Re: thinosi status?

[Peter Furniss <[e-mail]>]

Jeff Robbins sent:

> We have a set of products based on OSI networking for Microsoft Windows.
> We use a seven layer stack coded from the relevant ISO docs.
> I have read some skinny and thin stuff sent to me from John Day
> at Bolt Beranek and Newman.  What is the status of your efforts?

Presumably one of the things John sent you was the current Internet-
Draft of the thinosi "cookbook". The status of that is one of the current 
topics for discussion ! It is meant to be a re-specification in more 
friendly terms of those parts of the OSI upper-layer protocols that are 
used by "basic communication" application protocols - which means 
those that do not use complex session functional units. The current 
charter of the IETF thinosi group proposes the progression of this 
document on the internet standards track (but the precise nature of 
the document has changed slightly). By re-presenting the 
specifications, the document leads away from the lingering view that 
OSI implementations should be structured like the model. (technical 
note - an implementation built on the thinosi document will interwork 
with one built on the base standards - the protocol is identical)

The status and content of the document is under discussion on this 
list and it is hoped to have this resolved before or at the Houston IETF 
meeting. Watch this mailing list !

You have probably also seek the Common Upper-layer requirements 
part 3 (CULR-3) "minimal OSI facilities", which is a profile, in normal 
OSI profile style, of the OSI upper-layers as needed to support "basic 
communications". It is thus similar in intent to the cookbook. (One 
starts with nothing and adds the protocol bits you need; the other 
starts with the standards and takes out the bits you don't need)
CULR-3 is intended to become an International Standardised Profile 
eventually.

> Much like Moliere's character, it looks like we've been speaking thinosi
> all along!

Yes probably. If you merged the layers and concentrated on what you 
needed and not what happened to be the standard, you have a skinny 
stack. thinosi recommends some encoding choices, but the 
interworking requirement means that the allowed alternatives can be 
understood on receipt.

Peter Furniss