Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

perfsonar-dev - Re: [pS-dev] Proposal of change in Lookup Info structure

Subject: perfsonar development work

List archive

Re: [pS-dev] Proposal of change in Lookup Info structure


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Verena Venus <>
  • To: "Jeff W. Boote" <>
  • Cc: Maciej Glowiak <>, Perfsonar Development <>, Jason Zurawski <>, Martin Swany <>, Roman Lapacz <>, Szymon Trocha <>
  • Subject: Re: [pS-dev] Proposal of change in Lookup Info structure
  • Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 11:07:35 +0200
  • Organization: DFN

Hi all,

Am Tuesday 10 July 2007 00:01 schrieb Jeff W. Boote:
> Maciej Glowiak wrote:
> > Sorry, small mistake (in supportedEventTypes), it should be:
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > <nmwg:metadata id="lookup-info">
> > <nmwg:parameters id="lookup-info">
> >
> > <nmwg:parameter name="serviceName" value="Java RRD MA" />
> > <nmwg:parameter name="accessPoint" value="http://shower.fr:8080"; />
> > <nmwg:parameter name="serviceType" value="MA" />
> > <nmwg:parameter name="serviceDescription"
> > value="Java RRD MA, perfSONAR project, 229.148.249.60" />
> >
> > <nmwg:parameter name="supportedEventTypes">
> > <nmwg:parameters id="eventTypes">
> > <nmwg:parameter name="eventType1"
> > value="http://.../utilization/"; />
> > <nmwg:parameter name="eventType2"
> > value="http://.../l2-path-status/"; />
> > </nmwg:parameters>
> > </nmwg:parameter>
> >
> > </nmwg:metadata>
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > But anyway, the question was about general idea of such change.
>
> I already gave my opinion of the general change. But, I'm curious about the
> specifics here as well.
>
> Why not just use:
>
> <nmwg:parameter name="supportedEventTypes">
> <nmwg:eventType>eventType1</nmwg:eventType>
> <nmwg:eventType>eventType2</nmwg:eventType>
> <nmwg:eventType>eventType3</nmwg:eventType>
> <nmwg:eventType>eventType4</nmwg:eventType>
> <nmwg:eventType>eventType5</nmwg:eventType>
> </nmwg:parameter>
>
> I don't really see the reason to put another parameters container in. Or
> any reason to use a list of parameters inside this either.
>

I totally agree. I think it's a little bit confusing to have parameters
inside
parameters....

The scheme proposed by Jeff looks sensible to me.

Kind regards,
Verena

--
Verena Venus - DFN Labor

Regionales Rechenzentrum Universitaet Erlangen-Nuernberg
Martensstrasse 1, D-91058 Erlangen



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.

Top of Page