home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!nntp1.radiomail.net!cronos!Metaphor.COM!pstevens
- From: pstevens@Metaphor.COM (Paul Stevens)
- Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.networking
- Subject: Re: Winsock for OS/2
- Keywords: Winsock, OS/2Sock
- Message-ID: <2619@cronos.metaphor.com>
- Date: 6 Nov 92 01:10:55 GMT
- References: <921103081509@minimillian.ftp.com>
- Sender: news@cronos.metaphor.com
- Reply-To: pstevens@Metaphor.COM (Paul Stevens)
- Organization: m4
- Lines: 29
-
- In article <921103081509@minimillian.ftp.com>, backman@vaxeline.ftp.com (Larry Backman) writes:
- |>
- |> Winsock was a rousing success at Interop. There seems to be a groundswell
- |> of support for a Windows binary TCP interface; ie winsock.dll.
- |>
- |> FTP Software is interested in achieving the same level of binary interface
- |> for applications wishing to acccess OS/2 TCP stacks; i.e. OS2Sock.
- |>
- |> Are any of the other vendors of OS/2 TCP stacks interested in forming
- |> a working group to define and implement an OS/2 TCP socket interface?
- |>
- |> Do OS/2 application developers want this?
- |>
-
- We sure do! I just left a meeting to discus our plans to port
- our existing software to TCP/IP under OS/2. The question came up as
- to whose stack we develop to and the implications of that to our
- customers. Currently, not only is there no binary compatible DLL,
- the API's are different and not every vendor supports the same compiler!
-
- The marketing representative was none too thrilled to hear that our
- customers will only be able to use those stacks for whom we decide
- to port and test: "You mean there isn't a standard socket interface??!"
-
- +------------------------------------------------------------------------+
-
- Paul Stevens {apple|decwrl}!metaphor!pstevens
- Metaphor Computer Systems pstevens@metaphor.com
- Mountain View, CA
-