Maria Alandes Pradillo [mailto:Maria.Alandes.Pradillo@cern.ch] said:
On behalf of the DPM team, could you please also consider adding:
I think these do need some more discussion ...
- "DPM" to ServiceType
It isn't clear to me that DPM is a distinctive type - as far as I know it only implements standard interfaces like SRM and xroot, so why is it a different type of service to, say, dcache? What would you propose as a definition? DPM as a product name is published elsewhere. I think we probably need a type name that would be common between, say, DPM, dcache and Castor since they provide basically the same functionality.
- "org.webdav" and "org.xrootd" to InterfaceName
xroot has already been discussed extensively and we made a decision - I think the decision was to use "xroot" for the protocol name but we should check. For webdav I think the "org." prefix isn't adding much here - probably we should just use "webdav" as it's a well-known protocol defined in an RFC so there's no issue of a name clash, but there may be other views. Anyway there are likely to be other interested parties - dcache at least - who should express a view. Stephen -- Scanned by iCritical.