"intranet" or "sublayer"? Certainly not "internet", which is
explicitly used in exactly this way in RFC 791
The internet protocol is specifically limited in scope to provide the
functions necessary to deliver a package of bits (an internet
datagram) from a source to a destination over an interconnected
system
of networks...
This protocol is called on by host-to-host protocols in an internet
environment. This protocol calls on local network protocols to carry
the internet datagram to the next gateway or destination host.
For the record, I have used this concept and called it that since I
worked at CDC in 1978-1983. That was how we drew our pictures of the
network we were building. I have always thought we in fact had it
right and wondered why everyone else seemed to have it wrong. I'll
also refer you to http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~amer/PEL/estelle/pdf/
cpwsce.concordia.2001.pdf (which google just found for me); search
for the word "intranet".
I don't know whose confidence you're concerned about me betraying,
honest. This is the architectural model and terminology I have used
for nearly 30 years.
On Mar 24, 2007, at 3:20 AM, Templin, Fred L wrote:
Fred,
from my perspective, it is more useful to consider the network
layer sub-layered into an intranet layer and an internet layer.
You have said a word here that I know well from other contexts (as
I think you know) but did not know we could speak of openly. In
fact, I probably would have suggested these terms if I thought I
could. So, are we both in trouble now?
Thanks - Fred
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
