Subject: Wireless Terminology Draft (was: Re: [seamoby] Seamoby Charter Last Call)

From: James Kempf <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 10:45:09 -0700 (PDT)

------------- Begin Forwarded Message -------------

X-Delivered-For: <[email-masked]>
X-mProtect: Mon, 14 May 2001 10:33:07 -0700 Nokia Silicon Valley Messaging 
Protection
Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 10:32:43 -0700
From: "Charles E. Perkins" <[email-masked]>
To: James Kempf <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [seamoby] Seamoby Charter Last Call

Hello Jim,

> Maybe we need a terminology draft, or at least, define this term
> somewhere so that it can be referred to. I'm suprised nobody
> has done a generalized terminology draft for wireless terms before in the MIP
> group.

RFC 2002 does start off with a long list of terminology.

It is questionable whether any specific wireless terms are
needed for a protocol running over IP.  What is needed is
a list of useful terms.  For instance, one might care about
error rate or bandwidth even if the medium were not wireless.
I don't think that chip rate, for instance, should be part
of the [seamoby] terminology list.

Do you think that there are terms which SHOULD have been defined
for RFC 2002?  If so, now would be a good time to mention them
before RFC 2002bis goes to the RFC editor's desk.

Regards,
Charlie P.

------------- End Forwarded Message -------------