I agree, using the term 'link' won't help. Defining the new RSI acronym does seem the best option.
I wouldn't entertain an OSI layer analogy though. That by itself would open a whole lot of discussion. For instance, a router interface doesn't need to be limited to layers 1-3. Marcelo On 2012-11-28, at 11:00 AM, "George, Wes" <[email protected]> wrote: >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >> Marcelo Reis >> >> What about using the term 'link' when referring to traditional >> virtual/physical interfaces. And leave the term 'interface' to indicate >> a routing system interface? >> > [WEG] I think that is going to end up being an artificial distinction that > won't translate beyond those involved in the discussion, and to me, in that > context "link" refers to a connection between two interfaces, not just one > interface. > > We could say "physical interface" and clarify that this includes virtual > interfaces that are emulating a physical interface. I think that gets > properly specific. (and then the I2RS interface would be "control interface") > > I also like the idea of a crisper definition of the routing system interface > as a way to disambiguate it from the more generic form that could mean lots > of different things dependent on context. Maybe combined with making it clear > in the definition of a routing system that in that case we're referring to > interfaces carrying user data between devices (whether physical or virtual) > it'd make the distinction more evident. > > The only other way I can think of to clarify might be to actually tie it to > the OSI layers involved. > A router interface is going to be Layers 1-3 > An IRS interface is going to be Layer 7 really, even if it's manipulating > things to affect the path of Layer 3 data. > But that had the potential to be pretty clunky too. Is it possible to mainly > refer to the Routing System Interface as an API, or is that too limiting? > That at least uses a well-known disambiguation. > > Wes George > > This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable > proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to > copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for > the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not > the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any > dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the > contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be > unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender > immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail > and any printout. _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
