Talk:Wide area network

Internet a WAN?

I noticed that the Internet is referred to as a WAN, but I was pretty sure that this is not the case. Maybe somebody should look into it. AtkinsSJ 13:59, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

The internet refers to the interconnection of WANS and LANS 81.138.171.153 (talk) 16:40, 20 November 2009 (UTC)shedali I thought that the Internet was a LAN?

LAN is a LAN, Internet is a WAN.121.45.181.14 (talk) 16:11, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Virtually unreadable

The revision of 04:10, 24 October 2011 is a mess: under the heading "Design options", formatting is wrong, and much of the text is inappropriate to the article. Not sure what to do about it (I'm not experienced enough as a Wikipedia editor). Urgos (talk) 21:07, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

I undid the mess as of 26.10.2011

Mess is back as of 27 10 11

There was never a problem with this article. The Area networks template was vandalized. All better now. --Kvng (talk) 14:23, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Your recent Wide Area Network Edit

Copied this from my talk page. The disussion refers to this edit -—Kvng 20:44, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Not sure where you came up with "dubious" It's a key point in the reference. You did refer to the reference before your edit?? OH you didn't. Sloppy work!!!! Please add it back. Wa3frp (talk) 14:03, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

It's the fifth (last) bullet point in the description and is collocated with an outdated discussion of half-duplex LANs. So yeah, it's in the ref. But no, it's not central. And yes, it is a dubious statement. The ref is from 2005. We're not required to include outdated information when we use a citation. -—Kvng 20:42, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Wrong again! Even the latest version of the cited reference states the facts as they are today.

Also, point me to the Wiki guideline that states that 2005 references are "outdated".. Wa3frp (talk) 01:51, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Respectfully, I don't think further discussion just between you and I is going to help resolve this. Does any other editor consider full vs. half duplex to be a key point in describing a WAN? -—Kvng 03:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

No its not key and shouldn't be in the lede. Anyone that think it is would also need to add asynchronous or synchronous, unicast or broadcast, point-to-point or multidrop, and a zillion other pairs of complementary aspects utilized by particular technologies. How about green or not green? Saying that a WAN is someway or not someway doesn't really say anything. Also, WANs can be simplex instead of duplex (e.g. some Satellite systems). Leave it out.—Dgtsyb (talk) 14:11, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

note that "user Dgtsyb" has no prifile and may be a sock puppet.Wa3frp (talk) 14:22, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

That's an irresponsible accusation. Have you looked at Dgtsyb (talk · contribs)'s contributions or talk page. -—Kvng 19:01, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm considering the fact that you took a valid 2009 reference claiming that it is "outdated" information and call the information from that reference as "dubious" and then the delete the information and refuse to re-add it when requested. The facts speak for themselves. You can try to change the subject but that will prove unsuccessful. Wa3frp (talk) 20:19, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Respectfully, I worked with WANs as an Electrical Engineer and IT professional for 35 years in both technical and management postions with a common carrier, organizations in financial services and banking as well as an independent consultant. The largest WAN that I managed was over 500,000 miles long and handled over 30 percent of the USA based healthcare transactions. It is my assertion that WANs use both half and full duplex communication and there was a 2005 reference that backed up that fact.

Kvng labeled that as "dubious" and further claimed that references as old as 2005 are outdated and "...We're not required to include outdated information when we use a citation..." I have challenged that assertion.

The first question for the other editors: please point to the Wiki guideline that backs Kvng's assertion that "...We're not required to include outdated information when we use a citation..." noting that the reference is from 2005. This is basis for Kvng's claim. I cannot find this has any basis in fact.

The second question for the other editors: Is it so far out of line to include something that I feel is a referenced key point in the lead? If necessary, I can find addition references and more recent to confirm that half and full duplex do occur in WAN technology.Wa3frp (talk) 03:46, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Raw contribution

The following was contributed by Persisfds (talk · contribs). I have moved it here until formatting and grammar issues are resolved and the material can be integrated into the article. ~KvnG 17:04, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

          In WAN's ,the subnet consist of two components namely transmission lines and switching elements .Transmission lines move bits between machines .They are made up of copper wire,optical fiber or radio links .Switching elements are specialized computers which connects three or more transmission lines.When data is arrived on an incoming line the switching elements chooses the outgoing line .The switching elements are also known as routers.
         
          WANs necessarily do not just connect physically disparate LANs.  A CAN, for example, may have a localised backbone of a WAN technology, which connects different LANs within a campus.  This could be to facilitate higher bandwidth applications, or provide better functionality for users in the CAN.

References