Event reporting (was audio call Thursday: Minutes)
- event handling
- currently an event is identified to the MGC with an eventId - Paul
Sijben suggested that it would be better to use a terminationId
Sorry for missing the call, but let's comment on that specific point. We discussed the event reporting model at length during the IETF meetings and in the following week, and I don't beleive that there is any advantage in opening the debate again.
Termination Id and event names just do not belong to the same space. Terminations are defined on a per MG basis; events are defined independently of the MG, and in many cases independently of the termination class.
The current notifications identify both the termination on which the event was observed and the name of the event. There is a lot of experience to show that this is a very efficient decomposition, and I don't see any reason whatsoever for ditching the experience in favor of an unproven theoretical design.
-- Christian Huitema ------------------------------ Please note my new address: huitema@research.telcordia.com http://www.telcordia.com/
Actually I believe this item was not correctly written. I believe the discussion was about how you associate a reported event to a given Termination. There was talk that notifications come back with a RequestID, which must be somehow associated to a Termination. Paul suggested using TerminationID directly.
Christian Huitema wrote:
- event handling
- currently an event is identified to the MGC with an eventId - Paul
Sijben suggested that it would be better to use a terminationId
Sorry for missing the call, but let's comment on that specific point. We discussed the event reporting model at length during the IETF meetings and in the following week, and I don't beleive that there is any advantage in opening the debate again.
Termination Id and event names just do not belong to the same space. Terminations are defined on a per MG basis; events are defined independently of the MG, and in many cases independently of the termination class.
The current notifications identify both the termination on which the event was observed and the name of the event. There is a lot of experience to show that this is a very efficient decomposition, and I don't see any reason whatsoever for ditching the experience in favor of an unproven theoretical design.
-- Christian Huitema
Please note my new address: huitema@research.telcordia.com http://www.telcordia.com/
Yes that was my understanding as well. The TerminationID would be used to associate the event to the termination. Thus the event report would contain the Termination ID and the event ID.
Chip
At 02:21 PM 4/8/99 -0700, Rex Coldren wrote:
Actually I believe this item was not correctly written. I believe the discussion was about how you associate a reported event to a given Termination. There was talk that notifications come back with a RequestID, which must be somehow associated to a Termination. Paul suggested using TerminationID directly.
Christian Huitema wrote:
- event handling
- currently an event is identified to the MGC with an eventId - Paul
Sijben suggested that it would be better to use a terminationId
Sorry for missing the call, but let's comment on that specific point. We discussed the event reporting model at length during the IETF meetings and in the following week, and I don't beleive that there is any advantage in opening the debate again.
Termination Id and event names just do not belong to the same space. Terminations are defined on a per MG basis; events are defined independently of the MG, and in many cases independently of the termination class.
The current notifications identify both the termination on which the event was observed and the name of the event. There is a lot of experience to show that this is a very efficient decomposition, and I don't see any reason whatsoever for ditching the experience in favor of an unproven theoretical design.
-- Christian Huitema
Please note my new address: huitema@research.telcordia.com http://www.telcordia.com/
-------------------------------------------------- Chip Sharp voice: +1 (919) 851-2085 Cisco Systems Consulting Eng. - Telco Reality - Love it or Leave it. --------------------------------------------------
participants (3)
-
Chip Sharp -
Christian Huitema -
Rex Coldren