Valdis;
I'm routing based on circuit ID. Current RSVP does not.
Like I said - RSVP is *NOT* circuit based.
You don't have to make the confusion on terminology even worse by
insisting on youres.
Circuit ID is introduced by Noel w.r.t. ATM and you can use
your favourite wording for RSVP.
Content-Type: application/octet-stream;
name=rfc1258.htm
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: MPhCWy3v57x40e
PCFET0NUWVBFIEhUTUwgUFVCTElDICItLy9XM0MvL0RURCBIVE1MIDQuMCBUcmFuc2l0aW9u
YWwvL0VOIj4NCjxIVE1MPg0KPEhFQUQ+DQoNCiAgPCEtLSBDb252ZXJ0ZWQgYnkgQXNjVG9I
Mastaka / Bill,
Michel Py wrote:
In terms of design, if you do TCP/IP *only* design, the TCP/IP model
is
probably enough. However, the Internet is not only TCP/IP. Carriers,
for
example, don't care much if their fiber transports TCP/IP or IPX or
voice or video or GigE.
Masataka Ohta
Folks,
I would like to suggest that it is (well past) time to stop
feeding the trolls on this topic.
Bob Braden
Vint,
vinton g. cerf wrote:
Michel,
your drawing of TCP/IP is NOT the model I used in
the design of TCP/IP.
[Thanks for the historical precisions]
My understanding is that the TCP/IP model is de-facto, opposed to de
jure for the OSI model.
Below are the top ten matches searching for
