On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Mattia Rossi <mattia.rossi.mailingli...@gmail.com> wrote: > So probably it should be structured like this: > > _________ leak > / > hijack ----------------- mis-origination (which should be better described > as: I originate P when I don't have the right to) > \__________ origin scrubbing (I like that) > > It's a hijack (the result) in any case. If you want to differentiate > between malice and stupidity/ignorance just call it "malicious hijack" > opposed to "accidental hijack". And then list the cause (leak, > mis-origination, origin scrubbing)
Hi Mat, I object to jargon on general principle. Excessive jargon makes technical disciplines needlessly inaccessible to folks who aren't steeped in the lore. Now and then there's a concept of such routine utility within the discipline that it's worth abbreviating into a word or short phrase. In that case, words that imply the concept are a good choice. Route Hijack is a good example of this. Creating jargon down in the weeds, though, that's a bad thing. Unwise. Something to be deliberately avoided. Regards, Bill Herrin -- William Herrin ................ her...@dirtside.com b...@herrin.us Owner, Dirtside Systems ......... Web: <http://www.dirtside.com/>
