[Pc_Support] BS Terminology of the Day: 'Ritters

[Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith at ieee.org>]

As you may or may not know, I've been cringing at the term "Routers"
applied to NAT/PAT devices that do only basic IP forwarding at most.
Several months ago I ran into a potential client who couldn't understand
a thing about _real_ "routing," routing tables, their distribution, etc...
when it was clear they needed routing on a multi-subnet network (let
alone with their VPN).  Since then I've been trying to evangelize, even
if only from my closet.

But at least someone at Wikipedia knows my plight (among countless
other professionals) as someone just pointed out to me today:  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Router  

"... These are not "routers" in the true sense, but the terminology has
been confused with network address translation."

I had suggested "NFR" -- for "NAT-Fowarding Router" and, slangwise,
"Not a Fscking Router."  But acronyms aren't always the most ideal.
E.g., I hate the terms FOSS, FLOSS, etc... that try to solve the Stallman
insistance of "Free Software" ("free" not being appropriate even in the
mid-'80s IMHO) with the "Open Source" movement.  Frankly, I think
the term "Freedomware" is far more appropriate, since it clearly tells
many people that's it does "cost" in some way, but it's typically worth
the vigilance.  ;->

Last week I finally thought of one for these NAT/PAT devices, although
I forgot about it until someone brought it up on a list.  I just slurred
my speech into a stereotypical southern drawl and came up with
"'Ritters."

Like [c]'Ritters to a house, one is fine, but many are a nuisance.  They
are something you want to keep out of your house, and definitely
off your enterprise network.  More than one is an infestation you can't
control as they mass produce off-spring (unnecessary IP issues).  The
few professionals I used it in front of last week really liked it.

And just today I hit Wikipedia (after someone pointed out the NAT
and Router references).  Sure enough, 'Ritters has another meaning.
It is the lowest title for lower nobility in German history.  That
would also apply.  Wikipedia claims it is the equivalent of a Knight,
which would also make sense.  One Knight alone is fine in a
house, but two loners without any alliance or way to communicate
(no actual routing protocols) will cause the same issues.  Which is
why you need a protocol, like a routing protocol (RIP, OSPF, etc...)
as a "round table" for Knights who work together.

And the difference between a Router and a 'Ritter.  Because there
are $200-300 Routers out there, and occassionally at the Superstore,
that also have RIP and, gasp, even OSPF setup and support.  But
most of them are 'Ritters.

So, what do you think?  Is the BS just eccentric?  Or did he come up
with a good one like Freedomware (which I'm sure I wasn't the first
to suggest)?


--
Bryan J. Smith   mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org