Let me forward this to the NML-WG. Jeroen originally brought up the query part, and I commented on it off-list (in-person even). Jeroen is currently on holiday, but can probably comment when he returns. (I removed some spurious quotations for readability). Freek -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Nsi-wg] Syntax of NML endpoints in a connection request (was: Determining the Network of an STP) Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2012 09:36:28 -0400 From: Aaron Brown <aaron@internet2.edu> To: Freek Dijkstra <Freek.Dijkstra@sara.nl> CC: John MacAuley <john.macauley@surfnet.nl>, NSI WG <nsi-wg@ogf.org> On Jul 6, 2012, at 7:14 AM, Freek Dijkstra wrote: [...]
<source>urn:ogf:network:nordu.net:2012:onsala-tx?vlan=1791</source> <sink>urn:ogf:network:nordu.net:2012:onsala-rx?vlan=1791</sink>
[...]
The query stuff may have just been shorthand, but in case it's not, overloading the URN to include a query parameter seems a bad idea to me. I'd rather see something like (all in short-hand): <source> <port> <port_group idRef="urn:ogf:network:sne.science.uva.nl:2012:lighthouse-egress" /> <vlan>1791</vlan> </port> </source> For the "connect any vlan", you could presumably leave the vlan parameter out: <source> <port> <port_group idRef="urn:ogf:network:sne.science.uva.nl:2012:lighthouse-egress" /> </port> </source> You could presumably override the set of 'any' VLANs by doing something like: <source> <port> <port_group idRef="urn:ogf:network:sne.science.uva.nl:2012:lighthouse-egress"> <vlans>1790-1800</vlans> </port_group> </port> </source> I'm not positive what the "connect ALL vlans" would look like because I'm not sure what the result of that operation would be. i.e. would it be a port with multiple VLANs, or would it be a PortGroup that functions as a port, or would it be a ridiculous number of ports (depending on how many VLANs are in the PortGroup)? Cheers, Aaron
Hi, I have another question about URNs with query part: The proposed usage of a query part is that it is appended to a URN that identifies a Group, so that the whole uniquely identifies an element within that Group. It is evident that the URN of the Group is a valid URN. My question: is a URN with query part also formally a URN? In other words, do we allow a question mark in all URNs? For example, may I identify my PortGroup with "urn:ogf:network:xyz.org:2012:sdfghjk?x=2"? And if so, I need to write "urn:ogf:network:xyz.org:2012:sdfghjk?x=2?vlan=1719" to identify a Port within this PortGroup? The double question mark seems hideous to me. What about network objects that are identified by a non-URN, but another type of URI. We currently allow this. What solution do we want? 1) Follow Aaron's proposal to abandon the query part altogether, and use a child element in XML. (How would this be used in RDF?) 2) Describe/refer to the regular rules to define query parts in URIs. Thus with ampersands as in "urn:ogf:network:xyz.org:2012:sdfghjk?x=2&vlan=1719" 3) Forbid query parts in all URIs (including URNs) to describe network objects. 4) .... ? Thanks, Freek
participants (1)
-
Freek Dijkstra