[L2CP] RE: L2cp Digest, Vol 5, Issue 4

"Robert Rennison" <robren@laurelnetworks.com> Tue, 04 April 2006 15:58 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FQnvd-0006NX-4U; Tue, 04 Apr 2006 11:58:49 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FQnvc-0006NI-9k for l2cp@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Apr 2006 11:58:48 -0400
Received: from paperclip.laurelnetworks.com ([63.94.127.69]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FQnvZ-0004dn-IY for l2cp@ietf.org; Tue, 04 Apr 2006 11:58:48 -0400
Received: from postit.laurelnetworks.com (postit.laurelnetworks.com [63.94.127.21]) by paperclip.laurelnetworks.com (ECI-DND/ECI-DND) with ESMTP id k34Fwi7g021569 for <l2cp@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 11:58:44 -0400
Received: from sherlock.pit.laurelnetworks.com (washer.pit.laurelnetworks.com [10.0.0.46]) by postit.laurelnetworks.com (ECI-DND/ECI-DND) with ESMTP id k34FwiKh002664 for <l2cp@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Apr 2006 11:58:44 -0400
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 11:58:43 -0400
Message-ID: <589A873EAC072643A913D13596CDBDC61E0C01@SHERLOCK.ad.laurelnetworks.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: L2cp Digest, Vol 5, Issue 4
thread-index: AcZX/J4jmSC13X1QRBqgmKNNBjMpMAAA0wNg
From: Robert Rennison <robren@laurelnetworks.com>
To: l2cp@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 69a74e02bbee44ab4f8eafdbcedd94a1
Subject: [L2CP] RE: L2cp Digest, Vol 5, Issue 4
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

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