IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rrg] Terminology

"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Thu, 04 February 2010 14:25 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
X-Original-To: rrg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rrg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FAA63A692C for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 06:25:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.597
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.597 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.002, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 Ib5oJ9lmuHNR for <rrg@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 06:25:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hermes.mail.tigertech.net (hermes.mail.tigertech.net [64.62.209.72]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 833043A691A for <rrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 06:25:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hermes.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4922843035D for <rrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 06:26:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at hermes.tigertech.net
Received: from [10.10.10.102] (pool-71-161-50-49.clppva.btas.verizon.net [71.161.50.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hermes.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7EDE430358 for <rrg@irtf.org>; Thu, 4 Feb 2010 06:26:41 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4B6AD920.8030007@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 09:26:40 -0500
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rrg@irtf.org
References: <C78F8E7D.3D4%tony.li@tony.li> <4B6AD782.7050506@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B6AD782.7050506@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rrg] Terminology
X-BeenThere: rrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IRTF Routing Research Group <rrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg>, <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg>
List-Post: <mailto:rrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg>, <mailto:rrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Feb 2010 14:25:56 -0000

I believe it has now been demonstrated that the terms CEE and CES are 
being used by different people to mean different things.
That is even less useful than when I thought I knew what they meant.

Yours,
Joel

PS: The statement from Robin recently leads me to conclude that I don't 
even know what he means by the terms CEE, and CES.  And he coined them.
"The CES vs. CEE distinction does not arise from whether hosts are
altered or not.  It arises from the fundamentally different
mechanisms which are used by these two different types of
architecture to achieve scalable routing."

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email