perfsonar development work

["Luchesar V. ILIEV" <>]

One more thing, which I've missed so far. I did rewrite a bit both the 
EchoRequest and the EchoResponse schemata. The EchoRequest is 
essentially the same, and for the EchoResponse the change is subtle, 
related to the one-datum-per-error-message proposal. They should still 
validate the current messages, if I'm not wrong, and yet, perhaps a new 
minor revision could be considered, i.e. moving from "1.0" to "1.1"

Cheers,
Luchesar


Luchesar V. ILIEV wrote:
> I'll be able to put the info on the Wiki only later today when I get 
> back to work, so let me explain the most important things shortly in 
> advance:
>
> 1) The self-test request is pretty much straightforward, so I guess no 
> additional comments are necessary at the moment. Let me know if this is 
> not the case, please.
>
> 2) The response is a bit more complex, but still very much like the 
> "echo" one you already know:
>
>     a) the two recognized metadata eventTypes are:
>
>             success.selftest
>         error.selftest
>
>         or, using URI syntax instead:
>
>             http://schemas.perfsonar.net/status/
>                                                 success/echo/1.0
>                                                 error/echo/1.0
>
>         If you have strong preference over one or the other, please let 
> me know. Otherwise, I suggest both to be recognized for reasons of 
> compatibility and consistency with the "echo" eventType messages.
>
>     b) the data element should contain at least one datum, which (or its 
> value attribute) should hold:
>
>         - on successful self-test: "Self-test passed successfully."
>
>         - in case of errors one datum should be used per error message.
>
> In the last case, I'd suggest a general format "COMPONENT: Description", 
> e.g. "EXIST-DB: Database "null" does not exist." (erm, honestly, no pun 
> intended ;). The emphasis is on clearly stating which check generated 
> the error -- in the example above, it has been the eXist database. For 
> consistency, the success message could be instead "*: Self-test passed 
> successfully."
>
> There's also an alternative, and please let me know if it feels better 
> to you: both on success and on failure, one datum is returned in the 
> data element for _each_test_ performed. The datum indicates the 
> component tested and the result. E.g.:
>
> <nmwg:data id="..." metadataIdRef="...">
>     <nmwgr:datum type="errorDescription">
>         EXIST-DB: Database "null" does not exist.
>     </nmwgr:datum>
>     <nmwgr:datum type="successDescription">
>         DEVICE: Router "rt1.lon.uk.geant2.net" contacted successfully.
>     </nmwgr:datum>
>     <nmwgr:datum type="successDescription">
>         DEVICE: Router "rt2.lon.uk.geant2.net" contacted successfully.
>     </nmwgr:datum>
>     <nmwgr:datum type="errorDescription">
>         DEVICE: Connection attempt to "rt3.lon.uk.geant2.net" timed out.
>     </nmwgr:datum>
> </nmwg:data>
>
> You might have also noticed the possibility to use the type attribute, 
> which is allowed there, to facilitate the differentiation between datums 
> indicating errors and datums indicating successfully passed checks.
>
> I guess this variant is more complex to implement, but perhaps would be 
> preferred by the Service Desk. Once again, please let me know what you 
> think.
>
> I'll save the rest for last. Or was it "the best" for last? Hmm, never 
> mind, indeed. If you have objections, or anything else to comment... 
> Well, you know already what to do. ;)
>
> Cheers,
> Luchesar
>
> P.S. There will be examples on the Wiki.
>
> P.P.S. I've unintentionally omitted Jason from the previous mail 
> recipients. Sorry about that.
>
>
> Luchesar V. ILIEV wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I've been terribly late with my tasks, and I do owe you _at_least_ a 
> > round of beer. Now, before the number of the necessary "compensatory" 
> > rounds grows to an extent endangering my bank account, let me really 
> > begin doing something about it:
> >
> > http://wiki.perfsonar.net/jra1-wiki/index.php/Main_Page
> > --> Resources
> > --> Service Monitoring
> > --> Service Self-testing
> > --> Invocation/response web messages
> >
> > Direct link:
> > http://wiki.perfsonar.net/jra1-wiki/index.php/Service_Self-testing#Invocation.2Fresponse_web_messages 
> >
> >
> > This is pointer to the specification of the extended EchoRequest / 
> > EchoResponse messages used for invocation of the perfSONAR services 
> > self-tests and reporting the results. At the moment there's only the 
> > RELAX NG schema there, but I will (must) quickly add more information 
> > (this means in the next hours.)
> >
> > I'll keep you updated on the progress. Meanwhile, if you find anything 
> > wrong so far, or have any questions, please do write me.
> >
> > As a side note, you might also notice the attempt to organize the Wiki 
> > information on the service monitoring and have it structured better (I 
> > should have done this long time ago, actually... erm, well, that's 
> > another beer, I guess, for one very patient person, really.) If you 
> > have comments, suggestions, or simply don't like it, please let me know.
> >
> > Thanks a lot,
> > Luchesar

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature