Your mnemonic trick to remember the OSI layer

This is something I never really forgotten (which probably helps when starting to study for the CCNA) is the OSI model ..

I thought, why don't we all share how we remember them :P

So here is my one (top to bottom)

[Application] All
[Presentation] Pros
[Session] Search
[Transport] Top
[Network] Notch
[Data Link] Donut
[Physical] Places

The CBT Nugget one is not too bad either (Bottom to Top)

[Application] Away
[Presentation] Pizza
[Session] Sausage
[Transport] Throw
[Network] Not
[Data Link] Do
[Physical] Please

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

dynamik

There's been a couple of threads with a lot of those:
http://techexams.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3740
http://techexams.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=29818

And yes, I did find those by searching for "ninja turtles" in the search

royal

I think the CBT Nuggets one is a really good one for beginners just starting out on the OSI Model. Give it a little practice and those layers will be ingrained into your head.

Plazma

Ohhh i got a good one !

I have used the pizza on before but here goes

Application : All
Presentation : People
Session : Seem
Transport: To
Network: Need
Data-link: Data
Physical: Processing

Panzer919

[Application] All
[Presentation] People
[Session] Should
[Transport] Try
[Network] New
[Data Link] Dr
[Physical] Pepper

TryPingingTheServer

All
People
Should
Not
Stress
Over
The
OSI
Model
As
It
Is
Obsolete.

jibbajabba

TryPingingTheServer wrote:

All
People
Should
Not
Stress
Over
The
OSI
Model
As
It
Is
Obsolete.

Darthn3ss

all people seem to need data processing

ITdude

TryPingingTheServer wrote:

All
People
Should
Not
Stress
Over
The
OSI
Model
As
It
Is
Obsolete.

I don't think so.........

Slowhand

I found that it was much easier to remember all the layers, and their order, once I began to grasp an understanding of what each does and what types of devices (or functions) reside in each. The mnemonic devices didn't do much for me. Well, there was one, but I don't think anyone's going to want to hear it. . .

/usr

I've always just remembered PDNTSPA.

Works for me.

dtlokee

The OSI model is not obsolete, and yes you should know it.

TryPingingTheServer

dtlokee wrote:

The OSI model is not obsolete, and yes you should know it.

We live in the world of TCP/IP remember?

dtlokee

TryPingingTheServer wrote:

dtlokee wrote:

The OSI model is not obsolete, and yes you should know it.

We live in the world of TCP/IP remember?

So what's a layer 3 switch? Or layer 4-7 inspection? Not everything is only TCP/IP.

But hey what do I know.

dynamik

TryPingingTheServer wrote:

dtlokee wrote:

The OSI model is not obsolete, and yes you should know it.

We live in the world of TCP/IP remember?

You seriously said that to a CCIE?

I hope this is a case of ultra subtle sarcasm.

snadam

dynamik wrote:

TryPingingTheServer wrote:

dtlokee wrote:

The OSI model is not obsolete, and yes you should know it.

We live in the world of TCP/IP remember?

You seriously said that to a CCIE?

I hope this is a case of ultra subtle sarcasm.

A-ll
P-eople
S-houle
T-take
N-note of
D-tlokee's
P-ower and wisdom

its a stretch, but I think it works

jibbajabba

dtlokee wrote:

But hey what do I know.

NOTHING

j/k :P

TryPingingTheServer

dtlokee wrote:

TryPingingTheServer wrote:

dtlokee wrote:

The OSI model is not obsolete, and yes you should know it.

We live in the world of TCP/IP remember?

So what's a layer 3 switch? Or layer 4-7 inspection? Not everything is only TCP/IP.

But hey what do I know.

K, advertise yourself as a session-layer protocol developer and see who bites.

dynamik

snadam wrote:

A-ll
P-eople
S-houle
T-take
N-note of
D-tlokee's
P-ower and wisdom

its a stretch, but I think it works

Awesome

networker050184

TryPingingTheServer wrote:

dtlokee wrote:

TryPingingTheServer wrote:

dtlokee wrote:

The OSI model is not obsolete, and yes you should know it.

We live in the world of TCP/IP remember?

So what's a layer 3 switch? Or layer 4-7 inspection? Not everything is only TCP/IP.

But hey what do I know.

K, advertise yourself as a session-layer protocol developer and see who bites.

Try to getting a job if you tell the employer the OSI model is not important...--

shednik

dynamik wrote:

snadam wrote:

A-ll
P-eople
S-houle
T-take
N-note of
D-tlokee's
P-ower and wisdom

its a stretch, but I think it works

Awesome

Brilliant!!

btw TryPingingTheServer if you're going to make statements like that how about backing them up with your source if the OSI model is so obsolete then why is it still used today and found in literally every text book on networking..

jibbajabba

shednik wrote:

btw TryPingingTheServer if you're going to make statements like that how about backing them up with your source if the OSI model is so obsolete then why is it still used today and found in literally every text book on networking..

Wouldn't even argue to be honest .. not worth it :P :P

LBC90805

not strictly OSI but:

Don't = DATA
Smoke = SEGMENT
Pot = PACKET
For = FRAME
Breakfast = BITS

dtlokee

TryPingingTheServer wrote:

dtlokee wrote:

TryPingingTheServer wrote:

dtlokee wrote:

The OSI model is not obsolete, and yes you should know it.

We live in the world of TCP/IP remember?

So what's a layer 3 switch? Or layer 4-7 inspection? Not everything is only TCP/IP.

But hey what do I know.

K, advertise yourself as a session-layer protocol developer and see who bites.

Not to continue this but... SIP

How many thousands of hours are put into that one protocol? Oh and it's on the session layer of the OSI model. You can also argue it's on the TCP/IP Application layer as well.

Point is, the OSI model is still a very important model used to describe almost anyting in networking. The TCP/IP model (formerly the DOD model) is far less common even though the TCP/IP protocol stack was developed using it.

scheistermeister

TryPingingTheServer wrote:

dtlokee wrote:

The OSI model is not obsolete, and yes you should know it.

We live in the world of TCP/IP remember?

IS-IS FTW!

astorrs

scheistermeister wrote:

TryPingingTheServer wrote:

dtlokee wrote:

The OSI model is not obsolete, and yes you should know it.

We live in the world of TCP/IP remember?

IS-IS FTW!

Yeah the ignorance is mind-blowing. TCP/IP may be the most popular protocol but there are dozens of other protocols still in use, and having a common standard to map them against is important.

P.S. scheistermeister, I like the new avatar.

scheistermeister

astorrs wrote:

P.S. scheistermeister, I like the new avatar.

Your Too Legit gave me the idea

astorrs

scheistermeister wrote:

Your Too Legit gave me the idea

Yeah, sorry about that...

tiersten

TryPingingTheServer wrote:

dtlokee wrote:

The OSI model is not obsolete, and yes you should know it.

We live in the world of TCP/IP remember?

I'm not. I'm currently in the world of FCP to see whether we should go FCoE. We've got a fairly sizeable FC-SW SAN at the moment but somebody up high has heard of FCoE so now I've got to go look at that even though its not even ready.

At the end of the day, the proposal will be shot down because the price of all the gear. Ah well. Back to FC-SW

astorrs

tiersten wrote:

I'm not. I'm currently in the world of FCP to see whether we should go FCoE. We've got a fairly sizeable FC-SW SAN at the moment but somebody up high has heard of FCoE so now I've got to go look at that even though its not even ready.

At the end of the day, the proposal will be shot down because the price of all the gear. Ah well. Back to FC-SW

Ah yes, you're experiencing this problem.

The draft of FCoE isn't even due until this month. What does he want you to use for hardware? I mean Emulex/QLogic and Cisco have demonstrated it as working against the Nexus 5000, but it's not like the configurations with those HBAs/switches are generally available, let alone supported by anyone. Even Brocade has only committed to FCoE "by the end of the year".

Talk about being an early adopter (and on one of your most critical components in the data center). I love CIOs like this.

P.S. Just curious, how many nodes on your switched fabric?

tiersten

astorrs wrote:

Ah yes, you're experiencing this problem

Pretty much. Its time to get worried when you see glossy trade magazines appearing on the desk

astorrs wrote:

What does he want you to use for hardware? I mean Emulex/QLogic and Cisco have demonstrated it as working against the Nexus 5000

I'd love to have a Nexus to play with but yeah... not gonna happen!

astorrs wrote:

P.S. Just curious, how many nodes on your switched fabric?

Just over 100. Its an IBM shop which means IBM DS arrays, nSeries branded NetApps, TSM libraries, iSeries running a combination of legacy AS/400 systems and newer backends, pSeries running the front ends and xSeries running some standalone Windows services + ESX. Just replacing the directors would cost a fortune.

IBM need to get a bit more colour in their gear. The only thing I'm missing a zSeries

Gah. You can really date when I started messing around with IBM gear by what I call them.