Consolidated list of editorial changes from issues list
Hi, This is a consolidated list of editorial changes originated in the 0cci issues list found on http://code.google.com/p/occi/issues/list This list is to act as a guide for occi-wg editors writing the occi specification. This list attempts to place the recommendations in sequence in the document. cheers, gary ================================================================================ Section: Overall ***Comment:* - move table of contents after abstract - use MUST, SHOULD, MAY, CAN... should be uppercase - "Each implementation has a single OCCI end-point URL" should be 'each deployment' or 'each service'? - TIP, WARNING: are they normative? Like, the tip after Par. 54 contains a SHOULD. But I am asking about tips in general, not about this particular one. - "A simple peer review process is available for extending the registries" That process is not described, not referenced. - "This scalable approach..." not relevant, really - can go into footnote Section: Document-wide 1. The character set use in communications should be specified 2. Header Capitalisation of "OCCI working group" -> "OCCI Working Group" 4. Lacking/Inconsistent normatives throughout 5. What is the minimum set of requirements/features (a profile) that needs to be implemented so that one is OCCI compliant? 6. Format of references - should be enclosed by '[' and ']' e.g. [REF22 http://code.google.com/p/occi/source/detail?r=EF22] 7. Use appropriate page breaks 8. Revise use of round bracketing 9. Ensure consistency of dot or dash attribute notation in all examples 10. There is no consideration in the spec for the states that a resource can have 11. All extensions should be placed and grouped under a Section named "Extensions" 12. Aspects of security are dealt with in 3.3.1 and 3.7. It would be better for these to be placed together for context and ease of reading. 13. For numerical attributes it might be useful to state their numerical base e.g. if these should be Base-2 or Base-10. 14. Would be useful to introduce the notion of OCCI extensions in the walk through. ==================================================================================== Section: abstract *Paragraph:* Comment: first sentence should move to --> status; 'note' in walkthrough is misleading... ===================================================================================== Section: OCCI Core Pages: 5-14 41. P13 "Collection" link relation 1. Is a self-referiental reference appropriate? 1. Paragraph 26 "A "Resource Oriented Architecture (ROA)"" * Supply reference 2. P26 "Each resource (identified by a canonical URL)" 1. Bracket usage - suggestion "Each resource, identified by a canonical URL, 3. P26 "has zero or more representations" 1. If a resource has no representation then to all intents it does not exist within the system. Suggest "1 or more" 4. P26 "Metadata including associations between resources is exposed via HTTP headers (e.g. the Link: header), except in the case of collections where Atom is used as the meta- model." 1. Which is normative? Are there other ways? 5. P26 Comment 1. Is the supplied tip of relevance in the context? If so give an example to explain. 6. P27 "The interface" 1. What interface? Also the interface is defined in _part_ by the URL - consider rephrasing this paragraph 7. P27 "in-band/out-of-band" 1. Easier to supply a definition of this here and then later in the doc refer to the definition in glossary. Better way to introduce the concept to "newbies". 8. P28 "HATEOAS" 1. Expand the acronynm 9. P29 "WebDAV definitions are used for MOVE and COPY" 1. COPY is a valid operation on the external interface of an infrastructure provider. MOVE however is not and something that might be implemented optionally. Suggest to have MOVE as an extension and not part of core. Motivation not obvious to have in core. 10. P29 Comment 1. I can PUT to create and POST to update - would be worth explaining which to use (normative) 11. P29 "DELETE" - "and everything "under" it" 1. Better worded as "and all it's child resources" Lars pointed this out also 12. Section 3.3.1 Authentication 1. Needs to be extensible and adaptable - might consider it part of OCCI extensions also? E.g. SAML support 13. P33 Comment 1. An example should be given 14. P34 Comment 1. Ever seen a working model that did not include links between entities? 15. P34 "without regard to how they interrelate." 1. Surely this should be "with regard to how they interrelate." Both meta-model and model define links in general 16. P34 "the objects" 1. change to "infrastructure resources (objects)" 17. P36 "http://purl.org/occi/kind/ namespace" 1. Who controls this? 18. P36 Comment - "Warning" 1. These are repeated through out - rather than warn, insert a section on how to extend the specification including a note on this warning, how the peer process works etc. Then refer to the section from various parts of the doc 19. P37 "Internet media types" 1. Better to call this "Internet MIME types"? 20. P39 "dash character (“-”)" 1. Why the dash over the dot? Where's the motivation, reason is a little unclear. If all representations are UTF8 compliant then should this matter? 21. P40 Warning is repeated 1. Repeated: Use a dedicated section on extending OCCI and ref to it 22. Table 1 "Common Attributes" 1. "OCCI-Updated" - is the HTTP "Last-Modified" header sufficient? 2. Normative - are all these to be supported? 23. P43 Comment 1. It is noted that a list of actions are available - where? There's none in the spec doc 24. P34 Warning 1. Repeated: Use a dedicated section on extending OCCI and ref to it 25. P44 "An action is triggered via an HTTP POST" 1. Normative and possibly give the reason as to why POST is used. 26. P46 Tip 1. Usefulness of this in the context? 27. P47 Tip 1. Usefulness of this in the context? 28. P48 "The meta-model defines how objects interrelate." 1. Not a normative definition. Some include: http://bit.ly/gwCA5 Consider revising. 29. Section 3.5.1 1. What happened to the useful OCCI-text examples of categories? 30. P51 Tip 1. More than just a tip. This is a feature (tagging via categories) that Atom gives for free. Suggest making it a paragraph. 32. P53 Tip "O(n+1)" 1. Should this not be O(n^2)? - for every resource rendering (1 operation) there is the rendering of its details (1 operation). Therefore in a list of 4 resources we have to perform a constant 2 operations per resource, hence n^2 operations. 33. P55 Comment on examples 1. Should the example show the encoded ';' character? 34. Section 3.5.3 1. What happened to the useful OCCI-text examples of linking? 35. Table 2 1. What are the normative? 2. "help" - appropriate and useful in core section? 3. "icon" - appropriate and useful in core section? 36. P58 "public peer review" 1. Point to an extension section detailing this process 37. Section 3.6.1 Comment 1. Explain what "foreign markup" is 38. P59 Comment 1. Example needed 39. Section 3.8 "Registration" Comment 1. Place in an appendix Page 10, paragraph 52 "Where an operation returns multiple resources ..." to be replaced with "Where an operation COULD return multiple resources..." to make it clear that a collection is always returned, even if there is a single result. ========================================================================================== Infrastructure: 1. Table 3 1. Suggest to move it after introducing kinds - better logical flow 2. P77 "Cloud infrastructure can be modeled using three primary kinds: compute, network and storage." 1. Rephrase to: "Cloud infrastructure can be modeled using the following three primary kinds:" 3. Table 4 "Recorded information resources" 1. reword to "Information recording resources" 4. Table 5 1. Suggest to include boot volume attribute (Richard) 2. "Enum (standard, checksum)" -> "Enum (none, checksum)" 3. How to extend enumerations? Should we just use text field instead? 5. Section 8.1.2 Comment 1. These are mostly network client attributes. Are they sufficient to model a pool of static IPs? 6. Table 6 1. OCCI-Network-Address - unclear description - is it a gateway IP or node IP address? 2. OCCI-Network-Allocation - how is manual allocation performed, by who? 1. Section 9 1. What is the relevance of the date? 2. P83 OpenSearch 1. Give example for context/relevance 4. Section 10 "OCCI Status Extension" 1. Better named as "OCCI Task Reporting", especially as there's the "OCCI Tasks Extension"? 2. Isn't this extension just a specialisation of Monitoring (Lars noted this too) and should be reflected as such? 3. Very much related to the "OCCI Task Extension" - is it better combined? 4. An example of the extensions usage would be helpful 5. Table 8 1. Uses dot notation for attribute naming - consistency 7. Section 11 1. What is the relevance of the date? 2. An example of the extensions usage would be helpful 8. Table 9 1. Uses dot notation for attribute naming - consistency 10. Section 12 "OCCI Registries" 1. What are the normative HTTP status codes? 11. Table 11 1. We should also mention mailing list contributors as this IS a community effort and not just that of a few. ============================================================================== 7. Bibliography 1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document 40. Page 13 Bibliography 1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document 3. Section 9 Bibliography 1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document 2. What is the relevance of the date? 6. Section 10 Bibliography 1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document 9. Section 11 Bibliography 1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document
Hi all, Find a fresh draft attached. reflecting changeset 55... Cheers, -Thijs On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 08:37 -0600, Gary Mazz wrote:
Hi,
This is a consolidated list of editorial changes originated in the 0cci issues list found on http://code.google.com/p/occi/issues/list
This list is to act as a guide for occi-wg editors writing the occi specification.
This list attempts to place the recommendations in sequence in the document.
cheers, gary
================================================================================ Section: Overall
***Comment:*
- move table of contents after abstract
- use MUST, SHOULD, MAY, CAN... should be uppercase
- "Each implementation has a single OCCI end-point URL" should be 'each deployment' or 'each service'?
- TIP, WARNING: are they normative? Like, the tip after Par. 54 contains a SHOULD. But I am asking about tips in general, not about this particular one.
- "A simple peer review process is available for extending the registries" That process is not described, not referenced.
- "This scalable approach..." not relevant, really - can go into footnote
Section: Document-wide
1. The character set use in communications should be specified
2. Header Capitalisation of "OCCI working group" -> "OCCI Working Group"
4. Lacking/Inconsistent normatives throughout
5. What is the minimum set of requirements/features (a profile) that needs to be implemented so that one is OCCI compliant?
6. Format of references - should be enclosed by '[' and ']' e.g. [REF22 http://code.google.com/p/occi/source/detail?r=EF22]
7. Use appropriate page breaks
8. Revise use of round bracketing
9. Ensure consistency of dot or dash attribute notation in all examples
10. There is no consideration in the spec for the states that a resource can have
11. All extensions should be placed and grouped under a Section named "Extensions"
12. Aspects of security are dealt with in 3.3.1 and 3.7. It would be better for these to be placed together for context and ease of reading.
13. For numerical attributes it might be useful to state their numerical base e.g. if these should be Base-2 or Base-10.
14. Would be useful to introduce the notion of OCCI extensions in the walk through.
====================================================================================
Section: abstract
*Paragraph:*
Comment: first sentence should move to --> status; 'note' in walkthrough is misleading...
===================================================================================== Section: OCCI Core Pages: 5-14
41. P13 "Collection" link relation 1. Is a self-referiental reference appropriate?
1. Paragraph 26 "A "Resource Oriented Architecture (ROA)"" * Supply reference
2. P26 "Each resource (identified by a canonical URL)" 1. Bracket usage - suggestion "Each resource, identified by a canonical URL,
3. P26 "has zero or more representations" 1. If a resource has no representation then to all intents it does not exist within the system. Suggest "1 or more"
4. P26 "Metadata including associations between resources is exposed via HTTP headers (e.g. the Link: header), except in the case of collections where Atom is used as the meta- model." 1. Which is normative? Are there other ways?
5. P26 Comment 1. Is the supplied tip of relevance in the context? If so give an example to explain.
6. P27 "The interface" 1. What interface? Also the interface is defined in _part_ by the URL - consider rephrasing this paragraph
7. P27 "in-band/out-of-band" 1. Easier to supply a definition of this here and then later in the doc refer to the definition in glossary. Better way to introduce the concept to "newbies".
8. P28 "HATEOAS" 1. Expand the acronynm
9. P29 "WebDAV definitions are used for MOVE and COPY" 1. COPY is a valid operation on the external interface of an infrastructure provider. MOVE however is not and something that might be implemented optionally. Suggest to have MOVE as an extension and not part of core. Motivation not obvious to have in core.
10. P29 Comment 1. I can PUT to create and POST to update - would be worth explaining which to use (normative)
11. P29 "DELETE" - "and everything "under" it" 1. Better worded as "and all it's child resources" Lars pointed this out also
12. Section 3.3.1 Authentication 1. Needs to be extensible and adaptable - might consider it part of OCCI extensions also? E.g. SAML support
13. P33 Comment 1. An example should be given
14. P34 Comment 1. Ever seen a working model that did not include links between entities?
15. P34 "without regard to how they interrelate." 1. Surely this should be "with regard to how they interrelate." Both meta-model and model define links in general
16. P34 "the objects" 1. change to "infrastructure resources (objects)"
17. P36 "http://purl.org/occi/kind/ namespace" 1. Who controls this?
18. P36 Comment - "Warning" 1. These are repeated through out - rather than warn, insert a section on how to extend the specification including a note on this warning, how the peer process works etc. Then refer to the section from various parts of the doc
19. P37 "Internet media types" 1. Better to call this "Internet MIME types"?
20. P39 "dash character (“-”)" 1. Why the dash over the dot? Where's the motivation, reason is a little unclear. If all representations are UTF8 compliant then should this matter?
21. P40 Warning is repeated 1. Repeated: Use a dedicated section on extending OCCI and ref to it
22. Table 1 "Common Attributes" 1. "OCCI-Updated" - is the HTTP "Last-Modified" header sufficient? 2. Normative - are all these to be supported?
23. P43 Comment 1. It is noted that a list of actions are available - where? There's none in the spec doc
24. P34 Warning 1. Repeated: Use a dedicated section on extending OCCI and ref to it
25. P44 "An action is triggered via an HTTP POST" 1. Normative and possibly give the reason as to why POST is used.
26. P46 Tip 1. Usefulness of this in the context?
27. P47 Tip 1. Usefulness of this in the context?
28. P48 "The meta-model defines how objects interrelate." 1. Not a normative definition. Some include: http://bit.ly/gwCA5 Consider revising.
29. Section 3.5.1 1. What happened to the useful OCCI-text examples of categories?
30. P51 Tip 1. More than just a tip. This is a feature (tagging via categories) that Atom gives for free. Suggest making it a paragraph.
32. P53 Tip "O(n+1)" 1. Should this not be O(n^2)? - for every resource rendering (1 operation) there is the rendering of its details (1 operation). Therefore in a list of 4 resources we have to perform a constant 2 operations per resource, hence n^2 operations.
33. P55 Comment on examples 1. Should the example show the encoded ';' character?
34. Section 3.5.3 1. What happened to the useful OCCI-text examples of linking?
35. Table 2 1. What are the normative? 2. "help" - appropriate and useful in core section? 3. "icon" - appropriate and useful in core section?
36. P58 "public peer review" 1. Point to an extension section detailing this process
37. Section 3.6.1 Comment 1. Explain what "foreign markup" is
38. P59 Comment 1. Example needed
39. Section 3.8 "Registration" Comment 1. Place in an appendix
Page 10, paragraph 52
"Where an operation returns multiple resources ..." to be replaced with "Where an operation COULD return multiple resources..."
to make it clear that a collection is always returned, even if there is a single result.
========================================================================================== Infrastructure:
1. Table 3 1. Suggest to move it after introducing kinds - better logical flow
2. P77 "Cloud infrastructure can be modeled using three primary kinds: compute, network and storage." 1. Rephrase to: "Cloud infrastructure can be modeled using the following three primary kinds:"
3. Table 4 "Recorded information resources" 1. reword to "Information recording resources"
4. Table 5 1. Suggest to include boot volume attribute (Richard) 2. "Enum (standard, checksum)" -> "Enum (none, checksum)" 3. How to extend enumerations? Should we just use text field instead?
5. Section 8.1.2 Comment 1. These are mostly network client attributes. Are they sufficient to model a pool of static IPs?
6. Table 6 1. OCCI-Network-Address - unclear description - is it a gateway IP or node IP address? 2. OCCI-Network-Allocation - how is manual allocation performed, by who?
1. Section 9 1. What is the relevance of the date?
2. P83 OpenSearch 1. Give example for context/relevance
4. Section 10 "OCCI Status Extension" 1. Better named as "OCCI Task Reporting", especially as there's the "OCCI Tasks Extension"? 2. Isn't this extension just a specialisation of Monitoring (Lars noted this too) and should be reflected as such? 3. Very much related to the "OCCI Task Extension" - is it better combined? 4. An example of the extensions usage would be helpful
5. Table 8 1. Uses dot notation for attribute naming - consistency
7. Section 11 1. What is the relevance of the date? 2. An example of the extensions usage would be helpful
8. Table 9 1. Uses dot notation for attribute naming - consistency
10. Section 12 "OCCI Registries" 1. What are the normative HTTP status codes?
11. Table 11 1. We should also mention mailing list contributors as this IS a community effort and not just that of a few.
============================================================================== 7. Bibliography 1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document 40. Page 13 Bibliography 1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document
3. Section 9 Bibliography 1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document 2. What is the relevance of the date? 6. Section 10 Bibliography 1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document 9. Section 11 Bibliography 1. Move to a dedicated section at the end of the whole document
_______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
-- Thijs Metsch Tel: +49 (0)941 3075-122 (x60122) http://blogs.sun.com/intheclouds http://www.twitter.com/befreax Software Engineer Cloud, Grid and Virtualization Sun Microsystems GmbH Dr.-Leo-Ritter-Str. 7 mailto:thijs.metsch@sun.com D-93049 Regensburg http://www.sun.com
I merged, then committed changes to occi-core.xml in reference to #4. Also - as far the example tables go, I'm now looking at the newest PDF - expect some calls for help tomorrow night. -- Michael Behrens, R2AD, LLC
For paragraph 2.2 Basics, under the URL Namespace paragraph, is this the sort of
table desired/accurate?
The following table is a list of recommended URLs and their purpose:
http://example.com/
Hi Michael, In these urls, you basically have the right idea. However, we don't have a element following a machine address. We also do not have a resource for "application control". This is currently out of scope this this version of occi.. I believe Sam Johnston is working a language explaining "foreign" markup, where provider specific extensions can be included. We would expect to the the following in urls: http://example.com/compute http://example.com/%3Cmyresource/compute Define and configure machines http://example.com/network http://example.com/myresource/network Network configuration http://example.com/storage http://example.com/myresource/storage Storage services (SANs, etc) http://example.com/myresource/applicationTBD: "foreign" markup Application control gary Michael Behrens wrote:
For paragraph 2.2 Basics, under the URL Namespace paragraph, is this the sort of table desired/accurate?
The following table is a list of recommended URLs and their purpose: http://example.com/
http://example.com/%3Cmyresource/compute Define and configure machines http://example.com/myresource/network Network configuration http://example.com/myresource/storage Storage services (SANs, etc) http://example.com/myresource/application Application control -- Michael Behrens
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
Ok so to further explain this requirement, early versions of the spec talked
about dumping similar resources into buckets or "collections" - e.g.
/compute, /storage, /network. The problem is that the web today doesn't tell
you that images need to live in /images (even if they often do). Once you
add the type of resource to its metadata you no longer need to encode it
into the URL (which is fugly btw, and not particularly RESTful) and the
result is that users have much more freedom as to how they lay out their
resources.
Unfortunately many APIs restrict you to certain (generally legacy)
terminology like "virtual data centers" and "virtual racks" which is
something I very much wanted to avoid - even if only to be able to cater for
the various perspectives on this issue rather than (unsuccessfully) trying
to force our view down everyone's throats.
That is to say that said URLs are informative rather than normative, and
perhaps even belong in the walkthrough. I was thinking more along the lines
of:
http://cloud.example.com/us-east/webapp/web02
For a burnt-in hypervisor this might be simply:
http://node01/web01
Sam
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:33 AM, Michael Behrens
For paragraph 2.2 Basics, under the URL Namespace paragraph, is this the sort of table desired/accurate?
The following table is a list of recommended URLs and their purpose:http://example.com/
http://example.com/%3Cmyresource/compute Define and configure machineshttp://example.com/myresource/network Network configurationhttp://example.com/myresource/storage Storage services (SANs, etc)http://example.com/myresource/application Application control -- Michael Behrens
_______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
Sam, Are you saying you are changing the concepts of buckets ? for an ambiguous URL path ? where the management of the path is out of scope and control of occi api ? . So in the case of this configuration from the same provider: http://node01/web01: OCCI-STUFF http://node03/web02 http://node01/web01: OCCI-STUFF http://node04/web03 http://node01/web01: OCCI-STUFF http://node02/web04 http://node01/web01: OCCI-STUFF We do not have a way of aggregating those "nodes" in the occi interface. The reason for the buckets following the domain name and socket number was to eliminate the requirement for this type of additional management complexity, at least for the first draft of the occi spec. I was an advocate of a more flexible scheme from the beginning, I'm not sure if its wise to change this without a management api. -gary Sam Johnston wrote:
Ok so to further explain this requirement, early versions of the spec talked about dumping similar resources into buckets or "collections" - e.g. /compute, /storage, /network. The problem is that the web today doesn't tell you that images need to live in /images (even if they often do). Once you add the type of resource to its metadata you no longer need to encode it into the URL (which is fugly btw, and not particularly RESTful) and the result is that users have much more freedom as to how they lay out their resources.
Unfortunately many APIs restrict you to certain (generally legacy) terminology like "virtual data centers" and "virtual racks" which is something I very much wanted to avoid - even if only to be able to cater for the various perspectives on this issue rather than (unsuccessfully) trying to force our view down everyone's throats.
That is to say that said URLs are informative rather than normative, and perhaps even belong in the walkthrough. I was thinking more along the lines of:
http://cloud.example.com/us-east/webapp/web02
For a burnt-in hypervisor this might be simply:
Sam
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:33 AM, Michael Behrens
mailto:michael.behrens@r2ad.com> wrote: For paragraph 2.2 Basics, under the URL Namespace paragraph, is this the sort of table desired/accurate?
The following table is a list of recommended URLs and their purpose: http://example.com/
http://example.com/%3Cmyresource/compute Define and configure machines http://example.com/myresource/network Network configuration http://example.com/myresource/storage Storage services (SANs, etc) http://example.com/myresource/application Application control -- Michael Behrens
_______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org mailto:occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
I'm fine with closing issue 13 then. I think the material is covered in 2.2 Getting Started and in table 4. It may be good to replace /compute/123 in other parts of the specification with /node123 to avoid confusion. Thanks. Gary Mazz wrote:
Sam,
Are you saying you are changing the concepts of buckets ? for an ambiguous URL path ? where the management of the path is out of scope and control of occi api ? . So in the case of this configuration from the same provider: http://node01/web01: OCCI-STUFF http://node03/web02 http://node01/web01: OCCI-STUFF http://node04/web03 http://node01/web01: OCCI-STUFF http://node02/web04 http://node01/web01: OCCI-STUFF
We do not have a way of aggregating those "nodes" in the occi interface. The reason for the buckets following the domain name and socket number was to eliminate the requirement for this type of additional management complexity, at least for the first draft of the occi spec. I was an advocate of a more flexible scheme from the beginning, I'm not sure if its wise to change this without a management api.
-gary
Sam Johnston wrote:
Ok so to further explain this requirement, early versions of the spec talked about dumping similar resources into buckets or "collections" - e.g. /compute, /storage, /network. The problem is that the web today doesn't tell you that images need to live in /images (even if they often do). Once you add the type of resource to its metadata you no longer need to encode it into the URL (which is fugly btw, and not particularly RESTful) and the result is that users have much more freedom as to how they lay out their resources.
Unfortunately many APIs restrict you to certain (generally legacy) terminology like "virtual data centers" and "virtual racks" which is something I very much wanted to avoid - even if only to be able to cater for the various perspectives on this issue rather than (unsuccessfully) trying to force our view down everyone's throats.
That is to say that said URLs are informative rather than normative, and perhaps even belong in the walkthrough. I was thinking more along the lines of:
http://cloud.example.com/us-east/webapp/web02
For a burnt-in hypervisor this might be simply:
Sam
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:33 AM, Michael Behrens
mailto:michael.behrens@r2ad.com> wrote: For paragraph 2.2 Basics, under the URL Namespace paragraph, is this the sort of table desired/accurate?
The following table is a list of recommended URLs and their purpose: http://example.com/
http://example.com/%3Cmyresource/compute Define and configure machines http://example.com/myresource/network Network configuration http://example.com/myresource/storage Storage services (SANs, etc) http://example.com/myresource/application Application control -- Michael Behrens
_______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org mailto:occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
-- Michael Behrens R2AD, LLC (571) 594-3008 (cell) (703) 714-0442 (land)
Hi Michael, Can you put item 13 in a deferred (if that's possible) ? I would like to revisit this issue in the next draft. -g Michael Behrens wrote:
I'm fine with closing issue 13 then. I think the material is covered in 2.2 Getting Started and in table 4. It may be good to replace /compute/123 in other parts of the specification with /node123 to avoid confusion. Thanks.
Gary Mazz wrote:
Sam,
Are you saying you are changing the concepts of buckets ? for an ambiguous URL path ? where the management of the path is out of scope and control of occi api ? . So in the case of this configuration from the same provider: http://node01/web01: OCCI-STUFF http://node03/web02 http://node01/web01: OCCI-STUFF http://node04/web03 http://node01/web01: OCCI-STUFF http://node02/web04 http://node01/web01: OCCI-STUFF
We do not have a way of aggregating those "nodes" in the occi interface. The reason for the buckets following the domain name and socket number was to eliminate the requirement for this type of additional management complexity, at least for the first draft of the occi spec. I was an advocate of a more flexible scheme from the beginning, I'm not sure if its wise to change this without a management api.
-gary
Sam Johnston wrote:
Ok so to further explain this requirement, early versions of the spec talked about dumping similar resources into buckets or "collections" - e.g. /compute, /storage, /network. The problem is that the web today doesn't tell you that images need to live in /images (even if they often do). Once you add the type of resource to its metadata you no longer need to encode it into the URL (which is fugly btw, and not particularly RESTful) and the result is that users have much more freedom as to how they lay out their resources.
Unfortunately many APIs restrict you to certain (generally legacy) terminology like "virtual data centers" and "virtual racks" which is something I very much wanted to avoid - even if only to be able to cater for the various perspectives on this issue rather than (unsuccessfully) trying to force our view down everyone's throats.
That is to say that said URLs are informative rather than normative, and perhaps even belong in the walkthrough. I was thinking more along the lines of:
http://cloud.example.com/us-east/webapp/web02
For a burnt-in hypervisor this might be simply:
Sam
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 5:33 AM, Michael Behrens
mailto:michael.behrens@r2ad.com> wrote: For paragraph 2.2 Basics, under the URL Namespace paragraph, is this the sort of table desired/accurate?
The following table is a list of recommended URLs and their purpose: http://example.com/
http://example.com/%3Cmyresource/compute Define and configure machines http://example.com/myresource/network Network configuration http://example.com/myresource/storage Storage services (SANs, etc) http://example.com/myresource/application Application control -- Michael Behrens
_______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org mailto:occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
Thanks a lot! On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 22:46 -0400, behrens wrote:
I merged, then committed changes to occi-core.xml in reference to #4.
Also - as far the example tables go, I'm now looking at the newest PDF - expect some calls for help tomorrow night.
-- Thijs Metsch Tel: +49 (0)941 3075-122 (x60122) http://blogs.sun.com/intheclouds http://www.twitter.com/befreax Software Engineer Cloud, Grid and Virtualization Sun Microsystems GmbH Dr.-Leo-Ritter-Str. 7 mailto:thijs.metsch@sun.com D-93049 Regensburg http://www.sun.com
Ditto - thanks Mike.
As OCCI is only as open as we are accessible, if there's anyone else who
wants to roll up their sleeves but doesn't know how e.g. mercurial or
docbook works then please let us know. Basically you need to:
- Check out the site http://www.occi-wg.org/,
sourceforgehttp://forge.ogf.org/sf/projects/occi-wg(esp
wiki http://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/projects.occi-wg/wiki), wednesday conf
callshttp://forge.ogf.org/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.occi-wg/wiki/Teleconferenc...and
join the working
group list http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
- Create a free GridForge
accounthttp://forge.ogf.org/sf/sfmain/do/createUser/and agree to the
IPR
policy http://www.ogf.org/ggf_abt_policies.htm
- Get Mercurial http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/Download
- Checkout the source
codehttp://code.google.com/p/occi/source/checkoutfrom Google (hg
clone
https://occi.googlecode.com/hg/ occi)
- Read The DocBook Guide http://www.docbook.org/tdg5/ which you can
also use as a reference (we're v5, not v4)
- Get an XML Editor like XMLMind Personal
Editionhttp://www.xmlmind.com/xmleditor/persoedition.html(free)
- Edit (hopefully closing some
issueshttp://code.google.com/p/occi/issues/listin the process)
- Check-in your changes (using your email as the username and this
password http://code.google.com/hosting/settings - anyone can commit
but for IPR reasons you'll need to set up a free gridforge account first and
then ask myself or one of the chairs to add you)
Sam
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:54 AM, Thijs Metsch
Thanks a lot!
On Thu, 2009-10-08 at 22:46 -0400, behrens wrote:
I merged, then committed changes to occi-core.xml in reference to #4.
Also - as far the example tables go, I'm now looking at the newest PDF - expect some calls for help tomorrow night.
-- Thijs Metsch Tel: +49 (0)941 3075-122 (x60122) http://blogs.sun.com/intheclouds http://www.twitter.com/befreax Software Engineer Cloud, Grid and Virtualization Sun Microsystems GmbH Dr.-Leo-Ritter-Str. 7 mailto:thijs.metsch@sun.com D-93049 Regensburg http://www.sun.com
_______________________________________________ occi-wg mailing list occi-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/occi-wg
participants (5)
-
behrens
-
Gary Mazz
-
Michael Behrens
-
Sam Johnston
-
Thijs Metsch