While I don't whip out an OSI stack number, it's not uncommon to be troubleshooting systems interactions and isolate to specific layers (is this a http issue or an IP issue? Can we ARP successfully? Etc...)
Again, just because multiple conceptual layers map to fewer layer in practice doesn’t mean those functions don't exist... not to mention that assuming that TCP/IP as implemented in current stacks will forever be the only protocol seems a tad shortsighted, no? -sc > -----Original Message----- > From: Kurt Buff [mailto:kurt.b...@gmail.com] > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2010 2:23 AM > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Applicability of the OSI model (was: Big Changes) > > Sigh. > > Newtonian physics works to several 9's of accuracy, and is good enough for > almost everything that humans encounter. That's a whole different beast > than the OSI stack, where, unless I'm thoroughly confused, the only thing > that's even close to widely used that somewhat follows that model is X.400. > > Tell me - when was the last time in your memory where you thought > something like "Oh, this is operating at layer 5 instead of layer 6 or layer > 4"? > > Kurt > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ > <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
