OSI vs TCP/IP Layers

Imagine the world without an abstraction called IP Layer.

That's like asking a telephone lineman about IPv6. Diff layer in the OSI stack.

You're confusing network layer standardization (IP) with the application layer (HTTP, etc.)

There are; VNC doesn't know about IP, for example, and TCP doesn't know about Ethernet. IP is just as happy to run over PPP or Wireguard as over Ethernet. HTTP/1 knows about TCP/IP, but only a little bit, and you can easily run HTTP/1 over other protocols like TLS. Character-cell terminal protocols know very little indeed about the protocol layer under them and work almost equally well over telnet, rsh, SSH, a serial port, a modem, or a bare pseudo-TTY, the main survi

Incorrectly so :-ohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_protocol_suite#Compar...

That's at least one OSI layer north of what was being asked.

You're missing the point. Yes, understanding the different layers involved in a network is important. But the OSI model is the wrong way to explain those layers, because it's a different network/software architecture from the one which was implemented in the Internet. The "blurriness" you're referring to in layers 4-7 is literally because those layers are describing software which was never written.

I think you're missing about 4 layers of the OSI stack.

Tcp/ip is only 1 layer (transport) of the osi stack..

Can we stop using OSI layer numbers for TCP/IP? Why did that ever catch on?