[Nsi-wg] Network Service Framework public comment

Jeroen van der Ham vdham at uva.nl
Tue Aug 10 06:23:36 CDT 2010


Hi,

I can't seem to enter my comments on the website itself, so I'm mailing
them here.

I have reviewed the Network Services Framework document, and I believe
it is a fine document, that reflects what the group has decided on, and
provides a good framework for the coming work and documents.

I can't speak for the whole NML-WG, but my personal opinion is that the
document is completely compatible with the goals and use of NML.

I do have some small remarks, mostly editorial:

The word "community" in the first sentence is italicized, and it
shouldn't be.

Section 2.3 mentions a "NSI interface", which expands to a Network
Service Interface interface, is that correct?

Just above Figure 6 is the line "Need more explanation of figure 6...",
I assume that's fixed?

Figure 7 looks corrupted on the Mac version.

At the end of section 3.3 is a sentence with "serve as *a* both human
readable".

In section 3.4 is a sentence ending in "[…], require temporal aspects to
be understood and deterministic." I think I understand what it means,
but it is a strange way to say it.

Section 3.5 mentions four types of trust, but then only three are
enumerated.

Section 4.1 uses "intra-network" and "Inter-Network" (and once
"intra-Network"). Why the different capitalization, what does that mean?

Figure 9 should also include the meaning of the abbreviation SDP, and it
should be mentioned in the text explaining figure 9 as well.

At the end of section 4.2.1 is an enumeration of STP instances,
according to the way they are enumerated, there are only 45 of them, not 90.

Section 4.2.2 is titled Service Demarcation Point (fix capitalization
there too?), but the section mentions SDPs only once. The section should
at least include the abbreviation, and perhaps some more wording about
what it is and what it's for.
Figure 10 and accompanying text makes it unclear how grouping relates to
SDPs, is a group an SDP, or is each pairing of STPs an SDP? Shouldn't it
be called an SDP group?


Jeroen.

On 05/08/2010 10:46, Guy Roberts wrote:
> Hello all,
> 
> The Network Service Framework document is now available for public comment.  You are encouraged to  use this as an opportunity to provide feedback to the OGF community about the relevance of this document to you.
> 
> http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/artf6449?nav=1
> 
> Guy
> 
> 



More information about the nsi-wg mailing list