perfsonar development work

[Roman Lapacz <>]

Jeff W. Boote wrote:
> > > The others are protocol and profile. (See attached message.)
> > >
> > > I'm not convinced that a message-parameter is really enough here for 
> > > the 'general' solution. I suspect we may want this information 
> > > published to the LS somehow as well. But, I guess something like 
> > > this would at least be a start.
> >
> > I agree that the LS should contain also protocol versions used by 
> > registered services. Your proposal of using parameter right under 
> > message element is fine but we might need better solution if we have 
> > more data triggers (logical sub-requests) in one message. Then we 
> > might want, because of some reasons, different protocol versions for 
> > those sub-requests. The solution might be putting protocol version 
> > directly in/under data trigger element. Example:
>
> I think this complicates things too much. A message should only be 
> from a single protocol. If a client for some reason wants to make a 
> request with two different versions of the protocol, it can make two 
> distinct connections/requests.

Right. Simplicity is always important. I agree to not complicate things.

Roman
> jeff