Re: [Hipsec] Well back at this yet again -- Re: RFC4423bis review

[Andrew McGregor <[e-mail]>]

On 2/09/2011, at 5:51 AM, Robert Moskowitz wrote:

> Finally completed an update of 4423-bis.
> 
> now to NOT get bogged down in minutia in 5201-bis...
> 
> On 04/04/2011 10:35 AM, Henderson, Thomas R wrote:
> 
>> Section 3
>> ---------
>> I was not sure about the statement that IP addresses are a confounding
>> of two namespaces.  I think it may be more accurate to say that
>> the namespaces for endpoint identifiers and interface names overlap
>> since IP addresses are used for both names (or that there is
>> no separate namespace for endpoint identifiers, for historical reasons).
>> 
>> Here is suggested replacement text for paragraph 3:
>> 
>>    The IP addressing namespace has been overloaded to name both
>>    interfaces (at layer-3) and endpoints (for the endpoint-specific
>>    part of layer-3, and for layer-4).  In their role as interface
>>    names, IP addresses are sometimes called "locators" and serve
>>    as an address within a routing topology.
> 
> I grant your point. I have a particular attachment to the term 'confounding', as one of my Stat profs was always confounding us with it!
> 
> But I will go with this due to the evolution of the discussion of IP address 'meaning' with one change:
> 
> as an endpoint within a routing topology.

Isn't the exact word you are looking for 'conflation'?  As in, using the same name for multiple different ideas?

Andrew