Fred, OK, I did a search for the term and came up with many millions of hits so I see your point. But, I'm still not sure this quite captures it because there could be many things going on beneath the Internet layer yet above L2. Take for example multiple levels of IP-in-IP encapsulation, link-specific adaptation (per Daniel's message), link-specific ARP cache manipulations, etc.
So, what I'm looking for is a single term to refer to everything that occurs below the IP layer down to and including L2. (The reason I say "including L2" is that these fuzzy mid-layers may be NULL in some instances.) Does "sub-IP layer" work for you? Thanks - Fred [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -----Original Message----- > From: Fred Baker [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, March 23, 2007 7:36 PM > To: Templin, Fred L > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [Int-area] the layer below IP > > "intranet" or "sublayer"? Certainly not "internet", which is > explicitly used in exactly this way in RFC 791 > > The internet protocol is specifically limited in scope to > provide the > functions necessary to deliver a package of bits (an internet > datagram) from a source to a destination over an interconnected > system > of networks... > > This protocol is called on by host-to-host protocols in an internet > environment. This protocol calls on local network > protocols to carry > the internet datagram to the next gateway or destination host. > > For the record, I have used this concept and called it that since I > worked at CDC in 1978-1983. That was how we drew our pictures of the > network we were building. I have always thought we in fact had it > right and wondered why everyone else seemed to have it wrong. I'll > also refer you to http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~amer/PEL/estelle/pdf/ > cpwsce.concordia.2001.pdf (which google just found for me); search > for the word "intranet". > > I don't know whose confidence you're concerned about me betraying, > honest. This is the architectural model and terminology I have used > for nearly 30 years. > > On Mar 24, 2007, at 3:20 AM, Templin, Fred L wrote: > > > Fred, > > > >> from my perspective, it is more useful to consider the network > >> layer sub-layered into an intranet layer and an internet layer. > > > > You have said a word here that I know well from other contexts (as > > I think you know) but did not know we could speak of openly. In > > fact, I probably would have suggested these terms if I thought I > > could. So, are we both in trouble now? > > > > Thanks - Fred > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
