This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Computing: Networking Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Mid-importance). Telecommunications Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The content of All-to-all communication was merged into Broadcasting (networking) on 2015-07-25. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. For the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

"shotgun" approach.... informal, but I like it. Perhaps link to the meaning of the term :P -- Jimmetry

The sentence is unclear: 'Due to its "shotgun" approach to data distribution, broadcasting is being increasingly supplanted by multicasting.' Does this mean that broadcasting uses the shotgun approach, or that multicasting does? I believe that it's intended to refer to broadcasting. However, broadcasting just hits every target. Multicasting concentrates the fire. Isn't that more like a shotgun? Twocs (talk) 09:59, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the shotgun refers to broadcasting not having a guarantee to hit each target, ie, a lack of reliability. Multicasting can be made reliable.Henk.muller (talk) 10:39, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is possibly some useful material here, but it is quite specific. James^x12345 10:56, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are no references in that material so there may be venerability issues including that. ~KvnG 03:28, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All-to-all communication is poorly developed and seems to be discussing the same topic though perhaps in murkier terms. ~KvnG 15:16, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge  Done ~Kvng (talk) 20:56, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the Overview section, it begins with "In computer networking, broadcasting refers to transmitting a packet that will be received by every device on the network."; however, below it states "Both Ethernet and IPv4 use an all-ones broadcast address to indicate a broadcast packet. Token Ring uses a special value in the IEEE 802.2 control field."

Considering both Ethernet and Token Ring use Frames, would it be more appropriate to state "In computer networking, broadcasting refers to transmitting a PDU that will be received by every device on the network."?

-4sticky (talk) 03:43, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like your suggestion is to change packet to PDU. I assume your argument is that PDU is more technically correct. PDU is also more jargony so I don't see this as a net improvement. ~Kvng (talk) 13:35, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, my suggestion was to change "packet" to "PDU" since a broadcast is not necessarily at the network layer. How about changing "a packet" to "information"? That uses more general terms without unnecessary jargon.

This site http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gorry/course/intro-pages/uni-b-mcast.html uses similar wording to describe a broadcast.

-4sticky (talk) 04:37, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The lead and other parts of the article use message which is a piece of information. What do you think of message? ~Kvng (talk) 14:20, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The new article All-to-all (parallel pattern) may cover the exact same problem as All-to-all communication (now merged to this article), only from a parallell computing algorithm point of view. I have a feeling the article might just as well apply to the more general problem of all-to-all, so maybe someone here knows more about this and would like to make that article more general (or merge it somewhere). – Thjarkur (talk) 20:46, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]