Anton, very reasonable ;)
I think "multi-part" is a good term. OK, it triggers "MIME" in my head, but I think every term used to split up a message into multipe parts/fragments/segemnts/whatever is already used in some other context. As we don't do MIME in syslog, "multi-part" should cause the least confusion. I am going to change this in -protocol-03 if nobody objects. Rainer > -----Original Message----- > From: Anton Okmianski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 12:21 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Fragmentation terminology > > Rainer: > > If we keep the syslog fragmentation feature in -protocol, can > we change > its name to something that can't be confused with IP fragments. > Otherwise, I think it can creates confusion when one talks > about syslog > message fragments. "Segments" I think is also a term that is already > commonly used in TCP. > > Maybe "multi-part" message and "message part" instead? I > need a way to > refer to those pieces in -transport hopefully without having > to explain > what kind of fragment I am referring to. > > Thanks, > Anton. > > > > >
