[Nsi-wg] Topology update

[John MacAuley]

Jeroen,

A couple comments with respect to the OpenNSA topology if I may.  Nothing serious, and could be considered general requirements.  BTW, my diagrams already had these fixes in them, so we are still stuck with some islands.

There are no latitude and longitude coordinates in the topology.  Do we want to put them in to help with visualization, or should we just not rely on these at all.  Looking more for a statement on usage consistency.

How are we using the <name> element associated with the <topology> element?  Is this simply a user friendly name for display?  This is the way I have been using it, and assumed their are no uniqueness requirements associated with this element.

Thanks,
John

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeroen van der Ham" <vdham at uva.nl>
> To: "<autogole at glif.is> List" <autogole at glif.is>, "NSI Working Group" <nsi-wg at ogf.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 8:54:53 AM
> Subject: [Nsi-wg] Topology update
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> We found a small problem in the topology generation in OpenNSA. This
> bug has been fixed, but requires an update of the OpenNSA servers.
> UvALight and AMPATH have been updated, hopefully others will follow
> soon.
> 
> I believe that once these are updated this will solve a lot of
> "island" problems in the topologies, and we will have a fairly
> complete topology.
> 
> Jeroen.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nsi-wg mailing list
> nsi-wg at ogf.org
> https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg
>