I believe the purpose of what we doing here is to come up with
something that is efficient and practical to implement. CIM might
be favored from a standard-like architecture but when it comes
it to implementation, from my experience, it is not the first
choice of designers. Furthermore, it does not represent a data
model that is particularly compatible with any platform, thereby
making implementation difficult and non-deterministic. The CIM
schema is also less optimal for representation of data for
management purposes. INHO, CIM's use of XML is sub-optimal for
a protocol purposes. I think an infomodel/XML Schema designed
with this in mind would be too heavyweight for protocol purposes.
As for storage in regards to a comment made by Marcus, addressing
the storage issues is important and at some point of time we need
to address that, although not necessarily in this WG. Thinking
about the "conceptual" model of the protocol (e.g. entity a talks
to entity b with the following parameters) makes sense. In fact I
usually need to define protocols to help translate an information
model from one datastore to another, whereas if I start with the
protocol then each storage model will be forced to support the
same protocol model.
The question is: Should we define a representation of an SLA,
then figure out how to transport it? Or should we define the
protocol, and then optimize the storage? I think the latter
makes sense in protocol design. Take the policy LDAP schema for
instance... it is not optimized storage for the delivery protocols
(SMTP, COPS-PR). It is however optimized for LDAP representation,
which presumably makes it convenient for LDAP-speaking devices
and management clients.
my 2 cents
regards
Abdallah
LAVERGNE Laurent DvSI/SIReS/LAN wrote:
>
> I don't understand the point. Is SLS looking for an modeling language to
> describe the SLS information (for real time negociation) or is it looking
> for an existing information model to plug to?
>
> I think I agree with the first part of the previous message and don't
> understand the need of CIM (or even PCIM), someone could perhaps explain me
> this.
>
> regards
> L.Lavergne, France Telecom
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 30 2001 - 20:45:12 CEST