Re: [tequila/sls] comments on SLS scope

From: Marcus Brunner (brunner@ccrle.nec.de)
Date: Mon Apr 02 2001 - 11:58:38 CEST

  • Next message: Abdallah Rayhan: "Re: [tequila/sls] comments on SLS scope"

    --On Friday, March 30, 2001 3:19 PM -0500 Abdallah Rayhan
    <arayhan@nortelnetworks.com> wrote:

    >
    > 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.
    >

    I think on the layer we are talking, protocol efficiency is not the major
    issue. More important is that customer-provider and provider-provider
    interaction is based on one information 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.
    >

    Looking at PCIM LDAP schema you may be right. Looking into the device
    model, I am not so sure. At least the mapping to MIBs and PIB is straight
    forward, because the same information model is used for all the efforts.

    MArcus

    > 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
    >

    --------------------------------------
    Dr. Marcus Brunner
    C&C Research Laboratories
    NEC Europe Ltd.

    E-Mail: brunner@ccrle.nec.de
    WWW: http://www.ccrle.nec.de/
    personal home page: http://www.tik.ee.ethz.ch/~brunner

    Adenauerplatz 6
    D-69115 Heidelberg
    Germany

    Phone: +49 (0)6221/ 9051129
    Fax: +49 (0)6221/ 9051155



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Apr 02 2001 - 11:56:31 CEST