On 5/18/22 09:50, [email protected] wrote: > Hi Joe, > > FWIW, rfc4026#section-6.1 defines AC as follows: > > == > 6.1. Attachment Circuit (AC) > > In a Layer 2 VPN the CE is attached to PE via an Attachment Circuit > (AC). The AC may be a physical or logical link. > == > > which we can generalize as: > > == > 6.1. Attachment Circuit (AC) > > The CE is attached to PE via an Attachment Circuit > (AC). The AC may be a physical or logical link. > == > > We don't have an entry for AC because we thought that the meaning is already > conveyed in the CE/PE entries: > > == > Customer Edge (CE): An equipment that is dedicated to a particular > customer and is directly connected to one or more Provider Edges > (PEs) via attachment circuits (ACs)... > > Provider Edge (PE): An equipment owned and managed by the service > provider that can support multiple services (e.g., VPNs) for > different customers. A PE is directly connected to one or more > CEs via ACs. > == > > Please let us know if you still prefer having the entry added. Thanks.
It was this above I was "spot-reading" to see how you had changed the text to clarify SAP. When I saw "AC" I had expected to see it called out in terminology like PE is. I did find it as you show, but I still thought it, being referenced in other places like PE/CE, and in 6.1 would necessitate a separate terminology entry. Joe _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
