On Thu, 12 Jul 2007, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
Thus spake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
A site is a network of computers with a single administration,
this can mean indeed a major corporation (who maybe even
require multiple /48's which is why rfc4193 is a bit off to cover
those cases)
Where has the IETF redefined the meaning of the word "site"?
In plain English, this word refers to a distinct physical location such
as an office or building or campus.
This has been a longstanding problem in the IETF; in fact, the inability to
agree on what "site" means was one of the reasons SLAs were deprecated. The
word "site" is often abused to mean "administrative domain" rather than
"physical location" due to the ISP-centric nature of the IETF and RIRs. It's
virtually impossible to tell, in any particular context, which meaning an
author meant. We need to stop using the word entirely...
why does it mather if it is physical site, administrative domain (eh how
can anyone interprent that as a site?!) or a room, company etc... why not
leave that upto those that try to use it?
--
------------------------------
Roger Jorgensen | - ROJO9-RIPE - RJ85P-NORID
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | - IPv6 is The Key!
-------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
