RE: requirements draft revision

["Tony Hain" <alh-ietf@tndh.net>]

Joe Abley wrote:
> > > An "enterprise" is an entity autonomously operating a
> > > network using TCP/IP and, in particular, determining the
> > > addressing plan and address assignments within that network.
> > >
... snip ...
> Yes. If a customer of C can reach the rest of the internet through C,
> then C is a transit provider of that customer. Here's the updated
> diagram:
>
>    A --- B --- C --- F
>          |     |
>          D     E
>
> F is the customer of C.
>
>
> > What is the difference between that and
> > using a dial-in NAT to map 10/8 through a single address received
> from C?
>
> I don't understand the question. It's the fact that C is
> providing connectivity to the internet beyond C that makes it
> a transit provider. I don't understand what addressing and/or
> the presence of NAT has to do with it in the general case.
>
> > They both fit the definition of Enterprise here.
>
> Yes. A, B, C, D, E and F are all enterprises, according to
> what I meant to convey in the text. If we can make things
> clearer by introducing a new term for "an enterprise which
> has a transit provider", as Randy seemed to be saying, then
> that's cool. We can do that.
>
> > In both cases the address
> > space and routing policies presented to B & E belong to C, so what
> makes C a
> > 'transit' provider?
>
> The fact that C provides internet connectivity for F.

The reason I have been hammering on this is there are some underlying
assumptions everyone has about what these terms mean, and buried in those
assumptions are mechanisms for what needs to happen to make things work.

The reason for the NAT question was trying to distinguish the difference
between an individual dialing in vs. a larger organization. Basically, what
does F managing address space have to do with the discussion of C being a
transit or not? Does any collection of routed subnets constitute an
'Enterprise'? If so do we care about all of them, or only the ones that are
trying to punch a policy through C? Is there a way to distinguish those
cases?

The fundamental point I was getting to with that last set of questions was
trying to really nail the definition of 'transit'. The last line of your
response implies single directionality. Why is C not a transit provider of
B? (hint: the term 'customer' may not appear in the answer)

If the Internet were a single rooted tree the single directionality
definition would work, but the Internet is a mesh, so the definition is a
mess. Are you really trying to identify a term for the set of transit
networks where one of the attached parties is a stub?

Tony