RE: [L2CP] RE: L2cp Digest, Vol 5, Issue 4
"Voigt, Norbert" <norbert.voigt@siemens.com> Wed, 05 April 2006 07:06 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FR26D-0004t8-E3; Wed, 05 Apr 2006 03:06:41 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FR26C-0004sh-8Z for l2cp@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Apr 2006 03:06:40 -0400
Received: from goliath.siemens.de ([192.35.17.28]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FR267-00084Z-Lg for l2cp@ietf.org; Wed, 05 Apr 2006 03:06:40 -0400
Received: from mail2.siemens.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by goliath.siemens.de (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id k3576Ykx000629; Wed, 5 Apr 2006 09:06:34 +0200
Received: from mhpahx0c.ww002.siemens.net (mhpahx0c.ww002.siemens.net [139.25.165.42]) by mail2.siemens.de (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id k3576UV2016846; Wed, 5 Apr 2006 09:06:34 +0200
Received: from MCHP7RCA.ww002.siemens.net ([139.25.131.170]) by mhpahx0c.ww002.siemens.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Wed, 5 Apr 2006 09:06:32 +0200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [L2CP] RE: L2cp Digest, Vol 5, Issue 4
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 09:06:03 +0200
Message-ID: <B4AB8706B31D6943B60D8D04DEFAE5D2533934@MCHP7RCA.ww002.siemens.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [L2CP] RE: L2cp Digest, Vol 5, Issue 4
Thread-Index: AcZX/J4jmSC13X1QRBqgmKNNBjMpMAAA0wNgAB8WRNA=
From: "Voigt, Norbert" <norbert.voigt@siemens.com>
To: Robert Rennison <robren@laurelnetworks.com>, l2cp@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Apr 2006 07:06:32.0327 (UTC) FILETIME=[77F4F170:01C6587F]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 082a9cbf4d599f360ac7f815372a6a15
Cc:
X-BeenThere: l2cp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Layer 2 Control Protocol Discussion List <l2cp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2cp>, <mailto:l2cp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/l2cp>
List-Post: <mailto:l2cp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l2cp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2cp>, <mailto:l2cp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: l2cp-bounces@ietf.org
Hi all, I like Robert's rationale, so my preference is for ANCP. In addition, I'd like to accommodate one of its major characteristic: the dynamic aspect of the protocol. Thus, I believe DANCO works as well. Actually, we don't really need the "P" since it's quite obvious that the group deals with a protocol. Just my $0.02 Norbert. -----Original Message----- From: Robert Rennison [mailto:robren@laurelnetworks.com] Sent: Dienstag, 4. April 2006 17:59 To: l2cp@ietf.org Subject: [L2CP] RE: L2cp Digest, Vol 5, Issue 4 More specific is always good, hence I prefer ANCP over the open ended ANCO. My Rationale: Whether defining a new protocol or illustrating how an existing protocol is used, the discussion and purpose of the group will center around a protocol for controlling the AN. Rob Rennison ECI Telecom > > > > In an attempt to come to a conclusion on this, please can you > indicate your > preference between the following: > > > ANCO (Access Node Control) > > > ANCP (Access Node Control Protocol) > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Matthew > > _______________________________________________ L2cp mailing list L2cp@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2cp _______________________________________________ L2cp mailing list L2cp@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2cp
- [L2CP] RE: L2cp Digest, Vol 5, Issue 4 Robert Rennison
- RE: [L2CP] RE: L2cp Digest, Vol 5, Issue 4 Voigt, Norbert