[Nsi-wg] Topology Representation Schema

[Henrik Thostrup Jensen]

Hi Jeroen

On Wed, 22 May 2013, Jeroen van der Ham wrote:

> Attached is a new draft of the topology representation Schema.
>
> It features an example written in N3 to make it easier for human 
> consumption, and should be fairly obvious.
>
> The final document will only have an OWL and XML representation of the 
> example, to align with the NML doc.

OK. Since we are going with XML as the mandatory format, I would expect 
that to be in such a document.

> Please let me know what you think.

3.1.1

This section leaves out the cs[2]ProviderEndPoint which we have previously 
used. However I think that the service class makes much more sense.

3.1.2 + 3.3

The term "link" is an odd choice IMHO. The common term for this is "url", 
or occasionally "endpoint" (main used with web services). I think the term 
"link" is particularly unfortunate as it occurs in describing network 
topology, where this word typically has another meaning.

5.

The main reason we decided on a single format in Charlottesville, was so 
implementations would know exactly what that must be exported and must be 
able to parse. Hence I think that the "SHOULD" for parsing OWL syntax 
should be relaxed to "MAY" or "OPTIONAL".

The OWL example includes nsi:cs2ProviderEndpoint despite not being 
specified in the document. I think it can just be removed.

Should nml:Topology in the top be a nml:Node? I am left a bit puzzled 
about when to use topology and node now. Same with Port and PortGroup 
(I'll admit to now having read the full nml spec).


     Best regards, Henrik

  Henrik Thostrup Jensen <htj at nordu.net>
  Software Developer, NORDUnet