Talk:Port (computing)

I'm reading the article on "Port (computing)" to understand what the "ports" I read about in FTP and firewall docs really are. The definitions of hardware port and code porting aren't bad, but the sections about network ports and port mapping amaze me at the way the writer dances around the question without answering it.

The definitions of network ports and port mapping need to make better connections with one of the "plain English" definitions of port and a port number--a mental picture, just as the definition of a hardware port starts by saying it's simply a material outlet. Saying a network port is an interface is pablum. I see programming interfaces on the same page, and serial and parallel ports are defined as interfaces, so what's the difference? What "is" a port, besides a number? Why is a logical port called a port and not an elmo, or a mxyzptlk? Are there thousands of tiny connections, each with a constant ID number? What does the last paragraph on port mapping have to do with port mapping?

I agree with you. I just added a little on ports that hopefully make ports more agreeable. Even so the part on "Hardware Trunks" needs work on serial vs parrallel i.e. two wires needed for serial one of which is common ground otherwise no electrical flow. Light fiber and microwave are different cases of serial transmission and who knows what other cases there are around.

Ephemeral port

I was looking for information on "Ephemeral port". It redirects here but there is no mention of it. :(

Ditto. Somegeek 16:24, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A software port is a doorway in what?

Split page?

Can we split this into different pages for hardware ports and network ports? Articles like Nmap link here, and it would be confusing for someone to learn that a port scanner looks for open ports, then comes here to discover what a port is. They might think that it looks for ethernet jacks and audio sockets in the side of their laptop! Ojw 22:46, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TCP ports are indeed a completely different concept, and is should indeed get it's own article --LimoWreck 13:18, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article desperately needs to be split! It's a common misconception amongst people not yet proficient in techno-jargon to confuse network ports (as in port-forwarding and such) with actual physical ports like USB and printer ports. People often hear that something needs to be changed with their ports and they go looking around on their computer case to try and find the problem. Having these two very different things (which just happen to have the same name) combined as one article simply adds to the confusion. (And yes, I know - they're not completely unrelated, because data passes through both of them, but physical hardware and software protocols are pretty damn different things!)

A Split is necessary

I agree in that a split is necessary. TCP/IP ports differ quite completely from hardware ports. It is too confusing for the computer illiterate to make sence of the difference between physical and internet ports. However, it might be a better idea to integrate the ideas of internet ports into a different article, such as Internet or Computer networking, and make this one solely about hardware.

Nick2253 21:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC)Nick2253[reply]

Went ahead and split it

It looks like there's concensus to split, so I went ahead and split the article. Helvetica 18:50, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merged remaining disambig to Port (disambiguation)

I've merged the remaining disambig to Port (disambiguation) and redirected. Disabig pages are generally understood to be for people who are lost and need to figure out where to go. Readers who are lost are almost certainly going to wind up at the main port disambig looking for computer ports. Also, as far as I know, disambig pages aren't usually (ever?) broken out by subject area, but are instead grouped under an appropriate header on the main disambig page. --Interiot 00:57, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I redirected all the links to this page to the correct page, except for some on user Talk pages (which are mostly from SuggestBot, so should probably just be removed). The next step is to request deletion of this page. --Rick Sidwell 16:55, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Forget the deletion request. The page has non-trivial edit history. (I'm still learning here...) --Rick Sidwell 17:12, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]