[Babel-users] on Babel encoding terminology

[Juliusz Chroboczek]

> In particular, Section 4.3 of RFC6126

  http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6126#section-4.3

> the authentication I-D currently reuses these in a workable way

  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ovsienko-babel-hmac-authentication-03


> In particular, in the protocol extension I-D respective terms right
> now are "base length" and "extension data".

  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-chroboczek-babel-extension-mechanism-00


> Could you share your opinion if one of the two ways looks notably
> better than the other and why?

The terms under discussion are:

------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
RFC 6126                      | draft-chroboczek-babel-extension-mechanism
draft-ovsienko-babel-hmac-authentication
------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
original protocol             | base protocol
extra data                    | extension data
expected length               | base length
------------------------------+-------------------------------------------

I'm not planning to update RFC 6126, but I'd really like
draft...extension-mechanism and draft...authentication to use the same
terminology.

-- Juliusz