Noel Chiappa wrote:
Can I encourage people to pick terminology which separates i) the
characteristics of the name (e.g. 'includes location information'), and ii)
_what_ is named (endpoint, interface, etc)? So really you'd need a range of
terms for places on the first axis (which I'll call the 'characteristic'
axis), and a separate range of terms for the second (which I will call the
'object' axis), and then (if you're being complete) the cross-product of the
two.
Ah, yes. I was trying to articulate exactly this point yesterday.
Thank you, I concur.
> locator A locator is a name that has topological sensitivity and
> must change if the point of attachment changes.
I am sort of OK with the one, even though it differs from the original
definition of the term (in RFC-1992). Using my taxonomy above, this has
meaning purely on the 'characteristics' axis, and none on the 'object' axis.
Given the discussion about MAC addresses, I suspect that we should also
make this default to an L3 point of attachment.
> identifier An identifier is the name of an endpoint.
This one I don't like, because it overloads a common word ("identifier"), one
which has a more generic meaning to most people (either as a synonym for
'name', or some slightly more restricted meaning - e.g. 'fixed-length binary
name').
So for 'endpoint identificator' (which is what you wanted to name?), which
makes selections along both axes, you either need to double-barrel (perhaps
with a resulting initialism/acronym), or create some new word.
Or, perhaps we just make it more explicit that an identifier is a name
that has no topological semantics and remove the object reference
entirely? This would bring it back in line with the more generic meaning.
> Identifiers may have other properties, such as the scope of their
> uniqueness (global or local) and the probability of their uniqueness
> (absolute or statistical).
One 'word': "triple-barrel"! Actually, there's another important property,
which is the _lifetime_ of name. Presumably one property of an
'identificator' is that it should be permanent?
Ok, but we already know that some people, for the sake of privacy, want
to have temporary identifiers.
> address An address is a name that is both a locator and an
> identifier.
In IPvN, an "address" is both an 'interface locator' and an 'endpoint
identificator'. Trying to change that meaning is probably futile (and
potentially very confusing).
Agreed. I don't think we should try to change it, just make it more
explicit.
Next pass after I absorb all comments...
Tony
_______________________________________________
rrg mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
