Re: Layer 3.5 is actually layer 4

[Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>]

marcelo;

> > It should be noted that, during the discussion, no one have
> > give any support for your sweeping statement that:
> >
> > 	The systems level argument for a layer 3.5 solution is that
> > 	it can cover all cases, including ones we have not
> > 	invented yet.
>
>
> Just to state the obvious, I agree with this statement, and i guess that the
> authors of the several so called 3.5 layer solution do too (some of them
> have stated it clearly in some mails).

Thank you agreeing with my statement.

However, as Brian said

	So could we please close this discussion?

it is too late for Brian to make your support valid.

Your statement is invalid also because you give any technical
points at all.

You should be also aware that if authors of the several so called
layer 3 solutions agree with the fallacy, they should have stated
so cleary. But, they didn't. It is not your job to speak for them.

> Please do not assume that silence means that people agree with you, assume
> that people are just tired to continue endless discussions

Which is why raising new technical points is important, though it
is poor couter argument if the points raised are already
denied by the existing argument.

A simple fact is that:

	TCP is not IP.

							Masataka Ohta