Talk:Autonomous System

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition A set of routers and Internet Protocol addresses, under one or more administrative managers, that present a common routing policy to the Internet routing system via the Border Gateway Protocol [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Computers [Please add or review categories]
 Subgroup categories:  Internet operations and Routing and switching
 Talk Archive none  English language variant American English

Article name?

Maybe this should be at Autonomous System; doesn't a lot of the documentation use caps? J. Noel Chiappa 11:46, 4 May 2008 (CDT)

Good point. I've always preferred to be able to understand the derivation of an abbreviation or acronym, even the tricky cases such as eXternal Data Representation (XDR) or ReSource ReserVation Protocol (RSVP). A simple Autonomous System leads logically to the abbreviation AS. Howard C. Berkowitz 12:02, 4 May 2008 (CDT)
I would just go with whatever the documentation uses (and not so much the abbreviation root) - because that's what's correct. J. Noel Chiappa 13:08, 4 May 2008 (CDT)
If you would write Autonomous System in the middle of a sentence, then it is correct. Otherwise CZ rules state that it should be Autonomous system. I will hold off on checklisting the subpages until a decision is made. David E. Volk 10:55, 11 May 2008 (CDT)
I did verify that the RFCs use Autonomous System. I also verified, the hard way, that CZ has some definite case sensitivity, and would appreciate guidance in how I fix the problem--or that someone already fixed it. To be honest, I'm not sure exactly what I did, although it seems to be working. Following the IETF convention, I titled (or I thought I titled) an article, "Transmission Control Protocol", with a redirect for TCP. When I tried the redirect, it appeared to take me to the nonexistent article "Transmission control protocol", unless it was the other way around.
Let me review what I should do in the next. I need to create what the specification calls "User Datagram Protocol", but, if I understand the CZ convention, the article should be titled "User datagram protocol". First question: in the introductory sentence of the article, not the title, should I have User Datagram Protocol or User datagram protocol? I assume the former, if the RFC specification capitalizes that way.
Second, ignoring that "UDP" is ambiguous, would I then create a redirect to "User datagram protocol"?
UDP is actually ambiguous, so I need to start a disambiguation page if one does not exist. Finding documentation on the CZ conventions and syntax isn't yet intuitive to me; I thought CZ:disambiguation or CZ:Disambiguation might get me to the Fine Manual To Read, but neither worked. Howard C. Berkowitz 11:54, 11 May 2008 (CDT)
I would use Transmission Control Protocol and User Datagram Protocol, as the name are usually fully capitalized when given in documents (perhaps to distinguish the User Datagram Protocol from a user datagram protocol.
I have no idea what happened with TCP, but the current article is at the wrong place.
I'll look into upgrading CZ:Disambiguation. J. Noel Chiappa 12:25, 13 May 2008 (CDT)