Title: Message
Hi
Igor,
"managed object" is terminology from a logical model for manageability.
Your proposed terminology is more consistent with a conceptual model which I
believe is the current level of agreement for this group.
So +1
on the proposed phrasing.
However, in general -1 on excessive polishing of this document. Its not a
contract and at some point we have to move on and live with it - warts and
all
Zulah
-----Original Message-----
From:
Sedukhin, Igor S [mailto:]
Sent: Thursday, August
07, 2003 11:16 AM
To:
Subject:
[wsdm] Terminology in the requirements
We have a problem in agreeing to
the requirements that state "managed object MUST
expose <whatever>". It prescribes
certain way of doing management. These requirements are on the
"The software component representing or part of the manageable resource
responsible for interacting with the manager is referred to as the managed
object in this document. Traditionally, such software is also known as
agent."
We do not want to be limited by
defining requirements on management using agents as suggested.
We propose to use more generic
phrasing around ALL of such requirements. For example, We propose to phrase it
as follows "<whatever> MUST be provided for a manageable resource". This
phrase says WHAT instead of implying HOW.
PS. By "we" here I mean CA. And
this is a violent objection :).
-- Igor Sedukhin
.. ()
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza,
Islandia, NY 11788
