perfsonar development work

[Roman Łapacz <>]

Nina Jeliazkova napisał(a):
> Hi all,
>
>   
Hi
> I fully support Loukik message, that ideally, the protocol should be
> responsible to reveal versioning information. 
>   
In the comming release of rrd ma you will find new type of request 
LookupInfoRequest/Response which help you in getting general service 
information (including service version number; we could add protocol 
version to this set as well). The implementation of this message type is 
located in the base so each service can have it.

Take a look at the documantation of it:
https://svn.perfsonar.net/svn/perfsonar/tags/GEANT2-JAVA-RRD-MA-2.3-RC4/doc/Interface_Specification.doc

Of course I also support the idea of having protocol version inside 
requests which could instruct services how to answer (what protocol 
implemetation to use)

Roman


> Regarding perfsonarUI, the lack of such information so far led to introduction
> of "supported schema" field in MA.conf. One of the factors delaying abandoning
> MA.conf in favor of lookup service, is that after such transition, the version
> information will be lost. 
>
> I see versioning in URL as a temporary workaround, to become irrelevant when
> the protocol is updated to support versioning.
>
> Best regards,
> Nina
>
>
> Loukik Kudarimoti 
> <>
>  wrote:
>
>   
> > Nicolas,
> >
> > The lack of protocol versioning and a method to discover supported 
> > protocols required us to make this choice.
> >
> > Without such versioning in the URL, its difficult to know which version 
> > of software has been installed. If the protocol can be extended (as 
> > already proposed by Jeff) to support picking up of protocol version(s) 
> > supported, this can be safely removed. Ideally, this protocol should 
> > also help in picking up the version of software deployed.
> >
> > regards,
> > Loukik.
> >
> > Nicolas Simar wrote:
> >     
> > > Hi Loukik, Michalis
> > >
> > > Can you tell about the rationale for having the release version name?
> > >
> > > Hi Nina and Andreas,
> > >
> > > Would you prefer to limit the URL changes of the web-services or do 
> > > you prefer to have the product version in the URL?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Nicolas
> > >
> > > Maciej Glowiak wrote:
> > >       
> > > > Nicolas Simar wrote:
> > > >
> > > >         
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > looking at the web-services names
> > > > >
> > > > >           
> http://rrd-ma.perfsonar.xxx:8080/perfSONAR-RRD-MA-2.2/services/MeasurementArchiveService
>   
> > > > > I see there is a part mentioning the service version(2.2). Is there a
> > > > > particular benefit of seeing the service version?
> > > > >
> > > > > I am wondering about this, because when the service will be updated, 
> > > > > the
> > > > > version will be updated and the tools won't be able to access it until
> > > > > they are updated.
> > > > > It this statement correct?
> > > > >           
> > > >
> > > > Nicolas,
> > > >
> > > > AFAIR it was a requirement from Release Mgmt. Team for perfSONAR 2.0.
> > > > You should contact Loukik or Luis in order to get more information about
> > > > the reason for using version number.
> > > >
> > > > Anyway, Ilias and Roman are right - that's default name (contaning
> > > > version number) and everybody can change it after the installation.
> > > >
> > > >         
> > >
> > >
> > >       
>
>
>
>