Cell Relay Archive

[Paul Koning <pkoning@xedia.com>]

Nige wrote:
> 
> Paul Koning wrote:
> >
> > The UNI and signalling specs say "this end system identifier can be
> > a globally unique identifier specified by an IEEE MAC address".
> >
> > So the MAC address rules do apply.  What bugs me is the words "can be".
> > That's bogus because it defeats the purpose.
> 
> I'm sure the words "can be" are intentional - to mean that this is a
> suggested value for the field.  But in no way is it mandatory.
> I have a paper from the ISO explaining their (careful) use of
> "shall", "should" etc.   I'm pretty sure I've seen similar from the ATMF.

I know the terminology.  It's not clear that it was intentional
here.  Even if it was, it's a mistake.  If the use of the IEEE 
identifier were required, it would ensure unique ESIDs (if the
globally administered values are used) yet allow the use of
locally administered values as well (with the "local" bit set).
So the text as written creates ambiguity and removes a guarantee
without offering any benefit whatsoever in exchange.

	paul