perfsonar development work

["Nina Jeliazkova" <>]

Hi All,

I would like to further clarify, that "nmwg v2.2-netutil" is NOT an official
naming of the NMWG group. This is simply a configuration option for
PerfsonarUI invented to handle the issue of different name spaces (perfsonar
vs netutil) used within the same NMWGv2 schema for the subject element. It
does not influence any other element of the schema.

Best regards,
Nina

Charaka Palansuriya 
<>
 wrote:

> 
> Hi Loukik, Nicola and Nina,
> 
> Thank you for your prompt replies.
> 
> What Kostas, Jeremy and I were trying find out is the difference between 
> the "nmwg v2.2-netutil" schema and the "nmwg v2.2" schema. Few months ago, 
> I read the NMWG Schema Developers Guide ( 
> http://stout.pc.cis.udel.edu/NMWG/
devguide.pdf) which describes how to use 
> the NMWG base schema. If my memory is correct, the NMWG Schema Developers 
> Guide describes a base NMWG (v2.2 ?) schema which can be extended for 
> particular use with its own namespace (this would explain the usage of the 
> "netutil namespace" that you mentioned in your emails:). Therefore more 
> specific questions would be,
> 
>   1) How does the "nmwg v2.2-netutil" schema extends the base schema ?
>      I.e., does it define its own elements and attributes ? For example,
>      do you replace definition of elements in nmwg:metadata and nmwg:data
>      present in the base schema.
> 
>   2) Does "nmwg v2.2-netutil" schema restrict and/or ignore usage of any
>      elements in the base schema (e.g., optional commonTime element) ?
> 
> Hope these are much more clearer question. Please let me know if you 
> require any further clarification.
> 
> If there are more suitable documents that I should have a look at please 
> feel free to point them to me.
> 
> Cheers,
> Charaka
> 
> On Thu, 9 Nov 2006, Loukik Kudarimoti wrote:
> 
> > Thanks Nina.
> > Charaka, does this answer your question? Please don't hesitate to contact
us
> 
> > if you need more info or have any other questions..
> >
> > Loukik.
> >
> > Nina Jeliazkova wrote:
> >> Hi Loukik,
> >> 
> >> There are three possible values for the 3rd field in MA.conf :
> >> "perfsonar" :   Services that support older perfsonar schema, namespace
> >> "http://perfsonarNS.org/ns/perfsonarNS/";  "NMWG2v2" :  Services that 
> >> support NMWG2v2 schema, but make use of perfsonar
> >> namespace for the subject element.
> >> NMWG2v2_netutil":  Services that support NMWG2v2 schema
> >> 
> >> The "NMWG2v2_netutil" value in MA.conf's 3rd field  was introduced in
> >> perfsonarUIv.0.04.
> >> The reason was to support the latest change in the messages, that was not
> >> reflected by schema version change (AFAIK).
> >> The "NMWG2v2_netutil" services use netutil namespace for subject element 
> >> <netutil:subject id="iusub1">
> >> 
> >> netutil namespace:
> >> "http://ggf.org/ns/nmwg/characteristic/utilization/2.0/";
> >> 
> >> Before that, the messages used NMWGv2 schema, but perfsonar namespace for

> >> the
> >> subject
> >> "http://ggf.org/ns/nmwg/tools/org/perfsonar/1.0/";
> >> and this is reflected by "NMWG2v2" value in MA.conf. 
> >> The "NMWG2v2_netutil" is the value used to communicate with 
perfsonar-1.0 
> >> or
> >> newer services. 
> >> This is also reflected by perfsonarUI changelog
> >> http://wiki.perfsonar.net/jra1-wiki/index.php/PerfsonarUI#Change_log
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Best regards,
> >> Nina
> >> 
> >> Loukik Kudarimoti 
> >> <>
> >>  wrote:
> >>
> >> 
> >>> Hi Vedrin,
> >>> 
> >>> I think netutil term belongs to perfsonar UI. Is that correct? If so,
can 
> >>> you please answer the question from EGEE below?
> >>> 
> >>> thanks,
> >>> Loukik.
> >>> 
> >>> Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> Hi Loukik,
> >>>> 
> >>>> Charaka's (and everyone's here :-) question re NMWG:
> >>>> 
> >>>> It'd be useful to know what the difference between "NMWG version 2.2"
and
> 
> >>>> "NMWG version 2.2 *netutil*". If it is a subset what's dropped and why
?
> >>>> 
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> 
> >>>> Kostas
> >>>> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>
> >> 
> >
> >
>