On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 11:59 AM, Fred Baker (fred) <[email protected]> wrote:
> My comment was a review comment, that the word was being used in a way > that wasn't consistent with its dictionary definition (something with a > short lifetime, quite irrespective of birth/death processes) or common > usage (at least in my context). At this point, the draft has been sent to > the RFC Editor, so to my mind this discussion is mostly moot. If in your > other drafts you are pointing people to a glossary in the architecture > document (which I imagine you already are) and the architecture document > defines the term as you are using it, you have probably done enough. > > I never liked this term in I2RS, mostly because I keep misspelling it ;-) The thing about the ephemeral datastore that is interesting is that it overrides the local running datastore. But I am not suggesting a name change at this late date. Andy On Mar 24, 2016, at 11:07 AM, Gunter Van De Velde < > [email protected]> wrote: > > I am ok nowadays with using the terminology “Ephemeral”, although for a > non-natve speaker it is non-trivial exotic word, particular if the intended > usage doesn’t 100% reflect the Webster dictionary intended meaning. > > It is only about a year ago i started reading up on i2rs and discovered > this particular terminology, and at the time a google search on this > terminology was not very conclusive and resulted to some confusion. > I understand very well the confusion at play here from non-native english > speaker perspective. > > Adding text to explain the context in which the term Ephemeral is > useful/advised. fwiw now that i am used to seeing ‘Ephemeral' as > non-permanent config across reboot, i’m adapted its intended purpose… > > Is the goal to explain the intended meaning in each draft/rfc mentioning > it? > > Be well, > G/ > > On 24 Mar 2016, at 18:02, Susan Hares <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi all: > > <wg chair hat on> > The draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture document has been approved as an RFC. In > the review, the OPS-DIR review indicated that “ephemeral” meant more than > “does not survive a reboot”. They have asked the I2RS working group if > replacing “ephemeral” with non-persistent (across power on/off or reboot > cycles) would be a better choice. > > What do you think – leave at it at “ephemeral” or change to > “non-persistent (across power on/off or reboot cycles) ? We will have a 1 > week call on > > This would mean every place that “ephemeral” is listed, the authors would > replace with “non-persistent”. In the first instance, we will indicate > “non-persistent (across power on/off or reboot cycles). > > <wg chair hat off> > > As the author, I think we are better to define ephemeral at the beginning > as “non-persistent (across power on /off or reboot). Changing the > definition at this point, I suspect will simply confuse people. > > Sue Hares > > _______________________________________________ > OPS-DIR mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-dir > > > _______________________________________________ > OPS-DIR mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-dir > > > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > >
_______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
