forrest@LBL.GOV (05/12/88)
I recently read both books, starting off as a complete novice. As I recall, the introduction to Davidson's book states that the book used to be a document that was distributed to marketing and sales people so that they'd have some idea what all the buzz words mean (my interpretation). With this as a goal the book is OK. But, I wanted a more in depth study of TCP/IP which is why I turned to Comer's book. Comer's book is MUCH better although some of the chapters (specifically those dealing with routing) didn't feel right. This is probably my fault and I intend to reread the whole book a second time. For the time being, Comer's book is the only entry in the race for the perfect TCP/IP book. Anyone new to TCP/IP, or anyone who wants to fill in holes in their knowledge would benefit greatly from reading it. I know I did. By the way, on page 40, the second high order bit on a class C address is shown incorrectly in Figure 4.1 (this was pointed out to me by someone else). I've submitted this type to the tcp-typos account. Jon Forrest Lawrence Berkeley Lab. FORREST@LBL.GOV
kwe@bu-cs.BU.EDU (kwe@bu-it.bu.edu (Kent W. England)) (05/14/88)
In article <880512092448.2260d215@Csa4.LBL.Gov> forrest@LBL.GOV writes: >is why I turned to Comer's book. Comer's book is MUCH better although some >of the chapters (specifically those dealing with routing) didn't feel right. >This is probably my fault and I intend to reread the whole book a second time. > No, I felt the same way. The chapter on routing is too brief and left me wanting more. We need still one more book that tackles some of the issues Comer left too briefly treated. Maybe it's too soon. For now, it's back to the RFCs and IDEAs. Kent England, Boston University
philipp@LARRY.MCRCIM.MCGILL.EDU (Philip A. Prindeville) (05/17/88)
>>is why I turned to Comer's book. Comer's book is MUCH better although some >>of the chapters (specifically those dealing with routing) didn't feel right. >>This is probably my fault and I intend to reread the whole book a second time. >No, I felt the same way. The chapter on routing is too brief and left >me wanting more. We need still one more book that tackles some of the >issues Comer left too briefly treated. Maybe it's too soon. For now, >it's back to the RFCs and IDEAs. I enjoyed Doug's book also, and thought the "Hints to Implementors" was a great idea (there should be a 10 Most Deadly Sins RFC [like don't forward MAC broadcast packets, for instance]). The routing was a little thin, however. A novice might not really see the significance of the extra-hop problem, and the EGP description was too short. And even though EGP-3 is still a moving target, a separate chapter about that (maybe talking about LANDMARK and Dissimilar Gateway Protocol) would be good. To be sure, though, it was an very good book. -Philip
guru@FLORA.WUSTL.EDU (Gurudatta Parulkar) (05/19/88)
>>is why I turned to Comer's book. Comer's book is MUCH better although some >>of the chapters (specifically those dealing with routing) didn't feel rig >> [Stuff Deleted] >No, I felt the same way. The chapter on routing is too brief and left [Stuff Deleted] I enjoyed Doug's book also, and thought the "Hints to Implementors" was a great idea (there should be a 10 Most Deadly Sins RFC [like don't [Stuff Deleted] This spring, I used Doug's book as a supplementary text for a computer networking course (I had a prepublished version) with Stallings book as the main text. As a supplementary text, it turned out excellent as students understood the ARPA internet protocols well. However, I am still not sure if it will be a satisfactory text by itself for a course because of its lack of treatment of fundamental networking principles, lack of good exercises, and its treatment of only TCP/IP. Is anybody planning to use it as the sole text for a course ? -guru Dr. Guru Parulkar Asst Professor guru@flora.wustl.edu Dept of Computer Science parulkar@udel.edu Washington University wucs1!guru@uunet.uu.net St. Louis MO 63130 (314) 889-4621