Thread Links			Date Links
Thread Prev	Thread Next	Thread Index	Date Prev	Date Next	Date Index

Re: [EFM] EFM Requirements [really Oregon Trail Etherloop?]

To: Frank Miller <frank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [EFM] EFM Requirements [really Oregon Trail Etherloop?]
From: Fletcher E Kittredge <fkittred@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2001 17:12:35 -0400
cc: "'Vladimir Oksman'" <oksman@broadcom.com>, "'Hugh Barrass'" <hbarrass@cisco.com>, "Lough, Andy" <andy_lough@mitel.com>, Sherman Ackley <SAckley@nrtc.org>, "Stds-802-3-Efm (E-mail)" <stds-802-3-efm@ieee.org>
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 15 Aug 2001 16:06:10 PDT." <AB5E88345404DE49B49723CCB93580F0261F48@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-To: "'Vladimir Oksman'" <oksman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Frank Miller <frank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-stds-802-3-efm@majordomo.ieee.org



Thanks Frank!  

What I take away from your reply is what I have heard elsewhere:  The
Etherloop stuff works well, but is proprietary.  My sense is what
happens is that lots of people look at Etherloop, see that it is a closed,
proprietary protocol and walk away.

regards,
fletcher

References:
- RE: [EFM] EFM Requirements [really Oregon Trail Etherloop?]
  - From: Frank Miller

Prev by Date: Re: [EFM] EFM Requirements [really Oregon Trail Etherloop?]
Next by Date: Re: [EFM] EFM Requirements
Prev by thread: Re: [EFM] EFM Requirements [really Oregon Trail Etherloop?]
Next by thread: RE: [EFM] EFM Requirements [really Oregon Trail Etherloop?]
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread