[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Last Call for IPSEC
On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, Scott G. Kelly wrote:
> ...The flaw is in the logic
> of the argument that since this is 'the' key exchange for IP, it should
> be called the IP key exchange. The argument against is simply that the
> title is misleading and unecessarily broad...
TCP is not the only transmission-control protocol used on the Internet.
Nor is ICMP the only control-message protocol. Nor is PPP the only
point-to-point protocol.
Nor, for that matter, is IP the only protocol.
Names of this kind are typically metaphors. They should not be taken too
literally. To make the name more descriptive, TCP should really be called
something like the First Internet Reliable Flow-Controlled Bidirectional
Stream Protocol, but who cares?
For that matter, the abbreviations become names in their own right. I'd
bet that at least 75% of people who know what TCP is wouldn't immediately
recognize it if you called it "Transmission Control Protocol", and 95% of
the people who know what "IP" is would say "huh?" if you referred to "the
Internet Protocol" instead of "eye-pee". The United Nations International
Children's Emergency Fund became so well-known as "UNICEF" that when they
changed the name of the agency -- they dropped the "International" part
as redundant, and the "Emergency" part because the postWW2 emergency was
over -- they left the acronym unchanged.
The one thing that would make "Internet Key Exchange" a poor name would
be if IETF was standardizing more than one key-exchange system, which it
isn't. We need a short name for it; this one may not be perfect but it is
good enough.
Henry Spencer
henry@spsystems.net
(henry@zoo.toronto.edu)
References: