Re: [lmap] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lmap-information-model-12.txt

["MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Juergen,

In the latest Info Model...
> -----Original Message-----
...
> 
> There's also a htmlized version available at:
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lmap-information-model-12
> 
[ACM] 
The metric registry has become generic:

3.10.  Common Objects: Registry Information

   Tasks and actions can be associated with entries in a registry.  A
   registry object refers to an entry in a registry (identified by a
   URI) and it may define a set of roles.

3.10.1.  Definition of ma-registry-obj

     object {
         uri                 ma-registry-uri;
        [string              ma-registry-role<0..*>;]
     } ma-registry-obj;

   The ma-registry-obj refers to an entry of a registry and it defines
   the associated role(s).  The ma-registry-obj consists of the
   following elements:

   ma-registry-uri:          A URI identifying an entry in a registry.

   ma-registry-role:         An optional and possibly empty unordered
                             set of roles for the identified registry
                             entry.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

It's not clear to me how the generic object works with 
respect to the performance metric registry. It was clear when the
metric aspect was prominent (ma-metric-registry-obj).
This may be because the idea of an LMAP task registry
has been mentioned, but I haven't seen any details about 
the LMAP task registry and maybe an example would help. 
It would be good to see how the LMAP Task Registry and 
IANA Performance metrics registry are used together.

Since I'm mostly interested in using LMAP for control 
and reporting of registered performance metrics, the
composition of these measurement tasks should be as
straightforward as possible.

A follow-up question is how this will change the data model,
which still appears to contain specific references to metrics.

regards,
Al