Re: Link / attachment point / ?? (was RE: [DNA] Killing Jason: IssuesNeeds to be Settled)

[JinHyeock Choi <jinchoe@diffeo.com>]

Dear Alper 

Thanks for your feedback. 

> Sorry, but "attachment *point*" does not imply any type of "*link*" to
> me. I find it confusing. (think point-to-point links :-) I'd say on a
> 802.11b network, at the link-layer the attachment point of a MT is the
> access point. Or, on a cdma2000 network, at the network-layer the
> attachment point of the MS is the PDSN.
> 
> Can we stick to the definition of link as provided in RFC 2461, and
> refer to the other as "link segment"? We can still use the term
> "attachment point" but not to mean the medium that is connecting hosts
> together.

I understand that you propose to use 
1) 'link' for L3 link (or link as in link-local) 
2) 'link segment' for L2 link (or link as in link-layer)

Am I correct? It's ok for me if WG decides so. 

Best Regards

JinHyeock