3 ms·

I think a nice addition would be familiarity with the OSI model. It can be really useful having an understanding of it, at least a rough one, when trouble shoot

• oldandtired 9y ago
  This post seems to have been downvoted. Why? Having a knowledge of the OSI model has been beneficial in all sorts of ways since I was first exposed to it decades ago. I have even used one implementation of it actively and in a commercial environment. What we were able to do with at the time, made all other networking protocols seem very primitive (including the tcp/ip set of protocols and IBM's SNA). It may have not survived in the long run, but there is no guarantees about any system or product doing so. It is still worth understanding the basics of it though. [Edit for readability]
  • Const-me 9y ago
    > downvoted. Why? Networks have changed a lot since 1983. The only good idea from that model is “you can build a higher-level protocol on top of a lower level protocol”. Nowadays software ate every level of the OSI model including physical layer, and the idea of composing these layers is kinda obvious because that’s how people design complex software. > has been beneficial in all sorts of ways Having a knowledge of the OSI model has been beneficial to me in only one way, when someone asked me about it on a job interview. > It is still worth understanding the basics of it though. I know the basics, but I think that for younger people the OSI model is mostly useless. There’s modern stuff to demonstrate that principle of composability of protocols, e.g. websocket/http/tls (all of them are based on each other and yet all are on the same OSI level 7).