I am forwarding this conversation and will forward some other related ones to the NSI and NML groups. -- Note that I included the original doc in the message below. - John Begin forwarded message:
From: Freek Dijkstra <fdijkstr@science.uva.nl> Date: May 7, 2009 10:21:51 AM GMT-04:00 To: John Vollbrecht <jrv@internet2.edu> Cc: Martin Swany <swany@cis.udel.edu>, Jeroen van der Ham <vdham@science.uva.nl
, Aaron Brown <aaron@internet2.edu>, Jeff Boote <boote@internet2.edu>, Andrew Lake <alake@internet2.edu> Subject: Re: NSI naming
John Vollbrecht wrote:
Attached is a try at defining needs of NSI from NML. Some if it uses NMwg terminology as I understand it. I am thinking it would be good to sort this out and get a good definition by the end of OGF.
Hi John,
Thanks for writing this down -- a few comments.
You mix the NMwg with the NML terminology -- the NML terminology has improved much since the NMwg documents, and will deprecate the NMwg schema.
Here is a comparison table between NML and NSI, as far as we see. NSI NML End Device --- Node Edgepoint --- Port Network --- Topology (*1) Link --- Link Segment --- (under discussion) Service Group --- n/a Level --- Layer
(*1) If I understand your "network" correctly; the term network has different meanings.
Segment is still under discussion. We've used the term "Channel" a few times, but there is no group consensus. Segment refers to a multi layer concept, which will be defines in a separate schema.
NML hasn't defined Service Group. It seems an important concept, so perhaps we should.
Have you seen the terminology comparison table at http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc15512
Regards, Freek Dijkstra Jeroen van der Ham
John Vollbrecht Senior Network Engineer, Internet2 office 734 352 4960 cell 734 395 7890