Talk:End-to-end delay

	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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

N

No longer in article ~Kvng (talk) 19:40, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Someone who is knowledgeable in this subject needs to explain what N is in the formula. Is N the number of links, or the number or packet-switches? 128.180.228.81 (talk) 01:06, 2 September 2008 (UTC) N is the number of bits —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.25.88.205 (talk) 21:57, 7 February 2009 (UTC) I was wondering the same thing myself and was hoping I'd find the answer on Talk :( Ensign R (talk) 11:02, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From my textbook: N-1 is the numbers of routers.

From my TA: N is a numbers of link.

C-----R-----R------S

N = 3

R = 2

--Cooolway (talk) 21:57, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

merge

I suggest merging "one-way delay" into "end-to-end delay".

As far as I can tell from the articles themselves, both terms describe the same thing -- the number of seconds a packet spends traveling a network from source to destination. It appears that the difference, if any, between these two things can be described in a couple of sentences in the merged article. --DavidCary (talk) 03:39, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Strong support and I suggest this can be done WP:BOLDly without further discussion. ~KvnG 17:00, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support. We've got three who say yes over the course of a week. That's enough; go for it. Jim.henderson (talk) 11:53, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done ~KvnG 17:47, 15 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]