Re: [irs-discuss] What's in a name?

Sriganesh Kini <sriganesh.kini@ericsson.com> Tue, 13 November 2012 00:14 UTC

Return-Path: <sriganeshkini@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F24C21F87AF for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:14:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id I7s+WidHrwN4 for <irs-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:14:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wg0-f44.google.com (mail-wg0-f44.google.com [74.125.82.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2E7221F8788 for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:14:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wg0-f44.google.com with SMTP id dr13so3186073wgb.13 for <irs-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:14:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=+iUS1Y/tS2nFkGTvz2USZMej8yQN26JGmwKE4v9O3OA=; b=dDWnvSXM4hH99yXxyvs5a72PM9s/3WKnh0bJeHhu65zjkS6I92MXmkr0QZKqv4zkFj 13U5cNSkniqCglq0EjpMnzqVa40lBO9sLkcoYLM6+lGB2aNMDsjG9QcFV785nFcFIYXy LxY0D5O/XAM+yp44MZ5yYPOVZBjN6fAjxM2sOjtHWPDOrrkLsbTAMmkEKkMxf39YlQBH xPa4ag9j1FLTOwl2j8h2z4KMhF5up6PPud1B2KXeUmBOAQ1snLaiEyy4eoHePcCMwrmS 170e/K750V2vfYVw/7CcdEeFOzZbfbTzqvQ9OsPlD3t1oORdn9xOiyCBZYgTXd0Y6IWo IDjQ==
Received: by 10.180.76.203 with SMTP id m11mr17484824wiw.6.1352765665871; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:14:25 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: sriganeshkini@gmail.com
Received: by 10.194.43.170 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:13:55 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4FF6CF4D6CDC5C4D9B1AE073B14B040D073F41@xmb-aln-x14.cisco.com>
References: <015701cdc0e4$fbc439f0$f34cadd0$@olddog.co.uk> <CAOndX-uiOo4cO3t6wym1SECSs7YTByAWWu9=ZVBLbLjMArnVjA@mail.gmail.com> <2F3EBB88EC3A454AAB08915FBF0B8C7E0D898D@EUSAAMB109.ericsson.se> <7AB3E60F793B2E42BA2E4A8A761E249C756D8F@xmb-aln-x05.cisco.com> <4FF6CF4D6CDC5C4D9B1AE073B14B040D073F41@xmb-aln-x14.cisco.com>
From: Sriganesh Kini <sriganesh.kini@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 16:13:55 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: UfbX8DhDPvnq9SMf8Fj9w37OU7U
Message-ID: <CAOndX-tuZUaRSGqzxt5KB7eD0BHGDX8m5yHuM8HXQybhC0A=rw@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Zach Seils (seils)" <seils@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043c7b14fa889004ce554c52
Cc: "Palani Chinnakannan \(pals\)" <pals@cisco.com>, Jakob Heitz <jakob.heitz@ericsson.com>, "irs-discuss@ietf.org" <irs-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [irs-discuss] What's in a name?
X-BeenThere: irs-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Interface to The Internet Routing System \(IRS\)" <irs-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/irs-discuss>, <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/irs-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:irs-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss>, <mailto:irs-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 00:14:28 -0000

Hi Palani, Zach,

I agree it is more than routing. But 'network' is too wide and could be
argued that it goes beyond IETF's domain. Also we should not use any
element specific terminology since this goes beyond a single network
element. An alternative may have been to use IETF specific encaps such as
TCP/IP and MPLS in the acronym but that would make it too long.  IMO
'Routing' is the closest alternative for this charter and is also
identified with IETF's activities.

I also think it is useful to qualify the 'Interface' in any acronym as
'Programmatic', to differentiate it against the plethora of interfaces that
already exist.

Thanks

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Zach Seils (seils) <seils@cisco.com>wrote;wrote:

>  I agree with this take.  It’s about more than just routing.****
>
> ** **
>
> Regards,****
>
> Zach****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org]
> *On Behalf Of *Palani Chinnakannan (pals)
> *Sent:* Monday, November 12, 2012 3:17 PM
> *To:* Jakob Heitz
>
> *Cc:* irs-discuss@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [irs-discuss] What's in a name?****
>
>  ** **
>
> In general,  the reason why some of us feel that we should a use a much
> generic name like INS (Interface to network system) or INE (Interface to
> network element) etc is because the  operations, data models and the
> requirements spelled out in IRS as much wider scope that the routing
> table.  IMHO,  its scope is a full network system.  By introducing a name
> at a higher scope paves way for defining several other interface to
> components of a network (routing, transport, network, NE …) in a consistent
> framework as spelled in IRS.****
>
> ** **
>
> pals****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org<irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org>]
> *On Behalf Of *Jakob Heitz
> *Sent:* Monday, November 12, 2012 11:56 AM
> *Cc:* irs-discuss@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [irs-discuss] What's in a name?****
>
> ** **
>
> The similarity between****
>
> Routing Information Protocol****
>
> and****
>
> Rest In Peace****
>
> never confused anyone.****
>
> Did it?****
>
> --
> Jakob Heitz.****
>
>  ****
>
> ** **
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From:* irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:irs-discuss-bounces@ietf.org]
> *On Behalf Of *Sriganesh Kini
> *Sent:* Monday, November 12, 2012 10:55 AM
> *To:* adrian@olddog.co.uk
> *Cc:* irs-discuss@ietf.org
> *Subject:* Re: [irs-discuss] What's in a name?****
>
> PRI - Programmatic Routing Interface ****
>
> ** **
>
> Though this clashes with PRI of ISDN fame that has long been buried. IRS,
> besides the obvious clash can mess up the search results. Also, I don't see
> a good reason to include 'System' in the acronym.****
>
> ** **
>
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 6:49 AM, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
> wrote:****
>
> Personally, I find discussions of what name/acronym to use a bit sad. I've
> had
> enough code review hours wasted debating the names of variables to not
> want to
> spend any more time on this sort of thing.
>
> However, I note that there was some unease about the use of IRS. If we
> really
> need to find a new name for this work (and I note that RSI is also used for
> something else) we need to find a solution soon.
>
> Can I suggest that only those people who have a strong objection to IRS
> need to
> contribute to the discussion. Furthermore, we don't need suggestions to be
> floated, we need solid and definite proposals. That way we will possibly
> reach a
> serious conclusion quickly.
>
> Thanks,
> Adrian
>
> _______________________________________________
> irs-discuss mailing list
> irs-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss****
>
>
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> --
> - Sri****
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> irs-discuss mailing list
> irs-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/irs-discuss
>
>


-- 
- Sri