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)