Talk:Routing
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Routing 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 |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days  |
- Q: Why are there three seperated articles, Router, Routing, Routing protocol
- A: This is to solve the article being overly complex for a non-computer person. Update the article Router if you are updating infomation about Routers, NOT routing protocols.
Update the article, Routing protocol if you want to update information on the protocols routers use.
Finally update the article, Routing, if you want to update this topic without discussing the protocols behind routing. - Q: You have reverted/removed/trimmed my edits basically the whole section! Why?
- A: Most probable cause, duplicate content. You cannot create a section in an article, and then create a stub article with the same content. You need to use Wiki links and point to the information.
- Q: Why did you change the intro to the article?
- A: Intro's should be a short paragaph lead in that anyone can understand. In other words a laymen. You can get very technical in an article, just not in the intro. Remember everyone was not a computer science student.
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. | |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. | |
 | This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Top-importance). | |
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computer science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Computer science related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. | |||||
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. | |||||
| ||||||
EIGRP is not a link-state protocol
[edit]I'm getting really tired of seeing the Cisco marketing balderdash about EIGRP being a "hybrid" of link-state routing and destination-vector routing spammed across Wikipedia, and even more tired of seeing repeatedly inserted after I keep removing it. I'm therefore going to spam this across every Talk: page where I see this claim, and a shorter note to the effect that EIGRP has no link-state stuff at all, in the articles.
Nothing could be further from the truth than the claim that EIGRP has any link-state aspects.
EIGRP is simply a multi-metric, event-driven, destination-vector routing protocol. Neither the "multi-metric" part nor the "event-driven" part has anything to do with link-state.
Link-state protocols have the following characteristics:
- they distribute topology maps, not routing tables
- nodes run a shortest-path algorithm such as Dijkstra over the map to produce the routing table
EIGRP does neither.
Clearly, one can design link-state protocols to be either event-driven, or not; all done to date (from the original "new" ARPANet routing algorithm) have been so, but that's purely a design decision. Event-driven or not-event-drive is a completely separate design axis.
Now stop adding this bogus nonsense! Noel (talk) 04:57, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
"Hybrid" protocols
[edit]I removed the following text from the page:
- There is also a third method called hybrid: Hybrid protocols are a combination of link-state and distance-vector routing protocols. Hybrid protocols have rapid convergence (like link-state protocols) but use much less memory and processor power than link-state protocols. Hybrid protocols use distance-vectors for more accurate metrics and to determine the best path to destination.
because most of it's untrue. The only true MD/DV hybrid (it wasn't even link-state, but rather Map-Distribution, a larger class that includes link-state) ever even proposed (that I know of) was the "Unified" design of Rehkter and Estrin, circa 1988 or so (Deborah Estrin, Yakov Rekhter and Steve Hotz, "A Unified Approach to Inter-Domain Routing", RFC 1322) but it did not have the characteristics of "rapid convergence ... but use much less memory and processor power than link-state."
This whole "hybrid" think is Cisco marketing crap that most people seem to have swallowed hook, line and sinker - I assume because they don't really understand routing. Noel (talk) 05:22, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Comparison of Routing Algorithms - suggestion
[edit]Perhaps this info would be easier to read if placed in a table. Decisions are generally easier to make if the direct comparisons are clear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.104.209.228 (talk • contribs)
subtractive routing
[edit]Subtractive routing is alluded to in a few Wikipedia articles, such as IEEE 1355 and Serial attached SCSI. What Wikipedia article would be appropriate for describing subtractive routing? --DavidCary (talk) 17:59, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
- The IEEE 1355 use of subtractive path routing was not supported elsewhere so I removed that. The Serial Attached SCSI use of subtractive routing is described there well enough. ~Kvng (talk) 14:59, 7 May 2023 (UTC)