nanog mailing list archives
Re: Peerage versus Peering
From: "Jeff Young" <young () mci net>
Date: Sun, 04 May 1997 20:40:40 -0400
you're certainly right about one thing, this is silliness. webster certainly never contemplated this form of 'peer' so it is useless to quote him. i agree with peter, in this form 'peer' means a network of equal or similar size. in the current state of technology, peer to me means capable of asymmetry. i'm sure the rest of nanog will play a large role in defining this term 'peer' in the coming months, native english speakers and not. Jeff Young young () mci net
Return-Path: owner-nanog () merit edu Received: from merit.edu (merit.edu [198.108.1.42]) by postoffice.Reston.mci.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA20011; Sat, 3 May 1997 10:15:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost) by merit.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA27113; Sat, 3 May 1997 10:10:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: by merit.edu (bulk_mailer v1.5); Sat, 3 May 1997 10:01:56 -0400 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by merit.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA27030 for nanog-outgoing; Sat, 3 May 1997 10:01:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from Bill.Simpson.DialUp.Mich.Net (pm035-22.dialip.mich.net [141.211.7.33]) by merit.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA27026 for <nanog () merit edu>; Sat, 3 May 1997 10:01:51 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 3 May 97 13:37:09 GMT From: "William Allen Simpson" <wsimpson () greendragon com> Message-ID: <5784.wsimpson () greendragon com> To: nanog () merit edu Subject: Peerage versus Peering Sender: owner-nanog () merit edu Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1477From: Peter Lothberg <roll () Stupi SE> Look up ''peer'' in a dictionary, in this context it means something like ''networks of equal size''.This silliness comes up every so often, not always from non-native English speakers. Peer actually means several unrelated things. One of which (the first definition in my Webster's) is a member of a body called "the House of Lords" -- noblemen.... This comes from the Latin for "equal", yet is distinctly not equality. Although it seems that there are some who desire to apply that usage, that certainly is not what the rest of us are talking about here! The 5th definition is the one which I understand to apply: any associate.The internet is moving towards a scenario with a handfull global players that will be ''peers'' everyone else will become a customer.As a matter of network engineering, this Internet has not historically established a peerage, a heirarchy of "first among equals". TCP/IP (and PPP and every other protocol I've worked on in this environment) establishes "peer-to-peer" connectivity. A peer is merely any entity with which you have established communication. More prosaically, someone with whom you "look closely". Where this term comes from, to quote the dictionary, is "entymology uncertain". WSimpson () UMich edu Key fingerprint = 17 40 5E 67 15 6F 31 26 DD 0D B9 9B 6A 15 2C 32 BSimpson () MorningStar com Key fingerprint = 2E 07 23 03 C5 62 70 D3 59 B1 4F 5E 1D C2 C1 A2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Current thread:
- Peerage versus Peering William Allen Simpson (May 03)
- Re: Peerage versus Peering Jeff Young (May 04)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Peerage versus Peering William Allen Simpson (May 05)