perfsonar development work

[Fausto Vetter <>]

Hi,

I dont mind. For me, it is fine.

Fausto

Quoting Joe Metzger 
<>:

> Fausto,
> We anticipated multiple organizations would put together collections
> of measurement tools that all implement the same version of the perfSONAR
> protocols and have been tested and packaged together for for various
> reasons (to meet project management deadlines, targeted user communities,
> etc.)
>
> At the meeting last fall in France, we decided that such collections would
> be called perfSONAR bundles. Several of us thought that the bundle name would
> include organization that was putting together the package, but that  
>  was never
> explicitly documented in meeting minutes and it hasn't happen with the
> bundles released since that meeting.
>
> Your's is the 3rd bundle to be developed, so logically following the examples
> on the download page and what was previously agreed to, it should be called
> the "PerfSONAR V3.0 Bundle", and the collection that Internet2 is
> putting together
> real soon now could be the "PerfSONAR V4.0 Bundle".
>
> But I don't think that is a workable plan.
>
>
>
> So, what do people think about changing the bundle release section
> to something like:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>  perfSONAR Bundle Releases
>        * GEANT PerfSONAR Bundle v2.1 NEW! (22 Aug, 2007)
>            - Current Production Release recommended to European NRENs
>        * RNP CACTISonar Bundle v0.2  NEW! (22 Aug, 2007)
>            - Pre-Release Alpha
>        * GEANT PerfSONAR Bundle v2.0 (25 May, 2007)
>        * Initial PerfSONAR Release v1.0 (18 July, 2006)
>
> Note: bundles are named according to the group that managed the packaging,
> and usually contain contributions from multiple organizations.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Then in the near future Internet2 can add something like the following
> without going through this whole discussion again:
>       * Internet2 perfSONAR-PS bundle v1.0 (?? October, 2007)
>
>
> What do people think of this idea?
>
> --Joe
>
>
>
>
> On Aug 30, 2007, at 1:20 PM, Fausto Vetter wrote:
>
> > Hi Loukik,
> >
> > Answers follow below:
> >
> > Quoting Loukik Kudarimoti 
> > <>:
> >
> > > Hi Fausto,
> > >
> > > I noticed that on the wiki downloads page, you have added a new section
> > > called perfSONAR suite and added the cacti plug-in stuff there.
> > >
> > > I think the right place for it is the Visualization tools section. I
> > > think so because
> > >
> > > * we haven't defined what a suite is (the last time it was proposed, we
> > > agreed to use the bundle instead)
> >
> > I defined as a suite once:
> > - it implements an MA-RRD
> > - it is a client to MPs (for while CLMP - extensible for others)
> > - it enables users to manage their tests among their mps
> > - it enables users to extend metrics shared
> > - it enables users to manage data shared using MA-RRD implemented
> >
> > So, in summary, it is not just a visualization tool. It is more.
> >
> > plans to future: topology service at least
> >
> > > * why is it called a suite?
> >
> > I think because it is not just a tool to see metrics that other MA   
> > provide, once it manage the data handle by it.
> >
> > > Can you please move it?
> >
> > do you think I need to move it anyway?
> >
> > > thanks,
> > > Loukik.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Fausto Vetter
> > NPD/UFSC
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.



--
Fausto Vetter
NPD/UFSC

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.