[Nml-wg] References

[Aaron Brown]

On Oct 8, 2012, at 8:58 AM, Jeroen van der Ham wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On 5 Oct 2012, at 14:48, Freek Dijkstra <freek.dijkstra at sara.nl> wrote:
>> Jeroen's proposal: "If there are 2 network elements with the same id
>> attribute in a given document, the union of the two elements should be
>> considered the canonical definition of the element"
>> 
>> Aaron's Rule 1: If there are 2 network elements with the same id
>> attribute in a given document, the behavior is undefined.
> 
> I think so.
> 
> Some questions for Aaron's approach:
> - If you have a big database with measurements and topology information, would that mean you can only ever describe a network element once?

It depends on what you mean by describe. You can always annotate the network element:

<Node>
  <Relation type="inherits-from">
    <Node A />
  </Relation>

  ... some measurement data about A ...
</Node>

You're not "defining" A, you're simply saying "I have information about A", and it's scoped by your context.

> - How would you cope with updates and changes?

My recollection is that there is a version number attribute or a timeframe attribute during which they are valid (can't recall which). I'd be fine with having multiple definitions as long as each has a different version number, or non-overlapping timeframe. Then, if you ask for A, you know which attributes were valid when, and can use that to "scope" down the A you care about. (most recent, or the A or As that were valid during a given timeframe).

Cheers,
Aaron

> 
> Jeroen.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nml-wg mailing list
> nml-wg at ogf.org
> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nml-wg

TIP2013, University of Hawaii Mānoa
January 13 - January 17, 2013, Honolulu, HI
http://events.internet2.edu/2013/tip/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/nml-wg/attachments/20121012/8bcb957e/attachment.html>