Hi, Joel,
On 7/13/2011 1:44 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
Sorry, I apparently missed part of your earlier note.
Would text like:
This document uses the term "on-the-wire" to talk about the information
used by routing systems. This term is widely used in IETF RFCs,but is
used in several different ways. In this document, it is used to refer
both to information exchanged between routing protocol instances, and to
underlying protocols that may also need to be protected in specific
circumstances.
I think that is in direct contrast to the current text in the intro,
that appears to differentiate between the two and focus on the latter.
Joe
Individual protocol analysis documents will need to be
more specific in their usage.
work to address the issue?
Yours,
Joel
On 7/13/2011 2:47 PM, Wesley Eddy wrote:
On 7/13/2011 2:34 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
As I said in my earlier note proposing responses to Joe, we would be
happy to some text in the front clarifying the usage. Quoting from my
earlier email:
This text would note that it is a widely used term in IETF documents,
including many RFCs. It would also state for clarity that in this
document it is used to refer to the message sent from one routing
process to another.
Apparently, this does not address Joe's concern.
"message sent from one routing process to another" doesn't seem to be
right to me either since it sounds like the first definition that
covers routing protocol data only, and not underlying protocols, so I
wouldn't expect that proposal to address Joe's concern.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf