Confcall-prot-11aug05
From GEANT2-JRA1 Wiki
Contents |
Agenda
- Naming Schema for assigning names to Observation points/router interfaces
- Lookup Service Discussions - read the Lookup Service Implementation document
- XML database technology Evaluation progress (MG) - Data storage possibilities for LS
- LS component design discussions - discussion on model to be used and whether generic service design needs a revisit
- LS protocol disucssions - go through paris discussions on contents of messages and reach an agreement for phase 0
- Discussions on usage of identical schemas for storage and messages
- Rich's questions during previous call (LS and topology - impending problems)
- Discussion on MA as operational service
- Missing functionality
- Different approaches to complete
- Who can do it
Minutes
Attendees
Martin Swany (UoD)
Giorgos Pallas (GRNet)
David Schmitz (DFNm)
Loukik Kudarimoti (DANTE)
Szymon Trocha (PSNC, scribe)
Roman Łapacz (PSNC)
Joe Metzger (ESNet)
Andreas Solberg (UniNet)
Jason Zurawski (UoD)
Discussion
MS said that what was listed in Andreas'es proposal was traditionally referred as metadata. For instance in the observation point identifier to have address type as a part of the name was not the direction we had been thinking of. The same about direction. He said that in the prototype and NMGW and the current instances of the schemas an observation point was a subject which identified what was contained in a time series of data.
AS agreed that his observation point was the same as our subject. He said in the example he had made he had wrote that observation point could be used as subject (section 4). He thought that referring measurement to observation point by saying it was realted to IP address or ifIndex was not a good idea because they were not time-persistent. He was going to map those identifiers into one name which was time-persistent so that you could have one observation point name identifies that you looked up and be sure that it always referred to the same logical interface.
MS saw a problem whether it was really a name or a structure that uniquelly identified the data.
MS said that observation point seemed to him as very close to what the goup defined as subject. AS agreed that observation point could be not a subject but a subelement of the subject like identifier.
Conf call ended at 16:00 CEST.
Download to listen to this conf call
Actions
Back to JRA1 events
