perfsonar development work

[Martin Swany <>]

Hi all,

> > [SERVICE_TYPE] RESULT.ACTION 'DESCRIPTION'
>
> 1) Do we have a common agreement on the SERVICE_TYPEs abbreviations?
>
> 2) RESULT should be fairly straightforward, I guess, but how about  
> ACTION -- I'm afraid I don't understand what is going to be recorded  
> there exactly. To put it another way -- are the ACTIONs going to be  
> fairly standard (in fact: enforced as standard?)


The other way to go is to have the SERVICE_TYPE and result be
part of a single hierarchical eventType.  This the way that much of
the perfSONAR messaging works and is the way that the document
that Brian points to works.

I'm worried that you're re-creating a naming convention when we
already have one.

best,
martin