Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

layered approach suitable for communications architecture?

Options

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 954 ✭✭✭caff


    mise1992 wrote: »
    is a layered approach suitable one to use when dealing with communicatins architecture and how many layers is necessary?

    You don't give any context? This sounds like an exam question...
    The approach you take will differ widely depending on the purpose it is built for and what it has to handle.


  • Registered Users Posts: 34 mise1992


    caff wrote: »
    You don't give any context? This sounds like an exam question...
    The approach you take will differ widely depending on the purpose it is built for and what it has to handle.

    ya it is an exam question! i have been looking at it for ages and can find anything!


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,731 ✭✭✭GreenWolfe


    mise1992 wrote: »
    ya it is an exam question! i have been looking at it for ages and can find anything!

    What about the OSI model?


  • Registered Users Posts: 34 mise1992


    what about it?! the exam question is "do you feel a layered approach is suitable one when dealing with communications architecture? how many layers do you think are necessary? Justify your answer."


  • Registered Users Posts: 954 ✭✭✭caff


    Pick a few of the reasons from this list http://wiki.answers.com/Q/List_the_major_advantages_with_layered_approach_to_protocols

    The biggest advantage of layering is abstraction, each layer doesn't have to care about how the others are built or their protocol as long as their adhere to common standards.

    However there is also the arguement that layering can be too rigid and inflexible as described here http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3439#section-3


  • Advertisement
Advertisement