(Tai out v6ops list..) On Wed, 26 Nov 2003, Nick 'Sharkey' Moore wrote: > On 2003-11-25, Fred Templin wrote: > > > > RFC 2461 specifies the behavior of traditional routers (i.e., "ROUTERS"). > > "ROUTERS" typically advertise autoconfig parameters and prefixes from > > their attached networks. Hosts use them to reach off-link nodes via default > > or more-specific routes. But, a new breed of routers (i.e., "routers") is > > emerging from paradigms such as Mobile Ad-hoc Networks. "routers" > > typically advertise host routes only (aka, "addresses" or "locators") and > > no prefix or autoconfig parameters at all. > > [...] > > In the MANET paradigm, "routers" often have only a single network > > interface which may be used for multi-hop forwarding [...] > > Firstly, I don't think differentiating 'router' and 'ROUTER' is > a good idea. I for one would find it hard to follow in conversation :-) > > I think the usual definition of Router is a good one -- a Router > is a node which forwards packets. > > It seems to me that the confusion is not in the definition of > Router, but in the definitions of 'Interface', 'Link' and 'Network', > which don't generally take wireless into account.
I agree with this view, it's no use trying to overload two different meanings for a router depending on capitalization. I don't think it matters at all whether a router has just one interface or many, or what it advertises or not, or whether it pretends to be a host on one interface, or originates UDP/TCP packets, or whatever. It's still a router. -- Pekka Savola "You each name yourselves king, yet the Netcore Oy kingdom bleeds." Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
