Fully Electric Car available soon

[Jon]

[e-mail] declared for all the world to hear...

Links? Evidence?

[Doctor Drivel]

Matt, again....It was in the original concept.

It was obvious what they were up to. The big corporations should have not been on the committees as it was clear they had another agenda.

It was. It was widly adopted in the late 1980s.

Matt you are botty talking.

That was there from the start as transitional feature to upgrade large nets.

After the Internet took off like a rocket.

It wasn't at all. It was a realisation that the Internet had rocketed away leaving the rest behind and that inferior TCP/IP has become a defacto standard by more luck than anything.

It was delivered and working and was being amended as time went on by useful feedback.

It was envisaged that networks would be private nets. No one really thought anyone would be so daft to use the open and unpoliced Internet to connect up their companies. They did. All sorts of security software came out, firewalls and the likes, and most of it was easily breached. They used the Internet because it was there and cheap.

If the Internet had been run on OSI soon enough it would be the standard today. Seamless plug and play.

You will be surprised. Lots still in government circles around the world.

It worked well. Many used it on LANs as well. The IR did, although running TCP/IP over OSI.

Didn't it? I recall looking a Windows desktop machines running OSI, 1000s of them, on WANs and LANs.

Whatever that means. Er, er, it was be teh standard.

It wasn't. It was a success and even BMW implemeted OSI all over the world.

Only in LANs running Ethernet which were mainly all in one building. The next round of updates to the building could have OSI all through.

They were and many did. You may have been working for a company with its head up its bum, but others were more aware of the big picture and OSI (open system) made sense and still does.

Nonsense. I recall many companies when updating would implement OSI and have TCP/IP over it in preparation when for the next stage of updates. Many ran OSI on their own backbone and TCP/IP on the smaller LANs.

[Steve Firth]

UK. Like X25, it's one of those pups sold to government by over-eager academics that then gets enshrined and ends up costing the taxpayer big money because no bugger understands it and nothing can be bought off the shelf.

Change over to TCP/IP has been a revelation to some of the old hands. "You mean you can just buy that in a shop? You plug it in and it works? You only paid 50 quid???"

etc.

[Steve Firth]

Make your mind up you simpleton. You claimed to have already contacted the police, now you say you're just parroting something from Radio 4.

[Andy Hall]

Do you mean the US or UK one?

Really the point I was making was that from 1995 onwards, the U.S. federal procurement changed the requirements to remove the requirement to use GOSIP.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

'Can't continue'? I am continuing and don't appear to have had the boys in blue breaking down the door...

It must be true, then.

However, like much else, you simply didn't understand what was said.

[Steve Firth]

Meanwhile in Milton Keynes the CID are pissing themselves laughing having just had a call from the local village idiot.

[Andy Hall]

I see.

Desktop ATM was another one....

[Huge]

I'll be amused if he can. I've been working in IT since the early seventies, and the only contact I've had with X.25 has been tearing it out and replacing it with TCP/IP. Can you even buy X.25 equipment any more?

[Andy Hall]

I am not going to waste time debating that one with you. It's only necessary to look at the series of transport TPs to realise that connection-oriented was the original intent.

That's complete nonsense as well, although arguably had they not been, the whole thing would have come to an end a lot quicker than it did. The large corporations have a part to play just the same as anybody else.

No it wasn't. When I think back, less than 5% of organisations that I talked to at the time had the remotest interest in using it once it was realised that it was not going to come to fruition in less than geological time.

At the end of the day, people have work to do and businesses to run.

The whole thing with the DoD moving away from OSI began in 1990 when they came to the realisation that they were going to go on waiting for a very long time for products. I was involved in several RFP responses at the time and do know what happened.

It was essentially the absence of bureaucracy that is the largest factor in that, together with technologies being adopted and adapted by use rather than being mandated from ivory tower committees.

Too little. Too late.

To a large extent, they still are.

Some do in part. Most use private circuits and increasingly, VPN services that are not run over the public internet..

That would have happened regardless of the technology. Once one has a connection to a public network (any public network) the potential exists for security breach.

Academic, because it was never going to happen.

Costing a fortune to run because the expertise in them is rapidly disappearing. It's difficult to find anyone with technical background aged under about 35 who knows much about X.25.

I don't think that the IR can be held up as a shining example of doing anything that is competent or worthwhile.

A pointless exercise.

... and the market moved faster than the outdated way of establishing standards through ISO.

I meant commercially it was doomed to be a failure. Outside government circles, one would be hard pressed to come up with more than a handful of companies who used it.

Wrong. The first commercial IP WAN routers came out in the early to mid 80s. I know, because I installed some of them.

Do tell me how many major league companies have made a long term commercial success out of selling OSI products.

[Doctor Drivel]

System Admin eh.

You experience is very limited, probably working just for one company that uses a one system.

[John Rumm]

Not only that, but the DOS implimentations of the stacks at the time were to all intents and purposes unusable anyway due to their massive memory footprint. With the stack loaded there was not enough left to run most of the major applications of the day.

[Clive George]

clive

[Steve Firth]

No, and TBH even when you could, you couldn't because no NIC was actually a complete implementation of X.25 and IIRC several of the cards were mutually incompatible because of non-overlapping implementations.

As with all other old shit, there's still some about in government circles but it's being ripped out because even the government blanches at shelling out £800 a day consultancy fees to fix it.

[Steve Firth]

Drivel you're a f****it. You're a brainless, useless waste of protoplasm. There are things growing on the bottom of ships that have more right to oxygen than you do. You don't even know who you are talking to, you talk s**te that you glean from websites and catalogues and that you barely understand. The only times that you get anything right are when you ask a question via one of your sock puppets then repeat the answers you are given by the adults in this group as if they were your own words.

You are apparently too stupid to realise what a laughing stock you are.

[Doctor Drivel]

Matt, very wise as you have lost.

Matt, not at all.

Matt, it was. Not in your backwards company it probably wasn't.

Most don't understand networks or protocols anyway. Speak to the top guys and their knowledge is limited.

Matt, it was already there with many using it, although not in you backward company.

Strange that I was working withj US government agencies in 1991 and the aim was OSI. Matt, you must stop making things up.

OSI was for sale. Wanted a Windows PC OSI stack? They were there.

As I said, they never anticipated the meteoric rise of the Internet. If they did they would have insisted it be on OSI in the late 1980s. The Internet was a curio used by geeks in unis and by fellas with bears and mussies. The odd commercial organisation knobbed on the Internet and found it a useful comms tool to gain know-how in research matters from unis.

The industry was full of ignorance of OSI too. Most didn't care as long as something worked not looking to the future just fire fighting most of the time, having team of people just keep keeping a system up with bits of string. Every time they updated it costed a fortune, whereas with an open system it would have been easy. They just didn't know. Ignorance and negative propaganda by the likes of IBM, etc, didn't help either. Your ignorance of OSI is typical.

They are? Look at how many small companies use the Internet to communicate to their offices and outside.

VPNs over the Internet is very popular. It give them the impression it is their own private network, but it is on an open public network that an smart hacker can get into.

Many private networks have only one point into the public work which can be easily policed and shored up.

Matt, you missed the point...again.

There is still a hell of a lot of it around. It works and does what they want. Why spend a fortune to stand still?

They had one of the most advanced network and computer systems in the world. Private companies would come and look at what they had done. Most was modular. Many functions that are now off the shelf they pioneered and had it bespoke written. The software on the PCs could be updated, including the OS from one central point in the country overnight. Propagated out to the servers. When the users logged on it took half and hour to update the lot onto each PC and all ready to go. 1000s of them all at once. All by one system admin man with a beard or mussie. They pioneered network computers, diskless machines that stored nothing. Bill Gates tried to bring one out saying he had invented it. A bootstrap pulled in the OS and user profile and ran it from RAM. Users only saved on a server disk. Later a user could be down country and get his own profile from his own server too. All seemless to the user who though it was like a normal PC at home. The government spent a lot of money ensuring that it got its money and reduced maintenance costs of the system drastically. When the system was framed out to EDS, the Yanks were quite amazed at what they saw, thinking only the Yanks had advanced systems.

Matt, what a stupid comment.

OSI was advanced, open system plug and play. The market moved fast not because TCP/IP was good, it isn't. It was because one element, the Internet used it. Nothing else.

An open system is still be talked about, as TCP/IP will not stay forever. It should have sent 15 years ago.

It wasn't doomed to be a failure at all, it projected to take off. All routers could handle OSI. Companies were producing OSI stacks to work on any machine or OS. The EU/NIST were funding testing tools to be produced to test OSI implementations to aid the companies developing products. The Japanese were buying into it big time too.

Once the government agencies used it and a handful of large companies, and it was to "official", then it would have zoomed ahead. The WWW pushed it into the background.

Few used TCP/IP on WANs. TCP/IP was regarded as an Ethernet protocol. Ironically the Internets backbone was mainly on X.25 with TCP/IP running over.

Missed the point again Matt. OSI was gaining ground not in a competition because it was to be the open system standard. The WWW using TCP/IP killed it.

The big looser was the end user especially the smaller companies. Many have spent fortunes on network and mismatched computer crap. OSI on the network side would have made life very much easier and cheaper for them. Only big rip-off companies gain by the current setup.

The companies against OSI had a vested interst in TCP/IP and would all thye could to stop this opne a free protocval being implemented.

I mentioned one large German car company who were looking ahead...as the Germans do. They liked the concept and what they saw. No one expected the WWW to throw a spanner in the works. Oh and a number of large Japanese companies, I recall a number of large Japanese companies were heavily into OSI too. The Japs were very keen on the idea.

[Doctor Drivel]

What? Dr Watson?

[Doctor Drivel]

X.25 was the standard packet switched protocal used all over the world by the PTTs.

[Doctor Drivel]

Brainless, I contacted the police. Very nice they were. Your wicked ways may come to an end.

[Doctor Drivel]

Have you moved to MK?