• lysdexic@programming.devOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Are you going to post links to all Wikipedia articles here?

    What problem do you have with Wikipedia?

    • bizdelnick
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      No problems with Wikpedia, I always can go there and find what I need. There’s a problem with flood of meaningless link-only posts here.

      • derpgon@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I’d argue this is interesting. I mean, not all Wikipedia pages could be considered interesting by many, but OP clearly wanted to start a discussion about it, saying that we know TCP and UDP already, but there are many more.

        You can go anywhere and everywhere, but if something is on Wikipedia it doesn’t mean that it’s uninteresting.

        • bizdelnick
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If this is so interesting, where’s the discussion you are talking about? And I did not say there’s nothing interesting in Wikipedia. It is easy to find for everyone who needs it.

    • computergeek125@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I really only clicked on this to see if there were one you found interesting. Plenty of old interesting protocols and lots that probably can’t survive in a NAT/PAT environment like we have today, reducing us to a handful of IP protocol numbers that we actually use day to day. If you exclude routing equipment, that number is even less.

      There’s just no prompt here. I for one love rabbit holes but where to even start here?