2 ms·
Not to mention the Real Person All Grown Up Protocol Stack, OSI, which of course was going to displace this ARPANET childishness with protocols like the X.212 d
by msla 4y ago
Not to mention the Real Person All Grown Up Protocol Stack, OSI, which of course was going to displace this ARPANET childishness with protocols like the X.212 data link layer that, like all data link layer protocols, provides checksumming and resending and distinguishes between connection-oriented and connectionless communication, plus X.400 email which, naturally, uses the simple, comprehensible, easy-to-implement X.500 directory service, for email addressing inherently tied to your employer and physical address.
Or OSI will crash and burn and we'll all pretend it was just a model from day one, and insist that TCP/IP is best understood using precisely the kind of strict layering the IETF explicitly rejected in RFC 3439. Y'know, whatever reinforces the notion that we never lose.
https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3439 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3439
- anyfoo 4y agoHeh, I remember attending trade shows in a time when X.400 and X.500 were all the rage. Always a bad sign when another protocol comes along and calls itself "lightweight", as in LDAP, the "lightweight directory access protocol" merely based on X.500. SMTP is also the "simple" mail transfer protocol, but it's not based on X.400 in any way and was apparently replacing... FTP! (Only for one particular use case obviously.)