Talk:Network interface controller
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Network interface controller article.|
|Network interface controller was one of the good article nominees, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.|
|WikiProject Technology||(Rated Start-class)|
|WikiProject Computing / Networking||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
|WikiProject Telecommunications||(Rated Start-class)|
Ive added some more info to it as i happened to be sitting in a lecture and he went over some revision on the NIC... still needs the history to be added though so someone get on this! S3raph1m 16:34, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
This article, while referencing protocols other than Ethernet, ignores the actual differences between cards of other protocols, and seems to assume they all work like Ethernet NICs. In particular, Wireless NICs behave quite differently.
There are some wording issues, like "..., which is written to ROM carried on the card." It is contradictory to say that something was written to read-only memory--it would be perhaps more appropriate to say something like "..., which is stored in the card's built-in memory." Then there is the explanation of expansion cards: "to plug into a computer bus". Most cards go into slots, which connect them to the buses. It should also be noted that most new computers have an Ethernet network interface card built-in.
Then there is one statement that really just throws me: "It [a network card] is an OSI model layer 2 item because it has a MAC address." The NIC is network hardware and inherently OSI layer one (the "Physical layer"), and Ethernet (from which the MAC addresses come) is OSI layer two (the "Data link layer").
I'd be willing to (help?) clean up and expand the article, if time permits.—Kbolino 06:53, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with this comment. However, Ethernet NICs function as both layer 1 and 2 device in OSI model. Mahanchian 16:05, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
This article does have a lot of issues; I'll try to help too. LeiZhu 11:36, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
"Network Card" disambiguation
I am concerned that the disambiguation link for "Network Card"/"Network Railcard" has been removed twice with no explanation. The product now known as the Network Railcard was specifically named the "Network Card" for more than 10 years from 1986 onwards; it appeared under this name in all publicity material, advertisements, British Rail documentation etc., and even now - nearly 10 years after being renamed the "Network Railcard" - it is still commonly referred to by its original name. On this basis, it seems to be an ideal candidate for disambiguation, and I intend to restore the link. --Hassocks5489 07:47, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
- No comments, so I have restored this today. --Hassocks5489 11:43, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Is not "network interface card" different from "network interface controller" ?
I am not expert of NICs but i see that although N.I.Controller links here, this topic is mostly related with network interface cards. I supposed that there were some references to the productors of NIController. For example, National semiconductor's DP8390D/NS32490D. Am i wrong?
- I won't claim to be an expert either, but I imagine that 'Network Interface Card' refers to a dedicated expansion card, which might be installed via a PCI slot. If that is the case, then a Network Interface Controller would likely be a broader term used to describe any component that performs similar functions, including those directly installed onto the motherboard, or integrated into the chipset. However, as I implied, the above is entirely speculation and my comment should not be regarded as fact. Needles-Kane 22:47, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
NIC is actually Network Interface Controller (hence why you get the term NIC card, it's not a case of RAS syndrome) however popular misuse of it as Network Interface Card has eclipsed the original meaning and the controller aspect has all but been forgotten. 126.96.36.199 01:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Novell a current manufacturer?
As far as I know, Novell is now primarily, if not entirely, a software company at this time. If so, it should not be on the list of manufacturers of Network Cards. There may also be others that should be added or dropped.
If this is meant to be more of a historical list then other network protocols (e.g. Arcnet) should be added to the Ethernet/Token-Ring/etc. list. Manassehkatz 14:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
This has potential to be much much better.
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- Too much unexplained technical jargon. The lead is too long.
- a (prose): b (MoS):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Doesn't cover all major aspects. For example, it is lacking any information on History.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- Good luck improving the article
OSI Layers vs TCP/IP layers
Hopefully I'm not opening a can of worms here, but, given that the TCP/IP model is the one generally more used when designing networks and protocols, and that the OSI model has become more of a generalized idea, is it worth saying that the NIC is level 1 & 2 in OSI and TCP/IP? Just a thought, umrguy42 01:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
On older, cheaper cards there is usually an empty socket for a DIP chip on the PCB. I was told that this was for an optional decoder module, which would essentially offload processing from the CPU if present. Is that true? If not, what is the socket for? Ham Pastrami (talk) 13:57, 29 March 2010 (UTC)