Talk:Channel access method/Archive 1

OSI layer?
I removed the following formulation: "In the OSI seven layer model, channel access methods are typically placed at layer 1, the physical layer." Instead I added that MAC is handled by the datalink layer, and multiplex by the physical layer. Okay? Mange01 22:10, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Should this article be a laundry list? Suggestions for improvement
Someone added the following template: "This article contains unencyclopedic lists that may require cleanup. To meet Wikipedia's quality standards, please help improve this article by: removing items which are not notable, encyclopedic, or helpful from embedded lists; incorporating appropriate items into the main body of the article; and discussing this issue on the talk page."

Actually, I like lists! But okay, I suggest the following:
 * The cathegorization should be further explained, for example the difference between resource reservation schemes, contention based random access and circuit mode schemes.
 * Important application examples should be added after each method, for example GSM after TDMA, and Ethernet after CDMA/CD.

I don't think we should abondone the well-structured list, and convert everything into long paragraphs that may be hard to survey. If someone wants a definition of each channel access method, it can be found just one click away. (I also would prefer a well-structured "landry list" of multiplex methods instead of long paragraphs on the modulation article).

A question: Is it possible to make a navigational box for channel access methods, similar to Template:Modulation techniques?

Mange01 01:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

We don't have a Contention (telecommunications) article yet...
We do have various Ethernet, 802.3, and CSMA/CA articles, but nothing specifically on the concept of contention. The contention disambiguation page, until today, had multiple "red link" entries.

I discovered this after coming across Contention free pollable and realizing there hasn't been anything written to define contention yet. I don't like to add red links normally, but in this case I'm going to change the contention (disambiguation) link on this article to point to the yet-to-be-made Contention (telecommunications). E_dog95'  Hi ' 22:55, 12 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Good point! Someone removed large portions of the telecommunications part of the original contention article. I have now removed your redirect of the Contention (telecommunications) article to CSMA/CD, copied text from the 10 November 2006 version of the contention article into it. However, this text is not very concrete. I have also added concrete examples of contention based multiple access protocols to the article.


 * Is contention only about multiple access (as stated in the current version of the Contention article), or can it be used in other telecom areas (as implied by the text I copied to the Contention (telecommunications) article)?


 * We don't have an article on the concept of random multiple access either. Is that always the same thing as contention based multiple access?


 * Perhaps the discusion can continue on the Contention (telecommunications) talk page. 87.227.68.21 10:21, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

A few questions about the IEEE 802.11 channel access control protocols
Should we not move PCF to a polling-based protocol?

What about the EDCA and HCCA protocols defined in the HCF protocol of the IEEE 802.11e QoS MAC revision? Should we not add these to the list?

--137.158.152.206 (talk) 13:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC)