Re: [DNA] L2 link and L3 link

[Spencer Dawkins <spencer@mcsr-labs.org>]

From: "JinHyeock Choi" <athene@sait.samsung.co.kr>
To: "Alper Yegin" <alper@docomolabs-usa.com>; "Gregory Daley"
<Greg.Daley@eng.monash.edu.au>; <dna@eng.monash.edu.au>
Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 7:31 PM
Subject: [DNA] L2 link and L3 link


> I think we'd better clarify the definition of 'link'.

As long as we're clarifying terminology - I'm noting that we're using
the term "L2 triggers" more frequently on this list. My recommendation
is that we don't - we got pretty serious pushback in TRIGTRAN that
"triggers" means something that will always be available and will
always be acted on.

We negotiated down to "notifications", and we were headed for "hints".

I think one way to understand the difference is by saying that if you
have a trigger, you don't need any other way to figure out that
something happened, while if you have a hint, you would find out that
something happened later, even if the hint was lost, so you need a
belt to go with your suspenders.

But I'm pretty sure that calling them "l2 triggers" slowed approvals
down by between one and two full IETF meeting cycles. Alper, Carl, did
it look that way to you?

Spencer