> From: Sharon Barkai <[email protected]>
> Underlay ?
I suspect that's not optimal because the place I used the term the most was
in talking about LISP's possible future impact on routing in the DFZ - i.e.
the interaction between LISP and DFZ routing. So using a term that would tend
to lead to thinking about it as some sort of amorphous blob 'down there' is
probably not optimal....
But it rurns out that it's no longer urgent to find an alternative, since
it turns out most uses of 'DFZ' where in that section that got exiled to
another document.
> From: Scott Brim <[email protected]>
> The DFZ != "core". I would just clearly define it and use the acronym.
> From: Roger Jorgensen <[email protected]>
> I would say define the term DFZ and add some context to it .. It is the
> most used understanding of the "core" of Internet. Even not technical
> people mostly get it.
Well, I don't recall exactly who wanted to get rid of it, or why - it was at
the interim. I do have this vague recollection that the people there were
agreeable to removing it.
I personally agree with the points that both of you make (that 'DFZ' has a
specific technical meaning - and the one I expressly wanted to talk about -
that I'm not sure is captured by 'core', although they are roughly
equivalent), but...
Noel
_______________________________________________
lisp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
