What happened to occi-infrastructure ?

Hi, I just down loaded the occi-infrastructure. I have some concerns with the changes. 1) Networking: Critical network attributes, gateway and netmask, have been removed. 2) Networking: I don't remember any discussion or consensus on removing these attributes. 3) Storage: Storage/disk speed was added to the attributes. We had discussed and gained consensus early on NOT to include quality of service metrics like storage performance 4) Storage: References to wikipedia has been added as informative reference. Wikipedia is not qualified reference, especially for storage of storage quality of service. This should be stricken front the document. cheers, gary

Gary, I'm pretty sure I didn't make these changes (well at least not all of them) but I'll comment anyway: 1) Networking: Critical network attributes, gateway and netmask, have
been removed.
No, they've been merged into CIDR notation because we're confined to attribute-value pairs and it's better/faster/cheaper to do it this way: address: 10.0.0.1/24, 10.0.1.1/24, 10.0.2.1/24 than this way: address[0].ip: 10.0.0.1 address[0].netmask: 255.255.255.0 address[1].ip: 10.0.1.1 address[1].netmask: 255.255.255.0 address[2].ip: 10.0.2.1 address[2].netmask: 255.255.255.0 2) Networking: I don't remember any discussion or consensus on removing
these attributes.
Not sure which attributes you're talking about... perhaps those above.
3) Storage: Storage/disk speed was added to the attributes. We had discussed and gained consensus early on NOT to include quality of service metrics like storage performance
While QoS metrics (e.g. bandwidth, latency) aren't currently used for storage, they are for networking - 1 Mbit/s vs 10 Gbit/s makes a *huge* difference to applications and is extremely relevant to most applications. Same could be said for disk and memory bandwitdh - if we can (trivially) specify this information - even if it is ignored by those who don't support it - then why wouldn't we except to protect underperforming vendors?
4) Storage: References to wikipedia has been added as informative reference. Wikipedia is not qualified reference, especially for storage of storage quality of service. This should be stricken front the document.
Wikipedia is a fine *informative* reference which makes the document more approachable, readable and ultimately, implementable. *Normative* references on the other hand need to be strapped down. While it is possible to refer to a specific version of a Wikipedia article, by doing so one loses most of the value of linking to it in the first place (that is the very dynamic nature you have a problem with). Sam
participants (2)
-
Gary Mazz
-
Sam Johnston