Hi all, The summer-time-dance has reached Europe as well, so we should be back to our usual difference. UTC 15:00 - Ams 17:00 - Eastern 11:00 - Pacific 8:00 Call: +1-734-615-7474 (Please use if you do not pay for Long Distance) or +1-866-411-0013 (toll free US/Canada Only) Enter access code: 0186145 We'll be discussing most of the issues I sent out earlier. Freek will followup with a more detailed list soon. Jeroen.
Hi Jeroen; NMC will not hold a meeting this week, you may have the entire time. I will not be able to attend the NML meeting. Thanks; -jason On 3/27/12 10:50 AM, thus spake Jeroen van der Ham:
Hi all,
The summer-time-dance has reached Europe as well, so we should be back to our usual difference.
UTC 15:00 - Ams 17:00 - Eastern 11:00 - Pacific 8:00
Call: +1-734-615-7474 (Please use if you do not pay for Long Distance) or +1-866-411-0013 (toll free US/Canada Only) Enter access code: 0186145
We'll be discussing most of the issues I sent out earlier. Freek will followup with a more detailed list soon.
Jeroen.
Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
We'll be discussing most of the issues I sent out earlier. Freek will followup with a more detailed list soon.
We propose to discuss the following topics: * implicit hasTopology relation between Topology and (sub)topology artf6537 https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-subtopology/hasTopology.... (proposal #2 and optional #1) * implicit hasNode relation between Topology and Node (no artifact created) https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-subtopology/hasNode.xml (proposal #1 and optional #3) * name of the serial compound relation is "isSerialCompoundLink" https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6545 https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6510 (related) https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-vlans/compoundlink.xml (first question at footer) * What is the direction and name of the relation between Port and Link? https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6538 (second part) https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-vlans/compoundlink.xml (second question at footer) (this needs some further explanation, I'll provide that shortly) * VLAN is a link with multiple source and multiple sink ports, and optional parameter noReturnTraffic https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6503 https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6542 (duplicate) https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-vlans/vlan-link.xml Sorry for the delay. I was too tired yesterday, and found that not all issues have an artifact, and a few duplicate artifact were created, and some artifacts cover two items. I'll try to correct this in a few hours time and post a full proposal. Freek
Hi Freek/All; On 3/28/12 5:30 AM, thus spake Freek Dijkstra:
Jeroen van der Ham wrote:
We'll be discussing most of the issues I sent out earlier. Freek will followup with a more detailed list soon.
We propose to discuss the following topics: * implicit hasTopology relation between Topology and (sub)topology artf6537
https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-subtopology/hasTopology.... (proposal #2 and optional #1)
Since I won't be on the call, I include the exchange from early May via email in this ticket, and my commentary to the various proposals.
* implicit hasNode relation between Topology and Node (no artifact created)
https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-subtopology/hasNode.xml (proposal #1 and optional #3)
Commentary on this also in the notes/email exchange, and included in artifact 'artf6537'
* name of the serial compound relation is "isSerialCompoundLink" https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6545 https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6510 (related)
https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-vlans/compoundlink.xml (first question at footer)
This is fine by me.
* What is the direction and name of the relation between Port and Link? https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6538 (second part)
https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-vlans/compoundlink.xml (second question at footer) (this needs some further explanation, I'll provide that shortly)
Being consistent is what would prefer, either: - we always use the same 'direction' but multiple works (is/has) - We always use the same word (has or is) and that may imply different directions I can get used to either I suppose.
* VLAN is a link with multiple source and multiple sink ports, and optional parameter noReturnTraffic https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6503 https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6542 (duplicate) https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-vlans/vlan-link.xml
These proposals were fine with me, the only extra comment I could add is if we need to be 'naming' (assigning IDs) to bidirectional ports and links for later use. Thanks; -jason
Sorry for the delay. I was too tired yesterday, and found that not all issues have an artifact, and a few duplicate artifact were created, and some artifacts cover two items. I'll try to correct this in a few hours time and post a full proposal.
Freek
Jason Zurawski wrote:
I include the exchange from early May via email in this ticket, and my commentary to the various proposals.
Thanks, though not needed -- I have all comments and stuff already in my notes. What needs to be done is to make a concise proposal to the list. Give me a minute ;) Freek
As promised, some clarification: If you only have a short comment, would you be so kind to do so at the artifacts tracker whose URL is listed? For a discussion, you can of course use the mailing list. Implicit relations ==================
* implicit hasTopology relation between Topology and (sub)topology https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6537 https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-subtopology/hasTopology.... (proposal #2 and optional #1)
* implicit hasNode relation between Topology and Node (no artifact created) https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-subtopology/hasNode.xml (proposal #1 and optional #3)
Summary: We need to relate Topology with a Node (meaning that the
topology contains a Node), and related a Topology with a Topology
(meaning that the topology contains a subtopology).
Proposal: In XML, we allow (1) implicit relations; in RDF it is required
to use an explicit relation.
Example:
XML:
* name of the serial compound relation is "isSerialCompoundLink" https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6545 https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-vlans/compoundlink.xml (first question at footer)
I think we already have a collective "sigh, it's ugly, but can we please move on" on this one, so I won't waste more text :) Summary: Can we move on? Proposal: Can we move on? Example: Can.... Direction of Port-Link Relation ===============================
* What is the direction and name of the relation between Port and Link? https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6550 https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-vlans/compoundlink.xml (second question at footer)
This one was brought up by Jeroen, and backed by Roman at OGF34.
Summary: We need to define a two relations between port and link: for
traffic from port to link, and for traffic from link to port. (aka
source and sink relations).
Proposal: Use a "isSource" and "isSink" relation to relate a Port to a Link.
Semantics:
Port A --(isSource)-> Link X
means: there is a traffic flow from Port A to Link X.
Port B --(isSink)-> Link X
means: there is a traffic flow from Link X to Port A.
Note: this is contrary to how we currently related Ports and Links:
Link --(hasSource)-> Port
Link --(hasSink)-> Port
The rationale is that this proposal provides a "hierarchy" of relations:
Topology --> Node --> Port --> Link
Example:
XML:
* VLAN is a link with multiple source and multiple sink ports, and optional parameter noReturnTraffic https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6503 https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6542 (duplicate) https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201203-vlans/vlan-link.xml
Summary: We want to describe a LAN (or VLAN) between Nodes
Proposal: Use a single Link object, with multiple sources and sinks, and
an optional parameter "noReturnTraffic" to signify that
Rationale: A LAN is basically a broadcast domain, with multiple Ports.
The "noReturnTraffic" is an optimisation in present (switched) networks,
and seems the easiest way to describe the special case that no traffic
flows back to it's source, like it used to in a old LAN with HUBs. The
idea to put this in parameters comes from OGF 33:
https://forge.ogf.org/svn/repos/nml-examples/201109-switchservice/2vlans_opt...
Example:
I may mention a few other tracker items in the call. For easy reference, here are the links: Agenda NML Conf call 29-03-2012 These four items are on the table for discussion: https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6537 - Implicit relations https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6545 - serialCompoundLink https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6550 - source/sink Relations https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6542 - VLAN These three are in working group last call: https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6534 - Case https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6539 - Inbound/Outbound Ports https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6538 - Verbs in relation-names Propose to close (with reject status): https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6540 - Relate BidirectionalPorts https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6487 - Virtual Node concept New items: https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6551 - Subtopologies -> can go in last call? https://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6552 - Ordered list -> need example for RDF Freek
participants (3)
-
Freek Dijkstra
-
Jason Zurawski
-
Jeroen van der Ham