On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Burke, S (Stephen) <stephen.burke@stfc.ac.uk> wrote:
glue-wg-bounces@ogf.org
[mailto:glue-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Paul Millar said: Option 2) would allow publishing both Storage- and Computing- Service.ID values as LocationServiceID attributes; i.e., the following would be valid
LocationServiceID=<StorageService.ID> LocationServiceID=<ComputingService.ID> LocationDomainID=<UserDomain.ID> LocationDomainID=<AdminDomain.ID>
If this is all correct, I'd go for option 2) here.
Note that this interacts with the way inheritance is done and the question of whether IDs are globally unique. If there were separate attributes called ComputingServiceID and StorageServiceID and they were allowed to be identical then this scheme wouldn't work, but if every object has a globally unique EntityID then it's OK.
IDs are unique globably as stated in page 8 of the GLUE 2.0 Specifications.
There is also an issue of whether you would want to know what kind of object is being referred to - i.e. with this scheme you can't tell from the Location object what kind of service/domain it relates to. On the other hand I suspect that you would normally follow the reference the other way round.
True and I suspect the same.
Stephen -- Scanned by iCritical. _______________________________________________ glue-wg mailing list glue-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/glue-wg
-- David Horat Software Engineer – IT/GD – Grid Deployment Group CERN – European Organization for Nuclear Research » Where the web was born Address: 1211 Geneva - Switzerland, Office: 28/R-003 Phone +41 22 76 77996 Professional Web: http://cern.ch/horat Personal Web: http://davidhorat.com/ Profile: http://linkedin.com/in/davidhorat