Talk:Datagram

	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).

Distinction and expansion needed[edit]

Given the importance of the datagram concept, it doesn't seem appropriate to include it only under packet. However, a link to the article on packet would be useful here. Also, a brief discussion of datagram service and the important protocols that provide datagram service (IP and UDP). Ngriffeth (talk) 18:05, 10 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have revised the article to define a datagram, give references to datagram standards, contrast with packet. Stephen Charles Thompson (talk) 17:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incnis Mrsi has suggested adding references to datagram protocols SOCK_DGRAM in Berkeley sockets. Stephen Charles Thompson (talk) 17:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In response to Mixer's repeted edits of both Datagram and Virtual Circuit: it is incorrect to say that Datagram and Virtual Circuit are opposites. Although the definitions of both Datagram and Virtual Circuit consist of contrasting concepts, the two are not directly comparable. A Virtual Circuit is a service providing reliable data transmission, but it does not inherently contain data. For example, a TCP session creates a virtual circuit for data transmission, and TCP packets pass over that virtual circuit. A Datagram is a data frame (including headers) is inherently unreliable; for example, UDP datagrams are transmitted over IP networks with no guarantee of reliability. --Kguilbert (talk) 13:33, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Say what? WP:DIFFs, please. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 14:28, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My bad! Fixed. Kguilbert (talk) 02:16, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed again (sigh). ~KvnG 14:46, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interwiki[edit]

There are corresponding articles in some languages (Dutch, Spanish, Russian), but they were incorrectly bound to Packet (information technology). Datagram is a narrower concept related to datagram protocols (SOCK_DGRAM in Berkeley sockets). Incnis Mrsi (talk) 04:33, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merger of Datagram service[edit]

It probably was not a bad idea, but the Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Datagram/788238 feedback demonstrates that the resulting article is confusing. It is confusing even to me. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 15:07, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a {{confusing}} tag to the article. -—Kvng 15:26, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some improvements to the article and have removed the tag. ~KvnG 14:46, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Louis Pouzin vs. Halvor Bothner-By[edit]

RD2017 has added a bunch of information to the History section which is appreciated. They also changed existing material to credit Halvor Bothner-By with the name instead of Louis Pouzin. There are citations for both orginations. I have restored Louis Pouzin until we can sort this out. ~Kvng (talk) 14:35, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RD2017 has reverted and added another reference supporting Halvor Bothner-By. I don't think we resolve this by choosing the version base on which has more references. RD2017 can explain why the former cited material was wrong and why this new cited material is correct? ~Kvng (talk) 14:10, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am vaguely familiar with the IEEE article of communication history that makes the claim, but I do not see that it is definitively a reliable source. Pouzin had certainly been working on the datagram concept for Cyclades by then, and he is most commonly quoted as the father of what we since then understand to be a datagram (in the context of IP). The definition of datagram in Transpac or X.25 was slightly different, I believe, as it still involved virtual circuits. kbrose (talk) 17:37, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that none of the old papers that associate the datagram with Pouzin actually claim that he coined the term, only that he 'invented' it, and that can hardly be denied. In his and others' paper of the time, they only used the term packet, not yet datagram. I am going to go with RD2017's attribution. A new book about Pouzin also makes the same claim, and when French authors writing about a Frenchman give credit to a Norwegian does not smell like preferential national treatment. I'll be adding the reference to the article soon. kbrose (talk) 02:17, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RD2017, Kvng and Kbrose Hello, I hope you are doing fine, did you finally find a solution to this problem, because current text is not clear because it stated that Halvor Bothner-By did coined the word while the a reference used say it is Pouzin.

Thank you in advance.--Michel Bakni (talk) 22:17, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

https:// ref.internet.apps.samsung.com[edit]

https:// ref.internet.apps.samsung.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.88.213.116 (talk) 21:34, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]