Dear members of the NML and NSI group,
The NSI group has expressed desire for NML features behind the current
state, and also is discussing which subset of NML is applicable for NSI.
Immediately after after publication of the base draft, some members of
the NML group (iincluding myself) seem to have suffered from a little
standardisation-fatigue, but I see renewed interest at the moment.
To get this effort going, I propose the following:
1. Assess what needs to be done on the mailing list
2. Schedule a conference call to decide which activities have priority
and who is interested
3. Decide the best structure to get this going, which groups and which
people are responsible (I know that Martin Swany and myself have not
been very active lately, so I'm open for suggestions).
For the conference call date, please fill in
http://doodle.com/gsunb8iiycnimh4r (please check the time-zone in the
top right corner, I picked 7:00 and 15:00 UCT, so it is equally horrible
in Tokyo, London, Amsterdam and San Francisco time zones)
Thanks!
Freek
--
SURFsara has a new telephone number: + 31 20 800 1300.
Freek Dijkstra
| Group Leader | Network Innovation & Support | SURFsara |
| Science Park 140 | 1098 XG Amsterdam | +31 20 800 1320 |
| Freek.Dijkstra(a)surfsara.nl | www.surfsara.nl |
Available on Mon | Tue | Thu | Fri |
Hello NSI team,
I have requested 6 NSI sessions for OGF40 in Oxford, this will ensure that we have plenty of time to close down NSI CS v2.0.
Meeting details are here: http://www.ogf.org/dokuwiki/doku.php/events/ogf-40
I am also planning a dinner in one of the old Oxford colleges (details to be confirmed), could you please let me know if you would like to attend the dinner? NML members are also invited to the dinner.
Thanks,
Guy
_____________________________________________________________________
Guy Roberts PhD
Senior Transport Network Architect
DANTE
Cambridge, UK
+44 1223 371316
DANTE is the project co-ordinator and operator of GÉANT,
the high-speed pan-European research and education network that is
transforming the way researchers collaborate.
Learn more at: www.geant.net<http://www.geant.net/>
Like us on: www.facebook.com/GEANTnetwork<http://www.facebook.com/GEANTnetwork>
Follow us at: www.twitter.com/GEANTnews<http://www.twitter.com/GEANTnews>
DANTE is the trading name of Delivery of Advanced Network Technology to Europe Limited registered in England & Wales. Registration Number 2806796. Registered Office - 9400 Garsington Road, Oxford Business Park, Oxford OX4 2HN.
_____________________________________________________________________
Hi
As you probably NSI have picked up NML as it topology model, and is,
AFAIK, the first "real" user of NML. The NML work seems to have come to a
halt after publishing version 1, however from an NSI point of view version
1 feels more like a starting point then a final product.
Are there any one out there that is planning to continue working on NML?
Best regards, Henrik
Henrik Thostrup Jensen <htj at nordu.net>
Software Developer, NORDUnet
Hi
It seems we need a rehash of NML XML schema for support NSI. Here are some
further suggestions for how to improve the schema. The changes should not
change the semantics of NML, but just make it easier to parse.
* Any element in PortGroup
This is the main problem. John already has a fix for this.
Should probably go through the NML schema and check that it is on everywhere.
* Bidirectional ports after unidirectional ports
In the current model a bidirectional port is composed of two unidirectional
ports. When building a datastructure representation, this means that one has
to construct a temporary value/object to track this mapping, as the data
structure representing the undirectional ports have not yet been created.
Having the bidirectional ports after the unidirectional removes this need,
making the parsing simpler.
* Replace nml:Relation
The nml:Relation constructs are not very "XML". I suggest that instead of
<nml:Relation type="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/05/base#hasInboundPort">
one would use:
<nml:InboundPorts>
Several elements would have to be constructed for this though.
* Identical List constructs
The way list of bidirectional ports and unidirectional ports are created are
different. Bidirectional ports are repeated in the topology element, where as
unidirectional ports are contained under an element. I.e:
<nml:Topology id=...>
<nml:BidirectionalPort id=...>
...
</nml:BidirectionalPort>
<nml:BidirectionalPort id=...>
...
</nml:BidirectionalPort>
<nml:Relation type="http://schemas.ogf.org/nml/2013/05/base#hasInboundPort">
<nml:PortGroup id=...>
...
</nml:PortGroup>
<nml:PortGroup id=...>
...
</nml:PortGroup>
</nml:Relation>
</nml:Topology>
There isn't really a wrong or right way to do this, but I think doing both is
the worst option. I understand that bidirectional ports are a somewhat special
things in NML, but they could still easily be contained in an element.
Best regards, Henrik
Henrik Thostrup Jensen <htj at nordu.net>
Software Developer, NORDUnet
