That top-layer-calls-next-layer etc ad-nauseam model seems to have been one
of the original ideas for how to implement a stack.
Actual current implementations do all kinds of wierd stuff, but mostly pass
around accumulating collections of buffers; so the payload buffer doesn't
get copied to ac
> From: "John Stracke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >However, what's the point of tying someone to the
> >rails after the train wreck?
>
> As a deterrent, I think. "Don't misrepresent the ITU position, because
> they know whom they sent, and you'll blow your credibility in the ITU."
Those who care e
At 05:58 PM 3/8/02 -0500, Andrew G. Malis wrote:
>I also completely agree with Randy's point. Posting to IETF lists should be
>restricted to list participants.
The midcom mailing list started out that way but there
were some very, very loud complaints from several quarters.
Because the whole
>However, what's the point of tying someone to the
>rails after the train wreck?
As a deterrent, I think. "Don't misrepresent the ITU position, because
they know whom they sent, and you'll blow your credibility in the ITU."
/=\
|
