Protocol question

[Variable]

Im sitting for the Net+ tommorow and I've been going over some questions online and one in particular has me confused.

The question is which of these protocols are connectionless.

Netbuie
HTTP
FTP
TFTP

I have seen several places answer this as TFTP and HTTP. But HTTP uses TCP which is a connection oriented protocol.
Shouldn't the answer be Netbuie and TFTP? NetBUIE uses broadcasts and TFTP is certainly connectionless.
Anyone have any ideas on the subject?

Variable

[malcore]

One needs to be aware of layering. For instance, using HTTP over TCP, would be connection oreiented (or CL over CO), but TCP uses IP which is connectionless (CL),therefore CO over CL (HTTP-CL over TCP-CO over IP-CL). So, the question becomes vague. If we are purely looking at individual protocols, then disregard the fact that a CO or CL protocol may use another CL or CO protocol/transport. If that makes sense.

[Variable]

I thought the IP function was for addressing and path selection for HTTP. The data from the web site is sent over TCP port 80. IP gets it there then TCP takes over, so to speak.

[malcore]

Yes, it gets confusing. The point I was trying to make is the question (like all of these types of questions) is vague. Some will say for instance, that HTTP is connectionless, but as you pointed out, it uses TCP which is connection oriented. So confusion sets in.

TCP uses IP, which is CL. So, TCP must divide data into segments for transmission, place each segment in an IP datagram, and then send the datagrams across the underlying internetwork.

HTTP uses TCP (i.e., CO transport). TCP uses IP, so it's CO over CL. If the underlying network hardware happens to be CL, that's the end of the story.

But back to my point, your question is good and confusing. Just looking at HTTP, is it CL or CO?

Sorry, probably confusing the issue even more, but I just wrote my NET+ last month and still can't get enough of this. Still have many questions too.;)

[Variable]

How did the test go? any tips?

[juniper]

TFTP is on UDP port 69
HTTP is on TCP port 80
FTP is on TCP port 21 and port 20 for data

Netbuie is a virus!

Netbeui is protocol used by Lan manager or microsoft that is a legacy protocol no longer supported in windows XP created by IBM adopted by microsoft.

UDP and TCP are layer 4 protocols that use IP to get information from one computer to another.

TCP is connection oriented UDP is not.

[Variable]

Netbuie isn't a virus ;p Remember the Net+ deals with windows 95 and up.

There are two types of FTP, most FTP is passive and don't use port 20 for data. For FTP just remember port 21. The data port is negotiated.

BTW I already passed the test.

[juniper]

Trojan.NetBuie.A is a Trojan horse that comes disguised as an XBox emulator.

I think you need to check your spelling hehe! ( Netbuie vs Netbeui )

Also you are correct FTP does have two different modes in Active mode FTP uses 21 and 20, The problem with Active mode is that the FTP server is the one that tries to start the TCP session back to the client which most good firewalls use a sort of ASA that does not allow connections generated from the outside to come in but will allow all traffic out and the responses back in. So they craeted passive mode which the host sends a PASV command. The server then opens a random unprivileged port starting port 1024 (rather the first open port starting at 1024) and sends the PORT # command back to the client. The client then initiates the connection from port #+1 to port # on the server to transfer data this is how it gets past the firewall.

I never took net+ ( I just have MCNE 6, CCNA, CQS-CFS (cisco firewall specialist), CNE5, CNE4, CNS- cert novell specialist in groupwise, TCP, Bordermanager, ZENworks, MCP XP, MCP NT4, project +. ) but I think all you need for this question is not the port but that FTP is a TCP connection oriented protocol.

CONGRATS on paasing NET+!!!!!!

[Variable]

Ahh I missed the spelling error. I see your point.

I have my CCNA, MCP in 2k Pro and now Net+. The MCSA is next on the list with three tests left to go. I see your heavy into Novell. I have only a little experience with Novell, but the class I did have in it, well, I liked it. I like the way the file system is organized. But, Novell seems to be dieing a slow death. The local college where I got my networking AA from, has stopped teaching Novell. There are still good jobs out there for a Novell person though.

[juniper]

Yeah novell is pretty much gone in small to medium businesses, Since most of the app vendors only want to support one OS (more cost effective) they wright for microsoft forcing people to migrate, it is also easier to comprehend since it has a GUI. Novell purchase SuSE Linux and is migrating all its apps (e-directory, zenworks, groupwise, etc. ) to run on it and they are getting rid of the netware kernal so now Im studding CLE (Novell certified linux engineer) since it looks to me linux is growing at the rate microsoft did in the early 90's. I think in 5 years linux will be very common in the work place.

[Variable]

I think Linux will only be in the server closet in 5 years (like it is now), at least in America, if only because of the reason you stated which is consistent platforms but, there are other reasons too. Linux does a few things really well but, the end user though is confused enough with normal Windows, let alone learning a whole new OS.

Another thing that is benefiting Windows is that, computing power is still increasing as fast, as it has, for the last 15 years. So, resource hogs like Windows xp can function fine because technology is keeping up with their bloat. It used to be that Linux was great because it used so few system resources - it used to matter. Now, were at the point that the hold up is the software applications taking advantage of the current technology i.e. 64 bit Opterons and Itaniums.

Another problem for the end user with Linux is what I will call out-of-the-box functionality. Can you go buy the latest gadget from Best Buy or Newegg and slap it in your Linux box and start using it? The answer is no. What most people know as plug and play is not present with Linux that I know of. I can't even get Linux to support my PPoA DSL modem. Driver support is an issue with Linux. I know I will be stepping on some Linux guru's toes, but they tweak their kernel and machine as a matter of course, the average user is not gonna have a clue about how to do that to make things work. Also, don't overlook small to mid size corporations, a lot of the "IT" people out there are barely holding onto their sanity as is. Anything requiring actual in-depth knowledge of how things work is going too met with a lot of resistance. They want plug-and-Play, they want certified drivers- they want no headaches.

Maybe Novell can pull it off and make Linux more user friendly and capable. That's what Linux needs. It needs to step out of the niche market and into the big time to compete with Windows. Red Hat hasn't been able to pull it off. Anyway, I'm starting to ramble so I shall take my leave.

Variable

[juniper]

You seem to share the same view as many of my co workers. I have a different opinion on this. As for usability in the business I think Linux is there except for the database compatiblity on the end user side I go to hundreds of businesses and the majority of small businesses (100 user or less) have no IT department at all and outsource all computer work as no one onsite can do so much as change a network card or worse add an IP address to one. So as long as the consultant knows linux there really is no difference. ( the look and feel is almost identicle). If you look at most forums you will see alot of young people using linux at home because it offers more utilities and features for free so when the teenagers hit the IT fields with a broad feel of linux they will be the ones bringing it into the work force. As for your DSL I did a standard install of mandrake and SuSE and both easily worked with DSL just from clicking next during install ( It actually takes less time to install Linux then XP on most systems for myself). Novell is making things very easy using Ximian desktop with auto updates for every app all in one screen using red carpet and Zenworks. Also companies like IBM have been scoping out putting linux on every employees desk at this point people will buy linux for home so they are working with the same software at both places this is how microsoft got so big in my opinion. I think its getting close. 5 years is my guess when you will see it in abut 20-30% of businesses.

[Paleo Pete]

I know I will be stepping on some Linux guru's toes, but they tweak their kernel and machine as a matter of course, the average user is not gonna have a clue about how to do that to make things work.

That says a lot...your entire post had some excellent points, and I agree with most of it. I like Linux a lot, I'm using Mandrake right now, but I agree that it's just not "ready for prime time" yet. I'd love to see it, but so far it hasn't happened.

I've also given some thought to juniper's comment that in a few years when the youngsters using Linux now get into IT fields they will have a broader knowledge if it and a better chance of helping it into the mainstream, and that makes a lot of sense. Also the idea that if people are using it at work they will get a copy at home too just to be using the same OS both places seems logical.

Yeah, some of the really dedicated Linux fans might feel slighted by these types of comments, but probably very few of them that hang around here, most seem to be a bit more broad minded. Fact is, though, it's true...Linux is stable, flexible and resource friendly - but not yet user friendly, and that's the key to the home user's heart.

Soon as you can plug in your spiffy new Wally World web cam and send pictures to grandpa with no muss, no fuss - Linux will start to gain widespread home user acceptance. Not a minute sooner. I can do almost anything I need with windows, even XP which I don't run on my own machines, but I have a hard time getting Linux to do everything I want it to do.

Example...I want something to let a Linux machine take the place of Quick Books to handle book keeping and customer receipts for my shop. I've found 3 applications that sound good, but after trying for a week or more I never got one of them to successfully compile and run. Spent 2 nights downloading necessary *.lib files and other dependencies, learning how to compile the thing and trying to get a C compiler installed and running, kept getting a "No compatible C compiler found" error message...this thing is supposed to have at least one on it, GCC wouldn't install because it couldn't find it...CC I think it was...

Nope, the average home user is not about to deal with all that. Push the button and it works, that's what they look for. Until that happens, sorry Linux fans, it's gonna stay back burner.

On the other side of the coin, quite a few really good advances have been made. Each new version of whatever distribution you like seems to be a step or two closer to user friendly. More hardware is supported now and the hardware support keeps getting better. More software is being written that will handle Linux as well as Windows, and with Novell's efforts and IBM advertising Linux on TV, more hardware and software developers are starting to pay attention.

I already use Linux almost exclusively for Internet, and will for business if I ever get a good business application running. Many larger businesses are running Linux servers or switching over for any of several reasons. Ernie Ball String company (guitar strings) switched a while back, and they love it. No more employess sneaking games and screensavers in, better security, lots more stable, and much less expensive. It's getting there...

[Variable]

Thanks for your kind words Pete.

As for the youngsters using Linux, I agree, I see it all the time. In any higher education, I have been a part of, you see Linux zealots (thats what I call them.) I work with some guys who have ported Linux commands over to Windows. Grep is highly prized. I didn't even know you could do that :)

The only thing I would say is, that Linux is not new, it has been around for some time now, so has the other Unix flavors. Whether or not it will become a force in mainstream user OS's is yet to be seen. I hope it does. Competition is a good thing.

V

[juniper]

""The only thing I would say is, that Linux is not new,


I cant think of a newer OS then linux...

Unix has been around before bill gates was born hehe, as for linux it started in the early 90's linus T. was just messin with minux and just decided to create his own OS with no assumption it would ever be mainstream, just free to play with. Look at how much it has grown in the last 5 years. I dont think SCO would be spending the money in lawyer fees to get claims to linux if they wasnt thinking the same as me hehehe!

as for web servers microsoft is already loosing ground as 70% of the internet is apache and is growing not shrinking.

clip from cnet

"About 1.35 million copies of Linux were sold in 1999, which is 25 percent of the 5.4 million total copies of operating system software, according to preliminary data from market research firm International Data Corp. Linux shipments surpassed that of tried-and-true operating systems Novell Netware and all types of Unix in 1999. Nearly twice as many copies of Linux shipped last year than in 1998, and it grew at roughly four times the rate of the server OS market as a whole.

"Linux is moving much more rapidly than we thought," IDC analyst Dan Kusnetzky said. "We had projected it would be No. 2 in 2002 or 2003. It happened in 1999."

[Variable]

I cant think of a newer OS then linux

I can, 2003 Server, or uhh Windows XP. :)
If your going to say they are just variations of an earlier OS? I would say well what is Linux or the other variations of UNIX? Completely and totally different then previous OS's? Isn't SCO suing them? Why?


Hey, you forgot to include the next paragraph in the article you cited..

But sales of Linux brought in only $32 million for the whole year, less than 1 percent of the $5.7 billion market. Windows NT, by comparison, brought in $1.7 billion.

hehe, Im not arguing that Linux is not growing. The original post I made about Linux pretty much sums up my feelings.

V

[juniper]

dollar amount is nothing in linux world because uhhm well its free!!!! So it in no way shows how much of the market each owns the numbers are really just what they found out there for linux since it is free and almost impossible to know who is really running it. And microsoft sells at an outragouse license cost. very bad example you have there.


Isn't SCO suing them?
Im assuming you meen other Unix vendors?

No they are not, they are suing people for using linux because they believe IBM put unix code into linux ( which is why they are suing IBM ,so no unix and linux are not the same thing) and novell for slander. Please get your facts right. linux is not unix but works closely in the same way.

Your comparison is like saying microsft windows is a derivative of apple since they stole the GUI consept from them which apple got from xerox.

To compare XP and 2003 both microsoft OSes that where derived from DOS 20+ years ago is like comparing well one of 200 versions of linux. (how many new kernal upgrades have you seen in linux compared to microsoft in the past 5 years its growing fast)

you really have to compare the uprising of microsoft vs the uprising of linux in a whole both started as a command line OS and evolved to the full version OSes of today the difference is linux started 10 years later than microsoft.