perfsonar development work

[Slawomir Trzaszczka <>]

Hi all,

I'm working on lookup service. I would like to ask you few questions
about lsTTL parameter and nmwg message form. I'm implementing lsTTL
parameter handling by lookup service.

New feature is used when a service wants to register to lookup service
and send lsTTL parameter.

LsTTL (TTL - time to live) parameter is used when the lookup service
cleans up old services. Latest Lookup Service implementation uses global
lsTTL for all services registered in database. In new version, service
which want to register to lookup service, can send own lsTTL parameter.
This parameter will be prevented and it will ignore global lsTTL.

Message from service, with lsTTL parameter:

<message type="LSRegisterRequest">
   <parameters id="parameters.1">
     <parameter name="lsTTL">300</parameter>
   </parameters>

   <!-- ... -->
</message>


The problem is how can lookup service inform client that sent lsTTL
parameter is accepted/rejected(incorrect,out of bound) - in which part
of nmwg message?

This is my proposal :


<nmwg:metadata id="M_E_T_A_1">
   ...
</nmwg:metadata>

<nmwg:data id="result-code-description" metadataIdRef="M_E_T_A_1">

   <nmwgr:datum xmlns:nmwgr="http://ggf.org/ns/nmwg/result/2.0/";>
        Data has been registered with key ...
   </nmwgr:datum>

</nmwg:data>

<nmwg:metadata id="result-code1">
      <nmwg:subject id="reference-to-metadata"
metadataIdRef="M_E_T_A_1"/>
 
        <nmwg:eventType>
        http://ggf.org/ns/nmwg/result/2.0/warinig/ls/ttl_out_of_bound
        </nmwg:eventType>

</nmwg:metadata>

 <nmwg:data id="result-code-description1"  metadataIdRef="result-code1">
      <nmwgr:datum>
                Miminimal TTL is 90 sec. Your was 80 sec.
      </nmwgr:datum>
 </nmwg:data>

What do you think about this response ? Is it correct ?

Regards Slawek