Re: [Autoconf] draft-clausen-manet-linktype - naming

[Ian Chakeres <[e-mail]>]

I'd like to start a discussion thread on the naming of this draft/ 
linktype.

I don't think that MANET should be in the name of the linktype. The  
characteristics and constraints of a linktype are not MANET specific.

(I'd also like to repeat that MANET routing protocols will work quite  
happily over other link types as well.)

I would rather describe these links as "non-reflexive and non- 
transitive (wireless) links". I'd also be happy with a nice acronym,  
like NBMA or UDLR.

I'm interested in your thoughts. How do you think we should refer to  
this linktype?

Ian

On Nov 4, 2008, at 4:51 AM, Thomas Heide Clausen wrote:

> Folks,
>
> As you know, we need to make progress on the architectural issues,  
> before we can hope to make progress on other matters within this WG.  
> One of the requests that have been made to us has been to "describe  
> the MANET Link Type", and so I have written together a strawman text  
> to this effect:
>
> 	http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-clausen-manet-linktype-00.txt
>
> Feedback is, obviously, welcome -- preferably on the list such that  
> we could be prepared spend time on this also in MN.
>
> Note, however, that this is an individual I-D.
>
> I'd also like to draw your collective attention to:
>
> 	http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iab-ip-model-evolution-01.txt
>
> Which has served as a source of inspiration for the linktype text.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Thomas
> _______________________________________________
> Autoconf mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf

_______________________________________________
Autoconf mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf