Template talk:Routing scheme

Anycast Template Image

Shouldn't the anycast image show the connection going to the nearest node instead of the further node in the image?

Dthvt (talk) 16:08, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes

71.183.42.223 (talk) 21:28, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

yes. that is what they have explained in defination. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.247.13.51 (talk) 06:28, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

Anycast Image

I changed the anycast image because it was somewhat incorrect in that it showed delivery at 3 nodes, when Anycast would actually select the "nearest" of those three. Anycast is one-to-one-of-many routing not one-to-many. Also, on the cosmetic side, the Anycast image didn't look like the others, which are all similar.

I based my new image on multicast.svg, from which I simply removed two of the arrows. Then I noticed that the image I replaced was itself a recent edit from 18 November 2016 by User:FockeWulf FW 190. No reason to suppose it was not a good faith edit, but probably based on a misunderstanding of anycast.

An alternative to my change would be simply to revert back to the last edit of User:Kvng on 26 August 2016. I didn't do this because I have a slight preference for my image, and I had already uploaded it and made the change. The older image shows three arrows, with two of the three mysteriously ending before reaching the green nodes. My image shows three green "candidate" destinations, but only one path. A bit cleaner-looking and probably a bit more reflective of what the routing would actually be. The arrow that remains also goes to the visually nearest of the three to the origin, overcoming an apparent source of confusion. But no big deal if someone likes the pre-November 2016 image and wants to go back to that. It was, after all, that way for about seven years. Person54 (talk) 14:13, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

@Person54: I think your edit was an improvement and I thank you and I would not support reverting it. ~Kvng (talk) 15:03, 22 April 2017 (UTC)