This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Network packet article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I decided to put the definition in this page, instead of Datagram, since a lot more pages link here, so we can avoid a redirect if a reader hits the "packet" link. Noel 09:12, 24 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I'm torn about the IP packet area. I just fixed some typos for 'length' and also realised that a) the description is very long-winded and might benefit from a graphic representation, and b) the idiom 'next XX bits is YY' is used. I personally would use 'next XX bits are YY' instead, but I can see the point of treating the group of bits as a single non-plural. What do people think? TheMoog 11:34, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
I feel inclined when removing a chunk of existing definition to explain what is going on. The definition tried to use the notion of "connections" to define datagrams. This is not correct - the generally accepted definition is that datagrams are unreliable while packets might-or might not-be, depending of if they are datagrams. While connections are related to reliable transmission on the Internet (TCP), there are clear examples of networks that did not support connections per se, but attempted to provide reliable transmission (Arpanet, SDLC, and probably everything else predating Aloha). The network does not need to have a notion of "connections" in order to have reliable transmission. Rick Smith 16:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
The internet protocol does not provide a reliable communication facility. There are no acknowledgments either end-to-end or hop-by-hop. There is no error control for data, only a header checksum. There are no retransmissions. There is no flow control.
A stream of data sent on a TCP connection is delivered reliably and in order at the destination.
Is there a name for "networks that forward packets several hops from one node to the next, but occasionally drop packets and immmediately forget about them"? I suppose I could call them "dumb networks that follow the end-to-end principle", but is there a better name?
What other kinds of networks are there? -- 65.70.89.241 21:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
My understanding is that email is sent using some sort of ARQ system ...
It's called an unreliable network. Learjeff 19:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
I am considering adding this to the article:
Is the preamble considered "the first part of" the header, or "comes before" the header? -- 65.70.89.241 21:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Is a one-byte preamble the same as a "sync byte"? A "sync byte" is mentioned in Transport_stream#Packet (0x47) and Binary_Synchronous_Communications#Framing (what value?) and Local_Interconnect_Network#Header (0x55).
-- 65.70.89.241 16:18, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Ethernet also uses a preample. Preambles are common to protocols that use a broadcast medium, regardless of the particular broadcast medium. For Ethernet, the preample provides collision detection.
65.70.89.241 15:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
No
Although the article 'transmission block' is very sparse and not very informative it should probably not be merged here, at least not without careful examination of the scope of that term. 'Packets' are a form of 'transmission blocks' by some definition perhaps, but transmission blocks are not usually packets, it would appear. A major characteristic of 'packets' or packet-mode communications is that they are sent over a shared communications medium, whereas telecom's 'transmission blocks' are sent over circuits, therefore the need for the common start/end of block markers. Kbrose ( talk) 00:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Under "Example: IP packets," it doesnt specify where in the list the payload itself goes and what size or size range it occupies. -67.161.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.161.54.63 ( talk) 10:43, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
There was some info that did not seem immediately relevant or supportive to the topic. This info was also unclear and unsupported. I am removing those lines and adding here.
End of remarks Stephen Charles Thompson ( talk) 15:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Network packet article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I decided to put the definition in this page, instead of Datagram, since a lot more pages link here, so we can avoid a redirect if a reader hits the "packet" link. Noel 09:12, 24 Aug 2003 (UTC)
I'm torn about the IP packet area. I just fixed some typos for 'length' and also realised that a) the description is very long-winded and might benefit from a graphic representation, and b) the idiom 'next XX bits is YY' is used. I personally would use 'next XX bits are YY' instead, but I can see the point of treating the group of bits as a single non-plural. What do people think? TheMoog 11:34, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
I feel inclined when removing a chunk of existing definition to explain what is going on. The definition tried to use the notion of "connections" to define datagrams. This is not correct - the generally accepted definition is that datagrams are unreliable while packets might-or might not-be, depending of if they are datagrams. While connections are related to reliable transmission on the Internet (TCP), there are clear examples of networks that did not support connections per se, but attempted to provide reliable transmission (Arpanet, SDLC, and probably everything else predating Aloha). The network does not need to have a notion of "connections" in order to have reliable transmission. Rick Smith 16:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
The internet protocol does not provide a reliable communication facility. There are no acknowledgments either end-to-end or hop-by-hop. There is no error control for data, only a header checksum. There are no retransmissions. There is no flow control.
A stream of data sent on a TCP connection is delivered reliably and in order at the destination.
Is there a name for "networks that forward packets several hops from one node to the next, but occasionally drop packets and immmediately forget about them"? I suppose I could call them "dumb networks that follow the end-to-end principle", but is there a better name?
What other kinds of networks are there? -- 65.70.89.241 21:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
My understanding is that email is sent using some sort of ARQ system ...
It's called an unreliable network. Learjeff 19:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)
I am considering adding this to the article:
Is the preamble considered "the first part of" the header, or "comes before" the header? -- 65.70.89.241 21:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Is a one-byte preamble the same as a "sync byte"? A "sync byte" is mentioned in Transport_stream#Packet (0x47) and Binary_Synchronous_Communications#Framing (what value?) and Local_Interconnect_Network#Header (0x55).
-- 65.70.89.241 16:18, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Ethernet also uses a preample. Preambles are common to protocols that use a broadcast medium, regardless of the particular broadcast medium. For Ethernet, the preample provides collision detection.
65.70.89.241 15:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
No
Although the article 'transmission block' is very sparse and not very informative it should probably not be merged here, at least not without careful examination of the scope of that term. 'Packets' are a form of 'transmission blocks' by some definition perhaps, but transmission blocks are not usually packets, it would appear. A major characteristic of 'packets' or packet-mode communications is that they are sent over a shared communications medium, whereas telecom's 'transmission blocks' are sent over circuits, therefore the need for the common start/end of block markers. Kbrose ( talk) 00:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Under "Example: IP packets," it doesnt specify where in the list the payload itself goes and what size or size range it occupies. -67.161.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.161.54.63 ( talk) 10:43, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
There was some info that did not seem immediately relevant or supportive to the topic. This info was also unclear and unsupported. I am removing those lines and adding here.
End of remarks Stephen Charles Thompson ( talk) 15:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)