Anil, First, let me say I _am_ one of Paul's moderators. Moderation, on this list, works on an exception basis -- certain key phrases and names put things into a queue for moderator review before they post. People that don't play nicely with others have been known to join those filters. A friendly reminder. I'm not saying don't post, but use some discretion.
Now, speaking for myself rather than Paul, let me respond a bit to your concern. As a PhD, you presumably know the differences between primary and secondary research sources. Primary sources were directly involved in the development or experiment in question, while secondary sources are paraphrasing and commenting on primary sources. I believe I have some reasonable credentials as a primary source on OSI, and, for that matter, current IETF work. In the OSI context, I was involved, through the US Federal Telecommunications Standards Committee, with the ANSI Distributed Systems (DISY) project, which was a significant starting point for the CCITT/ISO work (1976-1979). After that, I was the network management architect for GTE Telenet (1980-81) and still worked with standards groups. Subsequently, I was the first member of the technical staff for the Corporation for Open Systems (1986-1991), an international consortium for OSI/ISDN conformance testing and general development.My duties included staff liaison to the Architecture Committee (including all major vendors), test system development manager for FTAM (which does include the OSI session protocol and service), CMIP, and X.25, programmed protocol code on a number of other protocol test systems, and one of the primary external representatives for COS (including lecturing on OSI testing in Tokyo). I was also involved with harmonizing architecture between the ISO and IEEE 802 efforts. Without getting into irrelevant detail, I've been participating in IETF meetings since 1994, am the author or coauthor of three RFCs, and a coauthor of five active Internet Drafts. With respect to TCP/IP interoperability, and the TCP/IP interoperability workshops that became Interop, been there, got the T-shirt, although it doesn't fit all that well anymore...I prefer to think I've gained more knowledge than weight since the 2nd such conference. In other words, I think I can say legitimately that I have primary experience with the Internet protocol development process and the role of the OSI (and other) models in it. I've worked with Priscilla for eight years or so, during part of which time she was a Cisco employee and course developer, and I was a Cisco contractor with involvement in course development. I think we can also claim a fair bit of direct experience with how Cisco does things. Without trying to get into the middle of either you or Priscilla are phrasing your comments, I will make the observation that more than one person on the list has some pretty direct experience with the technologies and their primary specifications. Arguing they are wrong because a secondary source written for beginners says something different is, to put it gently, perhaps ill-advised. > >>What's your point? >This is total crap coming from a self proclaimed moderator. >>>The session layer is an elusive beast that is not implemented much > >That is my point. >----- >>>until you have done some real research >-Anil (PhD [Comp-Sci Tokyo Inst of Technology]- Sister School of MIT) >Does that count?? > > >-----Original Message----- >From: anil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Tuesday, December 11, 2001 2:14 PM >To: Priscilla Oppenheimer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: Does session layer protocol use IP address ? [7:28378] > > >>Please stop sending messages about this topic >>(or any other topic) until you have done some real research. >I had no idea you were the moderator of this group. >My sincere apologies > >-Anil > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >Priscilla Oppenheimer >Sent: Sunday, December 09, 2001 7:05 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: RE: Does session layer protocol use IP address ? [7:28378] > > >At 06:18 PM 12/8/01, anil wrote: >>This is from Cisco Oct 2001 Packet.. >>http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/784/packet/oct01/p76-training.html > > >>It must be out of date :-) > >Not "out of date." Just wrong. You can keep coming up with wrong material. >What's your point? > >Have you looked at NFS with a Sniffer? Have you read a Unix man page? Have >you checked some RFCs? > >Have you considered what NFS does? What are its functions? What do its >messages look like? What protocols below it does it rely on? What problems >were its creators trying to solve? > >Please stop sending messages about this topic (or any other topic) until >you have done some real research. In your last message you quoted page 9 of >a CCNA book. Sorry to burst your bubble, but nobody on this list could care >less what it says on page 9 of a CCNA book. This list is for people >studying for advanced Cisco certifications. > >Priscilla > >>-Anil >>------------------------ >> >>5. Session Layer >>The session layer provides services in the application to manage inter-host >>communication. Think of this function as the old-time telephone switchboard >>operator: first, watching for a light on the switchboard indicating a >>connection was needed, next connecting and monitoring the call, and then >>finally disconnecting it by pulling the plug. For example, Network File >>System (NFS) is like an extended feature Telnet program for UNIX that keeps >>a connection (session) alive and available until the terminate command is >>given. Other examples include Structured Query Language (SQL), Remote >>Procedure Call (RPC), and X-Windows. >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >>Priscilla Oppenheimer >>Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 3:13 AM >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: RE: Does session layer protocol use IP address ? [7:28378] >> >> >>That's 40% right. >> >>SQL, NFS, and XWindows are application-layer protocols. >> >>RPC and NetBIOS are session-layer protocols. >> >>We often have discussions about which books are best. Todd Lammle books can >>teach you basic router configuration. They are often wrong where protocol >>behavior is concerned. >> >>A better reference for learning about OSI is the OSI paper by Howard >>Berkowitz at http://www.certificationzone.com. >> >>Priscilla >> >>At 11:32 PM 12/7/01, anil wrote: >> > >The session layer is an elusive beast that is not implemented much >> >Yes, I checked it out.. >> >Session layer protocols include: >> >SQL, NFS, RPC, NetBios, Xwindows are examples of session layer protocols. >> >Page 9 of CCNA 2nd Edition study guide Todd Lammle >> > >> >-Anil >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: anil [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> >Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 11:17 PM >> >To: Priscilla Oppenheimer; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >Subject: RE: Does session layer protocol use IP address ? [7:28378] >> > >> > >> > >The session layer is an elusive beast that is not implemented much >> >Wait a sec, I thought SQL, NFS and netbios were session layer protocols? >> >Someone please correct me. >> >-Anil >> > >> > >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of >> >Priscilla Oppenheimer >> >Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 9:55 PM >> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >Subject: Re: Does session layer protocol use IP address ? [7:28378] >> > >> > >> >At 02:59 AM 12/7/01, mlh wrote: >> > >Hi, there, >> > > >> > >I read Todd Lammle's CCNA2.0 study guide and found this sentence: >>"Remember >> > >that none of the upper >> > >layers know anything about networking or network addresses." I am >>wondering >> > >if the session layer doesn't >> > >use network address, how can it establish a dialogue with other session >> > >layer in other host? >> > >> >I would probably disagree with Todd's statement, although it's taken out >of >> >context and you haven't given us enough information to say that the >> >statement is definitely "wrong." >> > >> >However, try to picture the numerous OSI pictures you have seen. Most of > > >them show horizontal lines between a layer on one host talking to the >same >> >layer on another host. So the session layer talks to the session layer on >> >the other host. That's probably what Todd was getting at. >> > >> >However, the pictures also show vertical lines. A layer calls on a layer > > >below to provide services. Each layer offers services to layers above it. >> > >> >The session layer is an elusive beast that is not implemented much. But >one >> >example might help. NetBIOS is a session layer. On a Windows client, when >> >you access a Server Message Block (SMB) server, NetBIOS has the job of >> >setting up a session with the server. Before it can do that, however, it >> >must find the address of the server. If it's a modern Windows network, >then >> >SMB and NetBIOS are probably running above TCP/IP and UDP/IP. So NetBIOS >> >sends a DNS or WINS query to find the IP address of the named server. It >> >then sets up a NetBIOS session with the server. Actually, first, the >client >> >sets up a TCP connection. TCP has port numbers. The client sends to the >> >well-known TCP port for NetBIOS session (139) and use an ephemeral port >on >> >its side. These port numbers could be considered "addresses" at the >> >transport layer. >> > >> >Anyway, back to the question. The statement is at best over-simplified. I >> >recommend you get yourself a sniffer and watch what really happens >between >> >layers. (Ethereal is free by the way.) >> > >> >Priscilla >> > >> > >> > >> > >Thank you for your time. >> > > > > > >mlh Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28843&t=28378 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
