Hi, We can consider that in your example there are two Autonomous Systems, and each is a site. Do you mean this? Kevin Tomohide Nagashima wrote: > Hello, > > >we also don't need any specific definition of > >what is a site - all that can possibly do is to constrain thinking into > >the future. > > As I also think we should not constrain concept of site. But I belive we > still need some minimun defenition of site, or need some example that show > such a set is site or not. > > For example, how about it? > > There is a company that has two sets of network in two place. > As each network is too far, this company get connectibity from > two ISPs( ISP1 has prefixes in TLA1, ISP2 has prefixes in TLA2). > And this company want to communicate this two network without > Grobal network, this company connect this two network with > released line. like this; > > [TLA1] [TLA2] > | | > <NLA1-1>-----<NLA2-1> > > ( NLA1-1 is from TLA1, and NLA2-1 is from TLA2 ) > > then can we call a set of NLA1-1 and NLA2-1 is a site ? > > I belive that this set is not a site but two sites. > but if we define site is whatever I want it to be, > then someone will regard this a set of two networks is a site. > > ---- > Tomohide Nagashima > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List > IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng > FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng > Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------
begin:vcard n:Wang;Kuanjing x-mozilla-html:FALSE org:Motorola, Inc.;NAT, NSS adr:;;1501 W. Shure Dr.;Arlington Heights;IL;60004;USA version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:S.E. fn:Kevin Wang end:vcard
