Talk:Classic Ethernet
Appearance
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Classic Ethernet 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 article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contents of the 10BASE-F page were merged into Classic Ethernet on 2018-09-21. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Classic Ethernet
[edit]Is Classic Ethernet a term used by authoritative sources? This name is not mentioned in Ethernet. It is showing up a few places in a "Classic+Ethernet" Google search] but not strong. I had suggested 10 megabit Ethernet. Earlier, sub 10 Mbit/s, incarnations are known as experimental Ethernet. ~Kvng (talk) 22:19, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, e.g. in Buddy Shipley (2004): "Installer's Guide to Local Area Networks", Thomson Del Mar or in Bryan Carne (2004): "A Professional's Guide to Data Communication in a TCP/IP World", Artech House. Nightwalker-87 (talk) 22:33, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Kvng I share your concerns. As far as I can tell, no official designation "Classic Ethernet" exists. The most definitive source would be the IEEE standards, but since they're paywalled, I can't access them to check. :(
- Every instance I can find is either:
- some private definition (like the book below or here, where they put "classic" in quotes to indicate it's not an official term),
- a simple differentiator to a proprietary technology (like in Cisco documentation where they use it to contrast with their FabricPath technology),
- or one of many, many places where it is simply the adjective "classic" being used to describe Ethernet of whatever ilk is relevant to the sentence.
- Additionally,
- Some sources (like www.tutorialspoint.com/switched-ethernet-vs-classic-ethernet) use "classic Ethernet" to mean Ethernet with the shared collision domain, but that definition conflicts with this page's, since 100Base-TX hubs (that were not switches!) existed, too. (Not to mention that that site is completely unsourced, so I'd consider it very low reliability.)
- Some sources do share the definition this page uses (more or less), like this one. But again, no sign that this is in any way a defined term.
- It is noteworthy is that the term "classic Ethernet" shows up disproportionately in the context of the types of Ethernet frames and extensions to them (both proprietary and later IEEE standards).
- @Nightwalker-87 Your own sources refute your claim of this being a canonical name. Carne (2004) introduces "Classic Ethernet" with the statement: I have chosen to call the original version Classic Ethernet to distinguish it from the IEEE 802.3 LAN that is universally called Ethernet.
- So it is very clear that it was the author's private definition of the term, used to mean pre-IEEE 802.3 Ethernet. — tooki (talk) 14:37, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Tooki:: Current IEEE 802 standards aren't paywalled – free after registration on https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/browse/standards/get-program/page/series?id=68. But no need to check, they're not using "Classic Ethernet". --Zac67 (talk) 15:19, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, much obliged! (I guess I’m too used to the IEC standards, which would be very helpful for my day job, being paywalled.)
- Any thoughts on what this article’s fate should be? — tooki (talk) 16:38, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Are you considering deleting it? It contains important information about certain vintage of Ethernet. ~Kvng (talk) 12:36, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Tooki:: Current IEEE 802 standards aren't paywalled – free after registration on https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/browse/standards/get-program/page/series?id=68. But no need to check, they're not using "Classic Ethernet". --Zac67 (talk) 15:19, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
Mbit/s vs Mbps
[edit]Mbps is by far the most common way of abbreviating megabits per second. Shouldn't we use the WP:COMMONNAME even if it is not the ISO term. Volunteer1234 (talk) 21:26, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
- WP generally prefers SI units like Mbit/s, check WP:UNITNAMES. --Zac67 (talk) 05:15, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
- Agreed. And consistency, WP likes consistency. The WP:COMMONNAME assertion here is debatable in substance and debatable as to whether that policy applies outside article titles. ~Kvng (talk) 14:06, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
Categories:
- Start-Class Computing articles
- Mid-importance Computing articles
- Start-Class Computer networking articles
- Mid-importance Computer networking articles
- Start-Class Computer networking articles of Mid-importance
- All Computer networking articles
- All Computing articles
- Start-Class Technology articles
- WikiProject Technology articles
- Start-Class Telecommunications articles
- Low-importance Telecommunications articles