Jump to content

Talk:Connection-oriented protocol

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

They are seperate entities within themselves but i see few reasons why you would want to look at one, without the other.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.55.64.98 (talkcontribs) .

Oppose And how do you plan on organizing their combination? They are seperate entities, and there is no umbrella term.

Kashami 00:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Connection-orarticle talks purely about connection-oriented protocols, whereas this article discusses not just the protocols, but a slightly more general use of the term. So, at very best, it looks like the two articles are the wrong way round. Not having a great deal of experience of editting Wikipedia, I'm not sure of the correct way to solve this. Should I just swap it around as I see fit, and then wait for comments/flames?

--W33v1l 08:43, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having now read that I should be bold, I've decided to have a go at fixing the above. I have now removed my previous merge proposal, because I believe these edits have precluded such a move by providing a sufficient difference between the two articles. If anybody objects to what I have done, I'm sure they'll let me know! --W33v1l 16:13, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Connection-oriented communication

Regrding the suggestion to merge into Connection-oriented communication: