[Nmc-wg] Review of documents

[Michael Bischoff]

Hello all,

Are you sure Nina? Afaik a WSDL can be defined with a single method
that takes a document and define that the document needs to have a
NMWG schema?

Alike: http://www.w3.org/2001/04/wsws-proceedings/uche/wsdl.html

Though it does require a xsd or other supported schema type (eg not
relaxng). Now relaxng can be transformed but the transformation isn't
formal/unambiguous/two-way, or differently put if you transform from
relaxng to xsd and back you are not guaranteed to end up with the same
relaxng document. This is because some relaxng concepts can't be
mapped completely into xsd. Now afaik we don't make use of such
concepts now but it could create problems in the future.

As I frequently hear that there is no objection to particular preference
for xsd/relaxng from a theoretical standpoint (I know WG prefers
relaxng) Why not switch to xsd for practial reasons?

Considering I haven't seen the detailed report yet, please review the
following comments with that in mind;

For all that is wrong about perfsonar(and there are things wrong), certain
key area's seem to be overlooked.

Perfsonar is about sharing data to solve problems around services that
stretch across multiple administrative domains as opposed to making the
data available just within your own domain. For example AA, as far as
Authentication is concerned with NETCONF; it is left to the transport
layer which basically means that it's up to administrator/deployers to
sort it out. Now I'm sure admins/deployers are up to the task but still
it would require considerable effort as well as additional
specification/conventions. As perfsonar is actually focused on making
network measurements avail across multiple administrative domains it
actually does solve/handle this. Even currently all it takes is to point a
service to an AA-server. As pointed out on the perfsonar-dev list even
suppling an AA-server could easily be done automatically.

Perfsonar was not designed to replace current measurement systems
the idea was to complement them. As such it shouldn't be competing
with netconf; however as there are propriatary solutions for 'local' use.
Netconf might find itself caught in the middle.

Regards,

Michael



Nina Jeliazkova wrote:
> Roman Lapacz wrote:
>> Freek Dijkstra wrote:
>>   
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> My apologies for the (very) late reply.
>>>
>>> I have a few generic comments and questions on "Extensible Protocol for
>>> NMC" for now and will follow up with some more detailed remarks later.
>>> (I planned to have the detailed remarks now, but was not able to finish
>>> reading all I wanted).
>>>
>>> My main point of criticism is that I do not (yet) understand why this
>>> protocol was developed; as a naive reader it seems to highly overlap
>>> with what has been done with WSDL. Unfortunately, I'm not an expert on
>>> either, so I might miss the point. WSDL was developed as a generic
>>> request-response protocol framework, and so is "Extensible Protocol for
>>> NMC".
>>>
>>>   
>>>     
>>
>> NMC schema transformed from Relax NG into XSD format could be used in 
>> WSDL file to describe all messages. I didn't try it but basing on my 
>> (limited) knowledge of WSDL it's possible. So I don't see the conflict here.
>>
>> I understand that WSDL was mentioned here as an example for general 
>> observation that maybe some existing standard could be used instead of 
>> NMC. The same comment was raised in Geant3 by people who were not 
>> involved earlier in pS work. The investigation of Netconf in pS is a try 
>> to look at this issue and find answers.
>>
>>   
> WSDL alone is not sufficient for defining working web services, one 
> needs to define namespaces and XML schema, specific for the domain 
> (NMC schema for network monitoring in our case). 
>
> On the other hand, WSDL can still be used in implementations , 
> together with NMC schema, to allow automatic generation of client 
> classes, but this opportunity has not been explored so far.
>
> Best regards,
> Nina
>
>> Roman
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nmc-wg mailing list
>> Nmc-wg at ogf.org
>> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nmc-wg
>>   
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Nmc-wg mailing list
> Nmc-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nmc-wg
>