Hello All, Now that NSI v2.0 is nearly out the door we should be looking ahead to the next phase of NSI. The NSI working group will meet in Singapore in the week beginning 30th September to discuss the next steps for NSI - details of the meeting will be announced on this mailing list. If you have any ideas for NSI enhancements please prepare a presentation for that meeting. Regards, 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 On Wed, 26 Jun 2013, Guy Roberts wrote:
Now that NSI v2.0 is nearly out the door we should be looking ahead to the next phase of NSI.
Getting a protocol implemented, tested and integrated into a production infrastructure takes a significant time. I think we need be careful about how we approach "the next phase" as we don't want people halting NSI adoption and waiting for yet another release (ok NSI2 is significantly more useful and NSI1). Goals and timelines should perhaps be the focus of the next meeting (we tend to get lost on the hows).
The NSI working group will meet in Singapore in the week beginning 30th September to discuss the next steps for NSI – details of the meeting will be announced on this mailing list.
Does that mean we won't do anything at OGF39 in Madrid? I realize OGF39 in Madrid and Glif in Singapore are very close in time, so it might not make sense to have something at both.
If you have any ideas for NSI enhancements please prepare a presentation for that meeting.
I think we should also consider cleaning up some of the existing constructions in the current protocol. For instance the acks where conceived when some actions like provision and release could take a long time, due to activating the circuits, but they no longer have this role, and we could probably do without the acks. Simiarly I think we should also consider a protocol which is not based on request-reply, but truly message. Similarly I'd also like to kill off the correlationId and always have time be in UTC at the protocol. I'll try and come up with something for the meeting. Best regards, Henrik Henrik Thostrup Jensen <htj at nordu.net> Software Developer, NORDUnet
participants (2)
-
Guy Roberts -
Henrik Thostrup Jensen