[Nml-wg] NML terminology: Port vs Interface
romradz at man.poznan.pl
Mon Oct 3 07:53:59 CDT 2011
"port" is already used in the circuit monitoring stuff so it's easy for
me to prefer it.
W dniu 2011-09-28 20:49, Jeff W. Boote pisze:
> I prefer Port simply because we already moved this from Interface to Port 6 years ago. I don't see any reason to keep redefining the term. Seems like a really bad use of time.
> On Sep 28, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Chin Guok wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I'm fine with either "Port" or "Interface".
>> - Chin
>> On 9/27/11 6:32 AM, Freek Dijkstra wrote:
>>> A few years ago the NML group agreed to describe an object equal to the
>>> G.800 "Forwarding Point", but name it "Port", after prior usage in the
>>> Recently, it was proposed to rename this object to "Interface", after
>>> some confusion over the term "Port" in two projects.
>>> To end this discussion, I ask everyone reading this mail to vote what
>>> they think is the best term. The options are:
>>> * Port
>>> * Interface
>>> * ForwardingPoint
>>> * LogicalPort
>>> * LogicalInterface
>>> * No discussion, but further discussion on this term
>>> This is a ranked ballot, so if you don't care about the name, but like
>>> this discussion to end, you can rank the first five options with high
>>> priority (rank 1), and the last option (further discussion) as rank 6.
>>> Please vote at:
>>> The voting system has some easy-to-circumvent methods in place to
>>> prevent people voting multiple times. If you have problems voting, let
>>> me know.
>>> nml-wg mailing list
>>> nml-wg at ogf.org
>> nml-wg mailing list
>> nml-wg at ogf.org
> nml-wg mailing list
> nml-wg at ogf.org
More information about the nml-wg