perfsonar development work

[Maciej Glowiak <>]

Hi Jeff,

I fully agree, that we should follow the eventType naming scheme. But in 
fact there was previously defined "echo" eventType for handling echo. To 
be honest I didn't recognize the eventType before, because LS determined 
the message by its type which was "EchoRequest". I missed the eventType 
at all.

Recently Roman wrote generic Echo handler for all services and he used 
just "echo" event type. To distinguish the generic Echo from 
LS-parametrized-echo I add just a suffix ".ls", but of course I should 
have followed the naming scheme. Anyway, I wasn't sure how it should 
look like, because echo is not a characteristic/metric.

Perhaps some examples would be useful on "Generalities" page.

I was a bit confused:

"ggf.org/ns/nmwg/characteristic/echo/1.0"
is not appropriate

"perfSONAR/characteristic/echo/1.0"
contains no "LS", so:

"perfSONAR/characteristic/echo.ls/1.0"

but is "perfSONAR" valid organization name?
and it's still not a characteristic. So:

"perfSONAR/tools/echo.ls/1.0"
or better:
"perfSONAR/tools/echo/ls/1.0"
but is "echo/ls" valid tool name?
and what with perfSONAR.

And so on. If they're defined, I'll follow the examples.

Maciej