Hi all,
In the specification refinements found in the wiki the Core & Models
document [1] appears to change the Link attributes specification.
In the docbook spec (rev 164 from SVN) a link to an associated resource
looks like this:
Link: </storage/disk1>;
rel="http://purl.org/occi/kind#storage";
title="Quorum Disk"
I.e. the "rel" attribute specifies the Resource scheme.
In the wiki [1] however, another attribute named "target" is described as:
"The Kind to which the Link points to."
(I suspect Kind should be Resource here)
Am I interpreting the document correctly to say that the new Link format
would look like this instead:
Link: </storage/disk1>;
target="http://schemas.ggf.org/occi/resource#storage";
title="Quorum Disk"
regards, Ralf
[1]
http://forge.ogf.org/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.occi-wg/wiki/CoreAndModel…
I thought I added the mailing list to the email thread. :0
I'll repost.. with the original pdf attached.
-g
Andy Edmonds wrote:
> Please can this discussion happen on the mailing list - it goes
> completely against the grain of an "open community".
>
> Andy
> andy.edmonds.be <http://andy.edmonds.be>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 18:19, Gary Mazz <garymazzaferro(a)gmail.com
> <mailto:garymazzaferro@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>
> State and Status good question..
>
> State is an attribute set by the user to enable or disable the
> operation of the console instance.
> Status is the current operational disposition of the console instance.
>
> I think this is a MUST. XEN, ESXi, VirtualBox will not configure a
> virtual machine without the console set. I'm not sure, but I also
> believe the same is true for qemu. Without the console, we exclude
> many private cloud configurations.
>
> The big issue is what happens when the user moves a configuration
> (VM) to a provider that does not support the feature. What gets
> reported back ? Does the provider maintain the configuration
> (ala OVF like), but shows the instance status as an unsupported
> resource. Or, does the provider ignore the resource and report
> back "unknown" ? If the resource is ignored, how will that
> impact VM instance configuration changes and teleportability of
> the VM to another platform/provider ? Right now I cannot see
> resources or configurations being discarded just because the
> platform doesn't support the resource. Resources and
> configurations must be maintained, even though unsupported, to
> properly support teleportation.
>
> -g
>
>
>
> Thijs Metsch wrote:
>
>
> Overall looks good...Just wondering why there is a state and
> status? one immutable and one mutable?
>
> But would be cool if you could post it to the list as well...
>
> Also we should try to figure out if this is a MUST, SHOULD or
> MAY section according to RFC2116...
>
> Thanks Gary.
>
> -Thijs
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gary Mazz [mailto:garymazzaferro@gmail.com
> <mailto:garymazzaferro@gmail.com>]
> Sent: Wed 04-Aug-10 12:06
> To: Thijs Metsch; Andy Edmonds
> Cc: Subject: IO Console Resource -- Infrastructure
> doc proposal
>
> Hi,
>
> I've created a new section for the infrastructure document
> for the IO
> Console. The console is very important for virtual machine
> configurations.
>
> I've attached the section for the document. Please review and
> comment if
> considered for inclusion.
>
> -g
>
>
>
>
>
