and to clear up a little confusion in the references in the previous the OSI reference: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003m.html#9 OSI not quite dead yet
was in a thread about OSI/ISO vis-a-vis IETF ... using DNS activity as example of IETF workings. The thread started by claiming that two major differences between ISO and IETF vis-a-vis OSI ... were 1) ISO disn't require actual implementation for something to become a standard (you can get standards that are not actually implementable) while IETF does 2) ISO attempted to cast OSI in concret and make a cult of it for the true bleievers by instructing ISO-chartered standards body that they couldn't standardize a networking protocol that violated the OSI model http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003l.html#47 OSI not quite dead yet Basically OSI model reflected 1960s era technology. To some extent the ARPANET during the 70s reflected the OSI model. By the early '80s (when OSI was finally passed, at least) two significant things had happened: 1) arpanet on 1/1/83 converted to internet(working) protocol ... something that doesn't exist in the OSI model 2) LANs appeared that subsume levels 1, 2, and part of 3 (in the OSI model) with a MAC interface that sits in the middle of layer 3. Trying to get HSP (high-speed protocol) considered as standard in the late '80s in x3.s3.3 (iso chartered us body responsible for networking protocols in OSI level 3&4) .... it had to be turned down. HSP would go directly from level 4 interface directly to LAN/MAC interface. Since LAN/MAC violated OSI ... and since ISO proscribed work on standards that violated OSI model .... it was not possible to standardize any protocol that supported LAN/MAC interface. -- Internet trivia, 20th anv: http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/rfcietff.htm
