Re: [eman] EMAN-REQ: the notion of importance

["John Parello (jparello)" <[e-mail]>]

-1 on removing  Role

+1 on importance precedence

 

We haven’t had consensus yet on role in EMAN so you can’t say EMAN WG has backed away as yet. Considering it’s already in the drafts I think you’re speaking too soon. After a call sure.

Which WG groups have backed away for a role string? There are plenty of attributes defined in IETF RFC’s that hold a value where the value is not IANA registered. 

 

Look at location CAType 22 LOC  Additional Location information or CAtypre 21 LMK Vanity address. Very useful attributes without a registry for values defined as unstructured strings.

 

An unstructured vendor or site specific value for context is very useful and even without a registry having the attribute is extremely useful. I have vendors using such a field already for energy management. So whether or not this group makes a standard of the values the need for the attribute already exists and is deployed -  that seems useful to me.

 

Jp

 

 

 

From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Ira McDonald
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 9:45 AM
To: Brad Schoening; Ira McDonald
Cc: eman mailing list
Subject: Re: [eman] EMAN-REQ: the notion of importance

 

Hi,

Brad - good precedent - because it makes the "importance"
machine readable (and therefore useful).

But since EMAN (and many other IETF WGs) have consistently
backed away from any standard definition of "role" (w/ behavior
semantics that are predictable), a text string of "role" is useless
(except in a vendor- or site-specific manner - out-of-scope IMHO).

And I suggest that the "universe of things" is too diverse to lend
itself to an IANA registry of standard "role" keywords.

Cheers,
- Ira


Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG
Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group
Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG IPP WG
Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG
Chair - TCG Embedded Systems Hardcopy SG
IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB
Blue Roof Music/High North Inc
http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic <http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic> 
http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc <http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc> 
mailto:[e-mail]
Winter  579 Park Place  Saline, MI  48176  734-944-0094
Summer  PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI 49839  906-494-2434





On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Brad Schoening <[e-mail]> wrote:

Benoit,

 

There is a precedence for doing this on the device in the PoE MIB, rfc3621 which defines pethPsePortPowerPriority:

   pethPsePortPowerPriority OBJECT-TYPE
    SYNTAX INTEGER   {
               critical(1),
               high(2),
               low(3)
     }
    MAX-ACCESS read-write
    STATUS current
    DESCRIPTION
        "This object controls the priority of the port from the point
         of view of a power management algorithm.  The priority that
         is set by this variable could be used by a control mechanism
         that prevents over current situations by disconnecting first
         ports with lower power priority.  Ports that connect devices
         critical to the operation of the network - like the E911
         telephones ports - should be set to higher priority."
    ::= { pethPsePortEntry 7 }
 
 
 
 

Brad Schoening
e: [e-mail] ⟐ m: 917-304-7190

 

  <http://www.coraid.com/>  Redefining Storage Economics

 

 

From: Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 05:17:24 -0600
To: eman mailing list <[e-mail]>
Subject: [eman] EMAN-REQ: the notion of importance

 

Dear all, 

There is a discussion amongst the "EMAN requirements" authors right now about the notion of importance.
We're trying to evaluate the requirements related to the "importance".

The current draft version <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-eman-requirements-05>  only mentions:


5.1.2.  Context information on powered entities

   The energy management standard must provide means for retrieving and
   reporting context information on powered entities, for example, tags
   associated with a powered entity that indicate the powered entity's
   role, or importance.


So there are no justifications why the importance is required. 
The people who want this, please provide some more text/justifications

Some extra questions: 
- Is this importance specific to EMAN or is this generic also for non Energy Objects?
- Importance is important related to ...?

Regards, Benoit (as a contributor for the EMAN-REQ)





_______________________________________________
eman mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eman