Re: [dispatch] Agreeing on terminology about directions.

2016-02-23 Thread Ted Ross
On 02/23/2016 11:15 AM, Alan Conway wrote: Direction of message flow is tricky to describe in router configuration. "in" and "out", "sender" and "receiver" all have opposite meaning depending on whether you are thinking from a router or client perspective. Here's what I would propose based on

Re: [dispatch] Agreeing on terminology about directions.

2016-02-23 Thread Michael Goulish
I think this is confusing, because the link origins seem a little router-centric, while the link message directions are client-centric. Why not make everything rclearly router-centric, in this context. Like this: links made by clients are "client links" (or "client-originated links")

[dispatch] Agreeing on terminology about directions.

2016-02-23 Thread Alan Conway
Direction of message flow is tricky to describe in router configuration. "in" and "out", "sender" and "receiver" all have opposite meaning depending on whether you are thinking from a router or client perspective. Here's what I would propose based on the existing use of "in" and "out" in the