Hi Radek- Yes, we would like to test as software takes shape. Henrik Thostrup Jensen is our NORDUnet developer assigned to the NSI coding. He is on vacation this week, but should be back at the end of the month. I think it may be several weeks yet before the NORDUnet code is ready for interop testing. But we should coordinate as soon as he gets back. As for SMOA, it is up to the implementers to decide what tools/libraries they use internally to develop their code. The NSI standard should not endorse any specific implementation mechanisms. Nor should we simply agree to use certain software if that then constrains other implementations. The standard should define how two completely independent implementations should be able to communicate. Period. I.e. it should describe the messaging and state semantics, not how these are implemented. To underscore this point, even the WSDL implementation is considered an annex to the protocol standard for a web service message transport layer. The Web Service message transport layer is just one way two implementations of the NSI protocol standard communicate. But even this only addresses the message transport layer - not the protocol messaging itself. As it stands currently, the NSI CS v1.0 does not have pub/sub "notifications"... I think it is something we want to explore for some new features in Version 2.0. But for now, simple request/response messaging is all that is specified in the standard. Is SMOAN useful in such a context? Further, we cannot endorse the use of any specific library for implementations. The standard spec must be independent of any particular implementation. So we can incorporate or require open standards, but not specific implementations of those standards. Developers are free to use whatever libraries they wish as long as the behaviour of the messaging is as specified by the standard. Finally, as SMOAN is a web service library, it would be relevant to the web service message transport layer of NSI. We have explicitly made the protocol independent of any particular mtl implementation...we have defined an annex to v1.0 that describes how the NSI protocol would be mapped onto a web service messaging environment. Perhaps SMOAN may be useful in this context? Regards Jerry On 6/21/11 6:22 AM, Radek Krzywania wrote:
Hi all, In PSNC we have a draft implementation of state machine and messaging for NSI, according to recent WSDL files and specification. We would like to find partners who also have their part of code to initiate first testing on interoperability. Our code is currently no integrated with data plane, so we can play with control plane only. Please let me know if anyone is interested. You may also contact Michal Balcerkiewicz (in CC) to discuss details.
I would also like to present a simple messaging library, which we can consider to use for NSI purposes. It an implementation of OASIS standard called SMOA Notification (written by PSNC). Adopting it is not a big deal and it solves a lot of playing with messaging itself, so we can focus on real work. In the attachment I placed two docs on this SMOAN so you can take a look. We can discuss it through emails or during next call.
Best regards Radek
________________________________________________________________________ Radoslaw Krzywania Network Research and Development Poznan Supercomputing and radek.krzywania@man.poznan.pl Networking Center +48 61 850 25 26 http://www.man.poznan.pl ________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________ nsi-wg mailing list nsi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsi-wg