[Nsi-wg] minutes from today's NSI call

[Jerry Sobieski]

I think there are two fundamanetally different types of information 
being queried.  The "summary" status is what I call access information - 
i.e. information available about the _/service/_ delivery.   The 
"details" are network transport information - i.e.  information that is 
not fundamentally part of the service offering.  I strongly believe of 
these two query functions should be individually authorized.  The data 
they request has two different contexts, and Query() could come from 
third parties that will likewise need to present authorization.

I have no issue with making them both part of a single "Query()" 
primitive.  Or in naming them as John suggests.

Jerry

On 8/7/11 11:08 PM, John MacAuley wrote:
> After looking at the difference between the status query and the path 
> query I realized it was really a reservation "summary" query and a 
> reservation "details" query.  The only difference between the two 
> being the "details" query returned the recursive detailed path and 
> state information, otherwise, the information returned was identical. 
>  The original "status' and "path" didn't really represent the true 
> nature of the operations.
>
> So I am proposing that there is a single query operation with the 
> option for choosing reservation "summary" or "details".
>
> John.
>
> On 2011-08-07, at 4:21 PM, Jerry Sobieski wrote:
>
>> Hi John - Here is how I see this working:
>>
>> The NSA making the Query() request is always the RA and the NSA 
>> receiving that Query() request and providing the information is 
>> always the PA.   The RA/PA relationship exists for each primitive.   
>> NSAs always shift roles if/when they need to work the service tree.  
>> It does not matter what role they may have played in other 
>> primitives.   (Just as an NSA performs both RA and PA roles for 
>> reserve requests, likewise for the Query request.)
>>
>> What is a "summary" query you refer to?   I only recall that we 
>> decide on a "status" query and a "path" query.   And I am confused - 
>> you say you are asking about a "path" query...then mention a summary 
>> query...  Can you elaborate?
>>
>> Thanks man!
>> Jerry
>>
>>
>> On 8/6/11 9:54 AM, John MacAuley wrote:
>>> Peoples,
>>>
>>> I just thought of a small issue with respect to the detailed path 
>>> query.  How will it work when an provider agent queries a requestor 
>>> agent as is permitted with the original summary query?  Do we say 
>>> the detailed query is not allowed from provider agent to requestor 
>>> agent?
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> John.
>>>
>>> On 2011-08-03, at 12:42 PM, Guy Roberts wrote:
>>>
>>>> … are available here:
>>>> http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc16307?nav=1
>>>> _____________________________________________________________________
>>>>       **       Guy Roberts, PhD     Network Engineering & Planning
>>>>     *    *                          Tel:    +44 (0)1223 371300
>>>>    *      *    City House           Direct: +44 (0)1223 371316
>>>>    *           126-130 Hills Road   Fax:    +44 (0)1223 371371
>>>>   *            Cambridge
>>>>   *            CB2 1PQ              E-mail:guy.roberts at dante.net 
>>>> <mailto:guy.roberts at dante.org.uk>
>>>>   D A N T E    United Kingdom       WWW: http://www.dante.net 
>>>> <http://www.dante.net/>
>>>> _____________________________________________________________________
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nsi-wg mailing list
>>>> nsi-wg at ogf.org <mailto:nsi-wg at ogf.org>
>>>> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nsi-wg mailing list
>>> nsi-wg at ogf.org
>>> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
>> _______________________________________________
>> nsi-wg mailing list
>> nsi-wg at ogf.org <mailto:nsi-wg at ogf.org>
>> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/nsi-wg/attachments/20110808/a81ead05/attachment-0001.html