Recently an instructor in a class I was taking said something I found
interesting. I hope I can do justice to his words.
Network layer:IP IP IP
Transport layer: TCP UDP
Application layer: BGPRIP EIGRP, OSP
relies on TCP
Very confusing .
- Original Message -
From: "Chuck Larrieu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Zhang Jin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2000 12:18 AM
Subject: RE: routing protocols vs Tcp/ip model
Your instructor is one of the all-too-large group of people who try
to coerce things into a simplistic OSI model. Priscilla calls this
coercing protocols into OSI layers. It's really not the fault of OSI,
because there are documents that supplement the original model, such
as the Rout(e)ing Fr
Berkowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Reply-To: "Howard C. Berkowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: routing protocols vs Tcp/ip model
>Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 08:11:34 -0500
>
>Your instructor is one of the all-too-large group of peop
>Stephen Skinner wrote, let me see if i have this correct...
>
>routing protocols do the following
>
>manage links
>exchange data
>route packet
>update each other
I'd agree with exchange data and update each other. Try approaching
this from a different direction. Can we agree that the endpoints
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
Howard C. Berkowitz
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2000 6:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:RE: routing protocols vs Tcp/ip model
>Stephen Skinner wrote, let me see if i have this correct.
>Howard, I know we've had this discussion before here on groupstudy. I also
>accept that there remains a lot of confusion of OSI terminology with PC
>terminology. I.e. application on a PC versus OSI application.
>
>That said, I am looking at the Certification Zone OSI paper. (which
>version? I di
Howard commented:
>
>That said, I am looking at the Certification Zone OSI paper. (which
>version? I did one.)
It was the OSI paper by someone else of the same name and a different
CertificationZone with the same url ;->
_
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info
ECTED]>
>To: "Zhang Jin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2000 12:18 AM
>Subject: RE: routing protocols vs Tcp/ip model
>
>
> > Recently an instructor in a class I was taking said something I found
> > interesting.
>Routing protocols have network-layer functionality, regardless of
>whether they use an IP header, IP/UDP header, IP/BGP header, or no
>header at all above the MAC header (IS-IS) to transfer their
>information.
>
>If we can't agree that routing protocols have network-layer
>functionality, we s
You gotta love the airline industry. &;-)
"Many people on board the aircraft were quite upset that there was a large
uncontrollable pig on board, especially those in the first-class cabin,"
the incident report stated.
Priscilla
At 04:46 PM 11/11/00, Howard C. Berkowitz wrote:
>>Routing protoc
;To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: routing protocols vs Tcp/ip model
>Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 19:02:03 -0800
>
>You gotta love the airline industry. &;-)
>
>"Many people on board the aircraft were quite upset that there was a large
>uncontrollable pig on board, especi
> Your instructor is one of the all-too-large group of people who try
> to coerce things into a simplistic OSI model. Priscilla calls this
> coercing protocols into OSI layers. It's really not the fault of OSI,
> because there are documents that supplement the original model, such
> as the Rou
At 7:58 PM -0700 11/12/2000, Irwin Lazar wrote:
>
>
>To further cloud the discussion, I've heard folks argue that MPLS is a layer
>2 1/2 protocol, and I've also heard folks argue that MPLS is a layer 3 1/2
>protocol since it rides on top of IP (though how something could ride "on
>top" of IP yet c
- Original Message -
From: "Priscilla Oppenheimer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2000 3:39 AM
Subject: Re: routing protocols vs Tcp/ip model
> Routing protocols have network-layer functionality, regardless of whether
&g
15 matches
Mail list logo
