RE: [DNA-BOF] Modified Charter available.

[NJEDJOU Eric FTRD/DMR/REN <eric.njedjou@francetelecom.com>]

I agree with keeping the term "link" for L2. Even if people are not obliged to using the charter terminology, i think the charter is a place where terms should not carry any form of ambiguity. 

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Spencer Dawkins [mailto:spencer@mcsr-labs.org]
Envoyé : jeudi 8 janvier 2004 13:39
À : dna@eng.monash.edu.au
Objet : Re: [DNA-BOF] Modified Charter available.


Yes, please pick terms now, otherwise you'll spend time explaining
ideas to confused people later.

My suggestion is "link" for level two/link layer links, and "IP hop"
for level three/network layer links - if you decrement TTL/hop limit,
it's an IP link, if you don't, it's something else. "IP hop" seems
silly, but isn't that what the IP hop limit is limiting?

Please insert your suggestions for better names here, of course!

Spencer

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "NJEDJOU Eric FTRD/DMR/REN" <eric.njedjou@francetelecom.com>
To: <greg.daley@eng.monash.edu.au>; <dna@eng.monash.edu.au>
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2004 4:49 AM
Subject: RE: [DNA-BOF] Modified Charter available.


> Hello folks,
>
> >Description of Working Group:
>
> >For the purposes of detecting network attachment, an
> >L3 link is defined by the range within which IP
> >packets may be sent without resorting to forwarding.
> >In other words, a link is the range where a given IP
> >configuration is valid.
>
> In my opinion talking about "L3 link" is not a good idea at all.
People
> will very soon get confused between L2 link and L3 link. The
traditional
> "network layer" or "IP layer" expression was very convenient.