Subject: (ipv6) semantics - TLA

From: "Michel Py" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 13:18:30 -0800

As pointed out in the 6bone meeting today and on the ipv6mh list, there is a semantics issue using the acronym "TLA". Unless we have missed something, it does not exist anymore.

1. We still need a word or acronym to describe the concept, even though it does not aggregate at the /16 boundary.
2. The 6bone uses the acronym "pTLA".

Instead of re-inventing the wheel, I propose to amend draft-ietf-ipngwg-addr-arch-v3-07.txt to include a definition of "TLA".

Michel.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Pekka Savola <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 23:31:02 +0200 (EET)

> Instead of re-inventing the wheel, I propose to amend draft-ietf-ipngwg-addr-arch-v3-07.txt to include a definition of "TLA".

I'm not sure if the term is useful for _address architecture_ point of 
view at all -- how routing is managed is another thing altogether, and 
should not be messed up with standards documents.

Or perhaps you should describe in detail what the term would be useful for
in this context?

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy                   not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security.  -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords

---

From: Bill Strahm <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 16:26:20 -0500 (EST)

Wow, now we are overloading the acronym TLA... I just got that today for
no good reason...

TLA: Old acronym that stands for Three Letter Acronym. Technical bodies
enjoy creating these objects in their standards

TLAng: Next Generation acronym that stands for Top Level Aggregator.  See
TLA.

Sorry, I will take the blame if that shows up in an RFC in April.

Bill