LISP introduces the term "reencapsulating", and this is a useful term with practical application. However, LISP also uses the term "recursive (enapsulation)" in a way that is different than its uses elsewhere such as in RFC2473.
What LISP is calling "recursive (encapsulation)" is called "nested encapsulation" in RFC2473, and it has many practical applications such as for traffic engineering. Indeed, the term "nested" is also used in other practical contexts, including "Nested Nemo". But, RFC2473 goes on to define "recursive encapsulation" as a harmful condition that arises from misconfigurations, routing loops, etc. In the RFC2473 terminology, nested encapsulation is a useful scenario that has a healthy terminating condition, whereas recursive encapsulation is unhealthy and, if left unchecked, results in an infinite loop. I would like to suggest that the LISP authors consider altering their terminology to use the term "nested" to refer to a healthy application of multiple layers of encapsulation and to use the term "recursive" to refer to an unhealthy application, i.e., the same as the terms are used elsewhere. Thanks - Fred [email protected] _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
