com, rdesjardins@attmail.com, ron11@cc.bellcore.com, rschilk@huachuca-jitcosi.army.mil, sjg@arch4.att.com, THINOSI@ulcc.ac.uk, troisi_brenda@tandem.com, truoel@gmd.de, truskows@cisco.com, vantrees@sed.stel.com, wdavison@rlg.stanford.edu, X3T5@osf.org
Subject: Re[2]: Call for participation -- Is OSI really useful?
X-Orig-Sender: THINOSI-request@ulcc.ac.uk
X-ULCC-Sequence: 190
X-ULCC-Recipient: ietf-archive%us.va.reston.cnri@uk.ac.nsfnet-relay

   
   The proposal at the bottom is remarkably similar to an ULPI containing one 
   bit of Session and Presentation PCI plus two bits to callout A2CSE/PER 
   Transport, with minimal association presentation negotiation being done by 
   A2CSE.  I like this guy.  I think I could describe most of it on that much 
   paper too, if I could give up ISO standard conventions.
   
   Dave
   
   John Day <Day@BBN.COM> writes:
>
>For those of you familiar with Chicago politics, if the Internet is the 
>dirt road being paved as the NII, the contractor building it is putting 
>too much oatmeal in the concrete.  The potholes will be so bad, it will 
>need repaving before it is finished.
     
You must have heard about the North Carolina Information Highway, where
the governor's so-called independent report on the supposed benefits of their 
proposed system co-incidentally turned out to have been written by the regional 
telephone company... a strategy moulded in the great Southern tradition of 
bigga-grit networking.
     
     
As for salvaging bits from the OSI rubble - keep useful bits of ASN.1, keep 
PER and BER, nuke the session layer and start again with something that can 
be described on one piece of A4 paper (use both sides), keep just enough 
A2CSE and presentation to be useful (2 pieces of A4 each), keep X.500 
around as a valuable source of experience, and send X.400 back to the pit 
of Hell from which it first crawled.
     
Simon