User talk:Kbrose

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Editor talk[edit]

OSPF Link Layer???[edit]

OSPF is not a link layer (TCP/IP) or Layer 2 (OSI) protocol. You are repeatedly editing Wikipedia with wrong information known to you and affected by your own personal believes and thoughts, which have no references. I will report to the administrator if you do not stop it.

" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pritishp333 (talkcontribs) 09:29, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

The function of the Link Layer goes back a long time and the references are cited in the template documentation. OSPF does not fit neatly into OSI networking; it was developed within the TCP/IP framework and the specs don't use any of that OSI language. There is some legitimate ambiguity about layering characteristics, but that is not important in TCP/IP anyways. This has been rehashed in talk pages many times. The latest OSPF specs (v3) specify it works on the Link Layer, and it makes perfect sense as packets never leave the link. That's what Link Layer means in TCP/IP. You should read up on it and not blindly follow misguided "advise". Kbrose (talk) 01:20, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

It's not a misguided advice read here what Industry Experts (Specifically Cisco VIP Scott Morris-CCDE/4xCCIE/2xJNCIE) have said on this issue: https://learningnetwork.cisco.com/thread/82389?start=30&tstart=0 Pritishp333 (talk) 17:03, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

You can think whatever and listen to whoever you like, but please don't edit WP by relaying opinions you gather from your favorite forums. The purpose of the Link Layer in TCP/IP is roughly defined in RFC1122 and that does not mention any of your perceived requirements. OSI is not TCP/IP. Please don't conflate them, despite that being a favorite sport by those who don't read sources. How come you are not objecting to other protocols, such as L2TP being listed in the Link Layer section? That is much more of a problematic case than OSPF is. Kbrose (talk) 01:48, 20 May 2015 (UTC)