Subject: [P2PSIP] Defining Terminology

From: Cullen Jennings <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Sep 2007 07:58:34 -0700

The big goal of this group is to produce one or more protocols that  
get used for interoperable systems. To be able to come to consensus  
on that, we are going to need to be able to have conversation were we  
actually understand what each-other are saying - for that we will  
need some common terminology. ( I imagine this is obvious to everyone  
so I'm not sure why I am saying it but oh ... )

Clearly there is a desire is to use the terminology that is already  
common in the various fields of technology that we use to make it  
easier for people to understand our work. This does have  
complications. For example, in the DHT literature, the word "key" is  
often used while in the security world "key" is also used. Terms like  
root are common in both certificates and DNS but mean somewhat  
different things.  The working group is incorporating work, concept,  
and people from many fields and that makes terminology all that more  
complicated, however, it also makes getting terminology all that more  
important.

So what advice would I suggest .... Yes, you definitely have to  
define common terminology that people can use. Section 4 of the draft- 
ietf-p2psip-concepts looks like a great start - I imagine more will  
be added as the WG progresses. Define terms where the WG feels it is  
needed to be able to have conversations and it helps get to the end  
goal of being able to come to consensus on a protocol. Keep in mind  
the end goal is interoperable running software not a dictionary.  
Also, keep in mind that the documents this WG writes need to be  
reviewed and be understandable in the wider IETF context - so work  
carefully not change the meaning of words that folks outside the WG  
think they already know the meaning of.

Cullen <with my AD hat on>

_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip