[Nml-wg] Schema changes

[Jason Zurawski]

Jeroen & All;

> John Vollbrecht wrote:
>> My preference for this would be to try to work it out before dropping 
>> it.  It seems important to have it - at least adaptations - for defining 
>> network topology that can be used to create ete circuits.
> 
> To be clear: I'm not advocating that we drop this entirely.
> I merely want to speed up the process for the first schema. As far as I 
> can remember, we have reached consensus on the single layer schema at 
> OGF23 in Barcelona and the Berlin meeting after that. It really is time 
> that we write this up into a draft standard.
> 
> Adaptations are not required for the single layer schema, but it seems 
> very likely that some form of adaptation will be present in the 
> multi-layer schema.


I understand the desire to produce a document quickly, but I agree with 
John that we must work out the differences before proceeding.  Note that 
several groups (including DCN and perfSONAR) will be examining the 
schema and deciding if immediate adoption is in their best interest.  It 
would not be good to leave out any functionality if we expect outside 
parties to embrace the standard.

-jason