*> From listadm(_at_)loki(_dot_)ietf(_dot_)org Fri Sep 27 17:29:10 2002
*> X-Authentication-Warning: ietf.org: majordom set sender to
owner-ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org using -f
*> From: "Bill Cunningham" <billcu(_at_)citynet(_dot_)net>
*> To: <vcerf(_at_)mci(_dot_)net>
*> Cc: <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
*> Subject: TCP/IP Terms
*> Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 19:49:32 -0400
*> MIME-Version: 1.0
*> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
*> X-Priority: 3
*> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
*> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4807.1700
*> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
*> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
*> X-Loop: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
*> X-AntiVirus: scanned by AMaViS 0.2.1
*>
*> Vint,
*> Some of us at IETF are thinking about a draft to clear up some
*> terminology about the different layers of TCP/IP.
*> Whether it be packet, datagram, segement (more clearly defined) or whatever
*> the case. Do you have any opinions on this?
*>
Fourteen years ago, a significant segment of the IETF technical
community wrote RFCs 1122 and 1123; section 1.3.3 of RFC 1122 contains
definitions of these terms. These RFCs were written with much thought
and care, with input from 50 people as well as from Jon Postel who was
responsible for some of the terminology.
[Why] do we have to do this all over again?
Bob Braden