>> This is definitely wrong.  10base5 is "thicknet" [], whereas AUI is
>> not strictly a media type at all; it's a host<->transceiver
>> interface that can be used with [...]

> I've never seen a thicknet system that wasn't connected to hosts via
> the AUI ports.

Me neither.  I'e believe that 10base5 is a subset of AUI...but the
other way around is not true.

> I _think_ der Mouse's complaint is that AUI doesn't necessarily mean
> 10base5 [...]

Right.

> At this point, though .... is it really worth changing?

Is *what* really worth changing?  I did say "doc wrong", not "media
name wrong".  Someone proposed changing the "official" name of the
media type to AUI, with 10base5 kept for compatability; I like that
idea - but the principal point was that the doc was phrased in a way
that (incorrectly) equated AUI with 10base5.  Rewriting the docs a
little would cure the biggest problem; reordering the media types so
AUI is the principal name would cure almost all the rest.  (The only
remaining bit I am aware of would be the IFM_10_5 name, which while
arguably wrong (IFM_AUI?) is probably not worth changing.)

					der Mouse

			       mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca
		     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B