> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf
> Of Steve Deering
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 8:51 PM
> To: Marshall T. Rose
> Cc: Keith Moore; Danny Cohen; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Marshall Rose
> Subject: Re: [Hist Trivia] IP Protocol Layers
>
>
> At 12:07 PM -0700 7/18/01, Marshall T. Rose wrote:
> >ps: many of us still use "router" instead of
> "intermediate-system" and
> >"host" instead of "end-system", so i guess i have to
> question just how
> >useful all that OSI stuff really was.
>
> We used to use "gateway" instead of "router" (and a few still
> do), and I always thought the change to the "router" term was
> due to some sort of OSI political correctness. If not OSI,
> who gets credit for imposing the "router" jargon on the IP
> world? Was it the DEC folks (mostly Radia?)?
>
My memory is fuzzy, but I believe I deserve at least some of the blame.
Around 1980-81, I designed the "DECnet-SNA Gateway" and argued that the
term "gateway" ought to apply to something that converted one protocol
to another, rather than something which forwarded packets between
machines using the same protocol. I do know we used the term "router"
for DECnet layer 3 stuff as early as 1981. I don't think any OSI
political correctness was involved, since they used the somewhat more
formal and convoluted term "intermediate system", and DEC didn't go over
to the dark side until around 1984-5.
> Steve
>
> -
> This message was passed through
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], which is a sublist of
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Not all messages are passed. Decisions on what
> to pass are made solely by Raffaele D'Albenzio.
>
