On 18/07/2017 23:54, Michael Richardson wrote: > > We have many places in protocols where we want to express some ordering of > pieces of information. We call these fields priority or precedence or Just a side note: in the design of diffserv we paid a lot of attention to that choice of words. You might care to read section 4.2.1 of RFC2474, which could be summarised as precedence != priority. I think there is quite some subtlety in this area, and not so much randomness in the choices. Brian > sometimes other things. Give encode things as numbers. > > DNS's MX record has a "preference", in which lower numbers are better. > BGP has a LOCAL_PREF, in which higher numbers are better. > RAs have PreferenceLevel, in which higher numbers are better. > ROLL has "rank", in which lower numbers mean closer to the root. > OSPF has such numbers, which I forget at the moment. > > Is there any consistent usage where preference is a term used when > higher numbers are better and priority when lower numbers are better? > Does the RFC-editor have any suggestions? Or is it really all random. > > -- > ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ > ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [ > ] mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [ > > > > -- > Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works > -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > > >