Re: [Roll] Border router terminology

JP Vasseur <jvasseur@cisco.com> Thu, 07 May 2009 10:36 UTC

Return-Path: <jvasseur@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: roll@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: roll@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C69E23A6EA6 for <roll@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 May 2009 03:36:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.214
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.214 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.385, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 25B4bYFJ3jwK for <roll@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 May 2009 03:36:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F04503A6AC0 for <roll@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 May 2009 03:35:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.40,309,1238976000"; d="scan'208";a="40019404"
Received: from ams-dkim-2.cisco.com ([144.254.224.139]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 07 May 2009 10:37:05 +0000
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com (ams-core-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.150]) by ams-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n47Ab5HS025377; Thu, 7 May 2009 12:37:05 +0200
Received: from xbh-ams-332.emea.cisco.com (xbh-ams-332.cisco.com [144.254.231.87]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n47Ab5Sh022179; Thu, 7 May 2009 10:37:05 GMT
Received: from xfe-ams-332.cisco.com ([144.254.231.73]) by xbh-ams-332.emea.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 7 May 2009 12:37:05 +0200
Received: from ams-jvasseur-8712.cisco.com ([10.55.201.131]) by xfe-ams-332.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 7 May 2009 12:37:05 +0200
Message-Id: <99D31F57-C845-47A8-A7C9-1B5EDFDC74FC@cisco.com>
From: JP Vasseur <jvasseur@cisco.com>
To: Zach Shelby <zach@sensinode.com>
In-Reply-To: <4A02917B.40009@sensinode.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="WINDOWS-1252"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3)
Date: Thu, 07 May 2009 12:37:03 +0200
References: <4A02917B.40009@sensinode.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3)
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 May 2009 10:37:05.0297 (UTC) FILETIME=[C3C13010:01C9CEFF]
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=2415; t=1241692625; x=1242556625; c=relaxed/simple; s=amsdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=jvasseur@cisco.com; z=From:=20JP=20Vasseur=20<jvasseur@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[Roll]=20Border=20router=20terminology |Sender:=20; bh=3nzeCW7VlcGBNFQWtBD43XB5TkXZzQazds6WUUVlLao=; b=qfrV/WeBEKxyiUtpp+7PuBUP3o/hAVlsLfQh21PGjZ+SckcVb6hVRZGzTc LTKjAD0EJ9p+9rjyWBhQY8fRkusavXRIpZ1dmduK6kg5U3IimlQA6dAsM+nj pHaBP8lEbJ;
Authentication-Results: ams-dkim-2; header.From=jvasseur@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com/amsdkim2001 verified; );
Cc: ROLL WG <roll@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Roll] Border router terminology
X-BeenThere: roll@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks <roll.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/roll>
List-Post: <mailto:roll@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll>, <mailto:roll-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 May 2009 10:36:38 -0000

Hi Zach,

On May 7, 2009, at 9:44 AM, Zach Shelby wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Over in the 6lowpan WG we have been using the following term in  
> draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd:
>
>   LoWPAN Edge Router
>
>      An IPv6 router that interconnects the LoWPAN to another network.
>      Referred to as an edge router in this document.
>
> However following the ROLL documents it seems that this WG has  
> converged on the term "Border Router". We are updated our draft and  
> I am proposing to start using Border Router to keep consistency with  
> ROLL as well.
>

This is an excellent suggestion, thanks.

> Is Border Router going to continue to be the term used by the design  
> team?
>

Yes.

> I can find references to Border Router in ROLL here:
>
> draft-ietf-roll-home-routing-reqs
> draft-ietf-roll-indus-routing-reqs
> draft-ietf-roll-urban-routing-reqs
> draft-thubert-roll-fundamentals
> draft-tavakoli-hydro

Good catch. The right term is Low power and lossy border router (LBR),  
used by the urban draft, not used in industrial, should be updated in  
the home automation ID.

>
> Funny enough the (now expired) draft-ietf-roll-terminology doesn't  
> mention it, would be nice if that would be updated.
>

It was called LBR:

LBR: Low power and lossy network Border Router. The LBR is a device  
that connects the Low power and Lossy Network to another routing  
domain such as a Local Area Network (LAN), Wide Area Network (WAN) or  
the Internet where a possibly different routing protocol is in  
operation. The LBR acts as a routing device and may possibly host  
other functions such as data collector or aggregator.

The ID has been refreshed.

Thanks.

JP.

> - Zach
>
> -- 
> http://zachshelby.org - My blog “On the Internet of Things”
> Mobile: +358 40 7796297
>
> Zach Shelby
> Head of Research
> Sensinode Ltd.
> Kidekuja 2
> 88610 Vuokatti, FINLAND
>
> This e-mail and all attached material are confidential and may  
> contain legally privileged information. If you are not the intended  
> recipient, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail from your  
> system without producing, distributing or retaining copies thereof.
> _______________________________________________
> Roll mailing list
> Roll@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/roll