[Nsi-wg] NSI CS XSD comments

[Atsuko Takefusa]

Hi all,

I prefer John's structured schema.
Because it can specify optional or mandatory parameters and data types
of each parameter, explicitly.
In order for interoperability, we should define a standard schema as
explicitly as possible.
Thank you,

Atsuko
G-lambda, AIST


2011/4/12 John MacAuley <john.macauley at surfnet.nl>:
> Peoples,
> I think there is one major area we need to close on before I feel
> comfortable starting to write the associated document.  It is specifically
> around the service parameters and how they are specified:
>   <!-- Parameters relating to the requested service. -->
>    <xsd:complexType name="ServiceParametersType">
>       <xsd:sequence>
>          <!-- Time parameters relating to the reservation. -->
>          <xsd:element name="schedule" type="tns:ScheduleType"/>
>          <xsd:element name="bandwidth" type="tns:BandwidthType"/>
>          <xsd:element name="directionality" type="tns:DirectionalityType"/>
>          <xsd:element name="pathObject" type="tns:PathObjectType"/>
>          <xsd:element name="guaranteed" type="tns:AttributeSequenceType"
> minOccurs="0"/>
>          <xsd:element name="preferred" type="tns:AttributeSequenceType"
> minOccurs="0"/>
>       </xsd:sequence>
>    </xsd:complexType>
> The main question I have is do we change this structure to be completely
> generic and list all service parameters through type/value pairs, or do we
> break out hose key ones as I have here and put the remaining in the
> type/value pairs?
> Also, for bandwidth do we document the values as Mb/s or do I add an element
> to explicitly identify the unit as suggested in one provided comment.
> Thank you,
> John.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nsi-wg mailing list
> nsi-wg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
>
>



-- 
Atsuko Takefusa
Information Technology Research Institute, AIST