I'm with Les -- that ship has sailed almost exactly two years ago, when we had a most thorough and lengthy discussion about it: https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtg-bfd/current/msg02051.html
I, for one, use "S-BFD" (as there are really many fitting qualifiers that start with "S". The docs explain the why for the "seamless" name, and the seam being removed. Thanks! Thumb typed by Carlos Pignataro. Excuze typofraphicak errows On May 3, 2016, at 02:14, Les Ginsberg (ginsberg) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: This was debated at length 2 years ago and somehow we ended up with "seamless". While I am no way invested in "seamless" - the IGP drafts have already proceeded to IESG review - and in the case of the OSPF draft at least, the word "seamless" is used multiple times. So you would have to insure "seamless" is expunged everywhere it needs to be. Given this wasn't shot down 2 years ago it seems rather late in the game to make such a change. Can't we simply live with what we have? If nothing else it will make a great story to tell your overly nerdy grandchildren. :) Les From: Rtg-bfd [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Manav Bhatia Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 9:25 PM To: Sam Aldrin Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: Replace "seamless" with "stateless" I agree that stateless may not be complete enough, and just highlights one aspect of SBFD -- however, its better than "seamless", which i grudgingly concede, may sound pretty nifty, but means and conveys almost nothing. I dont think its too late into the WG cycle to change the name -- heck, all it needs is a DISCUSS from one of the IESG members ! :-) If the WG consensus is that "seamless" succinctly captures the essence of SBFD then we could leave it as is. However, i propose that we replace it with something more meaningful, that hopefully starts with "S" so that its still "SBFD" because you dont want all developers out there to rename their variables and function names now. Cheers, Manav On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 5:46 AM, Sam Aldrin <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Think there was some discussion during the extension of the charter for this work item. Not sure what the conclusion was exactly. IIRC, we found the cool term 'seamless' and tried to fit in SBFD work into that definition, rather than finding a term fitting the definition. Not sure if stateless is complete enough, but I have no opinion either way. On the contrary, someone asked if S means SDN :D Sam Sent from my iPhone > On May 2, 2016, at 4:52 PM, Manav Bhatia > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hi, > > Does it make sense to change "seamless BFD" with "stateless BFD" in the > documents? Its very convoluted to explain whats "seamless" about S-BFD. > > We called it "seamless" because it was simple and largely stateless. > > Any suggestions? > > Cheers, Manav
