reschly@BRL.MIL ("Robert J. Reschly Jr.") (05/31/90)
Good evening,
A quick point worth noting. I read Marty's note about CMOT being
advanced to DIS; thinking, "Yeah, it did get advanced to Draft Internet
Standard status". I later read Amanda's note about Draft International
Standards under the same thread; again nodding in agreement. Only when I
read the next followup (again referring to Draft Internet Standards) did
I tumble -- namespace clash.
I would propose PINS, DINS and INS where 'IN' comes from "InterNet"
but fear that is still to close to ISOese. Maybe PIPS, DIPS, and IPS
with 'IP' coming from "Internet Protocol". By tucking in the extra
word, the likelyhood of these acronyms being collapsed back to TLAs
(Three Letter Acronyms) is reduced.
Later,
Bob
--------
IP: reschly@BRL.MIL UUCP: ...!{{cmcl2,nlm-mcs,husc6}!adm,smoke}!reschly
U.S. Army Ballistic Research Lab. / Systems Eng. & Concepts Analysis Div. /
Networking & Systems Dev. Team / ATTN: SLCBR-SE-A (Reschly) /
Aberdeen Proving Grounds, MD 21005-5066 / (301)278-6808 AV: 298-6808
**** For a good time, call: (303) 499-7111. Seriously! ****amanda@mermaid.intercon.com (Amanda Walker) (05/31/90)
In article <9005310005.aa26406@SPARK.BRL.MIL>, reschly@BRL.MIL ("Robert J. Reschly Jr.") writes: > I read Marty's note about CMOT being > advanced to DIS; thinking, "Yeah, it did get advanced to Draft Internet > Standard status". I later read Amanda's note about Draft International > Standards under the same thread; again nodding in agreement. Only when I > read the next followup (again referring to Draft Internet Standards) did > I tumble -- namespace clash. I do apologize for that--I must admit that I hadn't seen the Internet version written as a TLA recently, and so the ISO interpretation was in my mental cache, reinforced by the fact that I think of CMOT as an ISO protocol that some strange people just happen to run over TCP :-). Sorry for any confusion... -- Amanda Walker InterCon Systems Corporation