Re: Last Call for draft-ietf-rolc-apr-00.txt

[Curtis Villamizar <[e-mail]>]

In message <[e-mail]>om>, Yakov Rekhter writes:
> > 
> > Sorry, I wasn't at the last IETF. How about IASG? (Internetwork Address Sub
> -Group).
> > Does the world really need yet another acronym for this thing?
> 
> I have no problems with using the term IASG, provided that this would not cau
> se
> too many objections from the members of the ROLC WG.
> 
> Yakov.


Yakov, Andrew,

IMO Internetwork Address Sub-Group is about as obscure as you can get.

Let's step back and try to remember why we needed a new term.  Some
confusion arises from the use of the terms "subnet" and "network" when
discussing "large clouds".  The term "IP subnet" and the OSI usage of
"subnet" have slightly different meaning.  In discussing cut-through
and/or the local/remote decision or any large cloud issue, the need
frequently arises for a term to describe "a specific subset of the
internetwork topology in which the underlying network does not prevent
all hosts or routers from being directly reachable without IP
forwarding to an intermediate party" (get the impression I'm pushing
this definition).  The definition of the term NBMA fits quite well,
but some people apparently don't like to use NBMA, perhaps because
non-broadcast is not viewed as a key feature.  I'll use the term NBMA
until we decide what the term "aka NBMA network" is.

It seems you want a term that covers the case where there is an
address prefix that covers the NBMA network exactly.  I'll argue that
this is a special case of an NBMA, so if anything, a separate term is
needed so we can still talk about NBMA in which the is no address
prefix that overlaps the NBMA exactly.  If you define the first term,
the second is just "an address prefix that overlaps an NBMA exactly"
(replacing NBMA for the term chosen).

Curtis