[Nsi-wg] ES.net and ManLAN topology issues.

[John MacAuley]

Found a few syntax errors in the ES.net and ManLAN topologies.  I will get the fixes submitted and send an e-mail when completed.

On 2013-09-23, at 11:47 AM, John MacAuley <john.macauley at surfnet.nl> wrote:

> I also noticed the ampath topology references these ports from NORDUnet that are not in their topology:
> 
> <nml:PortGroup id="urn:ogf:network:nordu.net:2013:aruba-in"/>
> <nml:PortGroup id="urn:ogf:network:nordu.net:2013:aruba-out"/>
> 
> John
> 
> On 2013-09-23, at 11:30 AM, John MacAuley <john.macauley at surfnet.nl> wrote:
> 
>> Unless you want to model using individual ports each with a single label…
>> 
>> On 2013-09-23, at 11:22 AM, Jeroen van der Ham <vdham at uva.nl> wrote:
>> 
>>> No, a single Port can only have a single Label, not a set of Labels.
>>> 
>>> On the other hand, a PortGroup can have a LabelGroup with just a single Label.
>>> 
>>> So it is recommended to use PortGroups and LabelGroups.
>>> 
>>> Jeroen.
>>> 
>>> On 23 Sep 2013, at 17:04, Hans Trompert <Hans.Trompert at surfnet.nl> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The same goes for the unidirectional port declarations, some use Port
>>>> and Label:
>>>> 
>>>>   <nml:Port id="urn:ogf:network:nordu.net:2013:netherlight-out">
>>>>     <nml:Label
>>>> labeltype="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/05/ethernet#vlan">1780-1783</nml:Label>
>>>>     <nml:Relation
>>>> type="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/05/base#isAlias">
>>>>       <nml:Port
>>>> id="urn:ogf:network:netherlight.net:2013:port:a-gole:testbed:nordu.net:1:in"/>
>>>>     </nml:Relation>
>>>>   </nml:Port>
>>>> 
>>>> While others use PortGroup and LabelGroup:
>>>> 
>>>>   <nml:PortGroup
>>>> id="urn:ogf:network:netherlight.net:2013:port:a-gole:testbed:nordu.net:1:out">
>>>>     <nml:LabelGroup
>>>> labeltype="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2012/10/ethernet#vlan">1779-1799</nml:LabelGroup>
>>>>     <nml:Relation
>>>> type="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/05/base#isAlias">
>>>>       <nml:PortGroup
>>>> id="urn:ogf:network:nordu.net:2013:netherlight-in"/>
>>>>     </nml:Relation>
>>>>   </nml:PortGroup>
>>>> 
>>>> Can both ways be used?
>>>> 
>>>> HansT.
>>>> 
>>>> On 9/23/13 4:46 PM, John MacAuley wrote:
>>>>> Can someone explain to me which of the following two segments are
>>>>> correct?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> <nml:BidirectionalPortid="urn:ogf:network:netherlight.net:2013:port:a-gole:testbed:232">
>>>>> 
>>>>> <nml:PortGroupid="urn:ogf:network:netherlight.net:2013:port:a-gole:testbed:232:in"/>
>>>>> 
>>>>> <nml:PortGroupid="urn:ogf:network:netherlight.net:2013:port:a-gole:testbed:232:out"/>
>>>>>     </nml:BidirectionalPort>
>>>>> 
>>>>> or
>>>>> 
>>>>>     <nml:BidirectionalPortid="urn:ogf:network:ampath.net:2013:ndn">
>>>>>         <nml:name>ndn</nml:name>
>>>>>         <nml:Portid="urn:ogf:network:ampath.net:2013:ndn-in"/>
>>>>>         <nml:Portid="urn:ogf:network:ampath.net:2013:ndn-out"/>
>>>>>     </nml:BidirectionalPort>
>>>>> 
>>>>> Should Port or PortGroup be used?  We have a mix right now in our
>>>>> topologies.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> John
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> nsi-wg mailing list
>>>>> nsi-wg at ogf.org
>>>>> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nsi-wg mailing list
>>>> nsi-wg at ogf.org
>>>> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nsi-wg mailing list
>>> nsi-wg at ogf.org
>>> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> nsi-wg mailing list
>> nsi-wg at ogf.org
>> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nsi-wg mailing list
> nsi-wg at ogf.org
> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg