Re: Review of thinosi cookbook

[Peter Furniss <[e-mail]>]

Allison,

Thank you for your reply on the cookbook - I'm glad you have it in hand.

> , can you give me a bit more detail about
> the state of implementations and use of the proposal?

There are two implementations directly inspired by thinosi - Terry
Sullivan's TOSI, which was used as the protocol engine in the osilite
(I think thats what he called it) implementation by Andrew Worsely
(which used the same interface as ISODE and my XTI/mOSI prototype.
These have not had a chance to communicate with each other yet.
However, since the cookbook is essentially a greatly simplified
redescription of the OSI upper-layers, a thinosi implementation will
interwork with any osi implementation (when supporting the same
application protocol - see the cookbook for an explanation).  The
XTI/mOSI prototype interworks with the HP commercial osi product, and
osi-lite has, I believe interworked with normal isode.

> I was slightly aware of a thin-osi effort in the
> U.S. Defense Messaging System arena -- are they now
> among likely users?

There was certainly interest, but I'm not sure what has happened. There
is considerable interest is using thinosi (or minimal osi - which is 
the same thing using documents suited to different environments)
to support remote database access (RDA) and the library protocols
(Z39.50, or its ISO equivalent SR, and ILL).

There has also been discussion of alternative upper-layer protocols
(which, generally will not interwork, but perform equivalent function
for the application protocols) in this area, and especially in
aviation. THIS IS NOT THINOSI (which is the existing standard protocols
implemented sensibly), though we opened the mailing list to
discussion on reduced OSI, which is a useful name for this.

> As to likening this delay to an ISO timetable, well, do
> remember we are all volunteers on this IESG staff :).

It was only a tease. But I fear you may be under a serious misunderstanding
about ISO committees, which should be corrected:

The technical people involved in ISO are also volunteers - counting as
volunteers people whose companies volunteer their efforts and people
who persuade their managers that it is worthwhile spending time and
travel money.  The only ones who get paid for their committee work
(consultancies excepted) are the national standards body staff - and
they are volunteered by the national standards body (so ANSI don't get
anything from ISO for running secretariats), and the iso staff .  This
is very similar to the IETF/IESG arrangements, or would be if all the
secretariat funding was via ISOC subscription (there is nothing
equivalent to the US federal funding of the secretariat, which is why
ISO and the national standards bodies try to cover their secretariat
costs by charging for the documents - we are trying to persuade them
that this is self-defeating)

My apologies if you knew this perfectly well and I am just over-reacting.


Peter
(also volunteer chair of BSI IST/21/-/8, editor of 4 iso standards)