• 0x4E4F@infosec.pubOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Actually, it’s not that silly, TCP/IP is built on that model, so are many other protocols. Though yes, it can be done better.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      TCP/IP does not have a concept of Presentation or Session. Everything above it is just “Application”, which is more sensible. There isn’t much criticism to be had of layer 4 down, but when they got to layer 5 and 6, they were telecom people sticking their nose in software architecture. You can write networked applications with those layers if you like. I’ve seen it done, and it’s fine. There are also plenty of other ways to architect it that also work just fine.

      • 0x4E4F@infosec.pubOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There isn’t much criticism to be had of layer 4 down, but when they got to layer 5 and 6, they were telecom people sticking their nose in software architecture.

        That is true.

        But, you have to understand, back when OSI was made, the only thing which could benefit from it was telecom and banking… there were no PCs as we know them today. It’s no surprise that OSI caters mostly to telecom software and needs.

        And you could always just use the model up until layer 4, it’s pretty good up until layer 4, and just do whatever you like after that… if you’re developing your own protocol for something that is.