W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > February 2003

Re: Messaging Service Layer

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 08:16:51 -0500
To: Anne Thomas Manes <anne@manes.net>
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Message-ID: <20030216081651.C15741@www.markbaker.ca>


On Sun, Feb 16, 2003 at 07:25:28AM -0500, Anne Thomas Manes wrote:
> The OSI seven layer stack represents the network layer. Anything that can be
> represented in the OSI stack is part of the network layer. Everything above
> the network (the application and messaging layers) can't be represented in
> the OSI stack.

The OSI stack can encapsulate all forms of agreement between parties
over a network; if you've got a protocol, it has a place in the OSI
stack.  Not that I think the OSI model is the be all and end all of
stacks (I don't), but it is complete in that sense.

The IETF model is similarly complete.

(and BTW, "network layer", in this context, usually refers to OSI layer

We've had this discussion here, in other forms (i.e. "GET is an
application semantic"), so I don't expect us to come to any agreement
about this.  If there's concensus in the WG about what you've written, I
would request that this be reflected in the arch doc so that IETFers
and other OSI/IETF model folks can be aware of the difference in
terminology.  Or perhaps it could just go in the glossary, in the
definitions of "application layer", "transport layer", etc..

Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
Received on Sunday, 16 February 2003 08:14:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:41:03 UTC