Jump to content

Talk:End-to-end principle

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Haifaalburek, Stadepell, Bader15 h.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:35, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Criticisms

[edit]
No longer in article ~Kvng (talk) 00:50, 31 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.

I broke out a separate section on criticisms, which used to be the bulk of the "history" section. I believe the criticisms section could still use more work. It is currently more of a position statement than a listing and explanation of prominent attacks. Lexspoon (talk) 15:21, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I gather that what you're referring to here is the section now titled "Views on the principle". We need to get more balance in the article. Right now it is all fact and criticism. The principle clearly has a lot of support. I've added a POV banner. --Kvng (talk) 21:19, 16 May 2011 (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.

Readability

[edit]

I think this article needs to be explained with less technical language. There's a lot of stuff in here that can't be understood even by following links in the article, often times because there are none. At the very minimum, I think a general reader should have some idea of what the end-to-end principle even is. Take for example the sentence that tries to define it: "The end-to-end principle states that application-specific functions ought to reside in the end hosts of a network rather than in intermediary nodes – provided they can be implemented "completely and correctly" in the end hosts." What is meant by an application-specific function? What is an end-host and how does a fucntion "reside" in one? Why should this be the case? I know a small amount about computers. Does "functions" in this case mean a programming function as in a well-defined and repeatable task the computer performs? Is this sentence saying that task carried out by a computer shouldn't be distributed among different computers in a network? There's way too much jargon for only the introductory paragraph.

Fine, let's see if any of my theories about what this is supposed to mean is true. Let's take the example, which should serve as a concrete representation of what is being discussed: "The only way two end points can obtain perfect reliability for this file transfer is by positive acknowledgment of end-to-end checksums over the final file in the destination storage locations on the destination machine." What is "positive acknowledgment of end-to-end checksums"? Is that an overly formal way of saying "checksums have to be used to verify that a file has been transferred correctly in the destination computer"? 184.20.43.154 (talk) 01:08, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. In IT since 1980s, yet struggle with:

... the latter to be implemented by the application end points themselves, while arguably no function to be performed in a network is fully orthogonal to all possible application needs; The principle is silent on functions that may not be implemented completely and correctly in the application end points and places no upper bound on the number of application specific functions that may be placed with intermediary nodes on grounds of performance considerations, or economic trade-offs... Zezen (talk) 14:27, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed these uncited points. The summary is enough. ~Kvng (talk) 16:35, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Citation for "Limitation"

[edit]

Hello editors I have found the citation for the section "Limitations" for the article [ [End-to-end principle] ] . It seems to be from this pdf http://kirils.org/skype/stuff/pdf/2012/An_Introduction_to_Computer_Networksweek_one.pdf. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aishwarya889 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it looks like the source of the information in this PDF is Wikipedia itself so using this as a reference would be circular. ~Kvng (talk) 12:52, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]


In the limitation part The most important limitation of the end-to-end principle is that its basic conclusion, placing functions in the application end points rather than in the intermediary nodes, is not trivial to operationalize.[citation needed] Specifically:

I found the citation which also provide more important section that can be added in this link http://delivery.acm.org.ezproxy.ltu.edu:8080/10.1145/1870000/1868500/p11-brzozowski.pdf?ip=207.73.64.110&id=1868500&acc=ACTIVE%20SERVICE&key=B5D9E165A72B697C%2E0E4E54096118C40C%2E07C51D4D14AB7094%2E4D4702B0C3E38B35&CFID=669390217&CFTOKEN=84447364&__acm__=1476659604_6fcfc66465cf21213564cc9e4e236c9e

i hope that can be helpful .. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bader15 h (talk • contribs) 23:11, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This resource is not accessible without a login. The statement has been reworded and the requrest for citation was removed at some point. ~Kvng (talk) 00:52, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment and completion

[edit]

license of terms use/create account 41.116.107.151 (talk) 13:12, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:End-to-end_principle&oldid=1250055160"