Re: Lost Layer?
[email protected] (Noel Chiappa) Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:09:29 -0500 (EST)
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.end2end |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> From: Joe Touch <[email protected]> >> IPvN = 'internetwork layer'. > Which is what ISO calls the network layer, which is why I map the two > as equal. There are (at least) three layers there. If you persist in trying to name them with only two names, you will of course run into insuperable Procustean difficulties. > From: Jon Crowcroft <[email protected]> > MOST things now have a net later as well as a link layer in fact, > because most the world is either in a data center or on a cellular data > net, and both have topology that is manged by routing that runs below > the IP layer and is tech specific I'd forgotten all about mobile! Amazing how the world has come full circle and we once again have complex (subnetwork-wide) network layers underneath the internetwork layer. (To me, a sign that the internetwork layer architecture is lacking in functionality/capability/flexibility... but I digress.) I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say 'most' as I think a lot of home links don't have a complex network layer, since they are often via CATV (and, in more advance plant, fiber to the home) - but then again, a lot of home links are via DSL, and I don't know how that's carried inside the ISPs these days (it used to be ATM), so perhaps your 'most' is correct. Noel