![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Listen, I'm considering rewriting this article in the following way:
In general, I feel that the existing article somewhat confuses the role of the interface and overly simplifies physical layer processing as mere electrical pulses on a wire. This may be true for old standards, but certainly does not hold for any physical layer standard developed since the mid-1980's.
Any comments? RobertYu 21:41, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Would not a better analogy for the physical mail system be the vehicles that transport the mail, rather than "a specification for various kinds of paper and ink"? BevanFindlay 22:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Is there a standard pinout for putting EIA-485 on a
RJ-11
6P4C or RJ-45
8P8C connector?
(Does
10BASE-T specify this, or are the signals on a 10BASE-T cable *not* EIA-485 signals?)
I would like to fill in the holes in this table:
This table distinguishes "the electrical voltages" from "the mechanical plug shape and how the wires are twisted" from "some standard that defines which voltage goes on which physical conductor". Is there a name for these 3 things? Yes, OSI model calls all 3 things taken together the "Physical Layer", but is there 3 different names for these 3 part?
-- 65.70.89.241 17:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Give your vote here. Should the TCP/IP model template have four or five layers? I.e. should the physical layer be a separate layer or not? And what should the the bottom layer be named in case of four layers? And is it okay to mention both the four and five layer TCP/IP models in Wikipedia articles? Mange01 ( talk) 18:24, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the move request was no consensus for move. Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 04:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
I believe this move should be undone (the move was made along with several other {{ OSIModel}}-related moves). WP:MOSCAPS issues can be tricky, but in my mind the issue boils down to whether this article is OSI-specific.
This article covers both OSI and non-OSI issues — point-to-point and bus topologies aren't OSI, but still have PHYs. While it might be possible to split the article into two parts (a general-purpose physical layer, and an OSI-specific Physical Layer (OSI) or somesuch), it seems far more sensible to leave this as a single article that covers both OSI and non-OSI issues, and name it 'physical layer' to reflect its general-purpose nature. -- Underpants 15:20, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
It is not clear that for instance a cable itself is considered physical layer or that only the signals are physical layer. When doing a bottom-up aproach based on the OSI model the first step is to check the wiring. (According tot Cisco CCNA 4.0 module 1) So, is a cable itself considered physical layer or not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.145.222.194 ( talk) 22:23, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Listen, I'm considering rewriting this article in the following way:
In general, I feel that the existing article somewhat confuses the role of the interface and overly simplifies physical layer processing as mere electrical pulses on a wire. This may be true for old standards, but certainly does not hold for any physical layer standard developed since the mid-1980's.
Any comments? RobertYu 21:41, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Would not a better analogy for the physical mail system be the vehicles that transport the mail, rather than "a specification for various kinds of paper and ink"? BevanFindlay 22:16, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Is there a standard pinout for putting EIA-485 on a
RJ-11
6P4C or RJ-45
8P8C connector?
(Does
10BASE-T specify this, or are the signals on a 10BASE-T cable *not* EIA-485 signals?)
I would like to fill in the holes in this table:
This table distinguishes "the electrical voltages" from "the mechanical plug shape and how the wires are twisted" from "some standard that defines which voltage goes on which physical conductor". Is there a name for these 3 things? Yes, OSI model calls all 3 things taken together the "Physical Layer", but is there 3 different names for these 3 part?
-- 65.70.89.241 17:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Give your vote here. Should the TCP/IP model template have four or five layers? I.e. should the physical layer be a separate layer or not? And what should the the bottom layer be named in case of four layers? And is it okay to mention both the four and five layer TCP/IP models in Wikipedia articles? Mange01 ( talk) 18:24, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
The result of the move request was no consensus for move. Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 04:26, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
I believe this move should be undone (the move was made along with several other {{ OSIModel}}-related moves). WP:MOSCAPS issues can be tricky, but in my mind the issue boils down to whether this article is OSI-specific.
This article covers both OSI and non-OSI issues — point-to-point and bus topologies aren't OSI, but still have PHYs. While it might be possible to split the article into two parts (a general-purpose physical layer, and an OSI-specific Physical Layer (OSI) or somesuch), it seems far more sensible to leave this as a single article that covers both OSI and non-OSI issues, and name it 'physical layer' to reflect its general-purpose nature. -- Underpants 15:20, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
It is not clear that for instance a cable itself is considered physical layer or that only the signals are physical layer. When doing a bottom-up aproach based on the OSI model the first step is to check the wiring. (According tot Cisco CCNA 4.0 module 1) So, is a cable itself considered physical layer or not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.145.222.194 ( talk) 22:23, 26 May 2010 (UTC)