Web Based Monitoring and Management: RE: WBMM> WBMM Requirem

RE: WBMM> WBMM Requirements

From: MARKLE,CATHY (HP-Boise,ex1) (cathy_markle@hp.com)
Date: Thu Jan 30 2003 - 19:53:21 EST

  • Next message: Wagner,William: "RE: WBMM> WBMM Requirements"

    Thanks for the start Harry. I would also like to add some ideas regarding
    the XML and MIB points you mention.
     
    1. The new model should be structured around how the data is consumed by
    applications as opposed to how a device is physically built.
    2. It should take advantage of XML's ability to describe (and enforce)
    structure
    3. It should be extensible so that vendors can add their own extensions.
    We should provide a defined path for vendors to provide updates to the model
    as needed. (Maintenance?)
    4. It should be organized in a manner that a group of related data can be
    accessed all at once.
    5. It should take into account other efforts that are happening in other
    standards areas to leverage learnings in these areas where beneficial and to
    not cause conflict in overlapping areas whenever possible.
     
     I also think we should address the access protocol.
    1. Use SOAP
        - SOAP supports both an RPC and document based model.
        - Currently, use SOAP over HTTP but it is not limited to this
        - WSDL exists to describe SOAP services
        - Directory and discovery services exist to support the SOAP protocol
    (for example UDDI)
        - SOAP is also usable by the wide variety of applications that Harry
    mentions below.
     
      
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Harry Lewis [mailto:harryl@us.ibm.com]
    Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 5:25 PM
    To: wbmm@pwg.org
    Subject: WBMM> WBMM Requiements

    The PWG process (diagram) acknowlesd Brainstorming, Charter development and
    Requirments gathering as valid actiities at the origin of a new program. I'd
    like to begin a requirements thread. Here are requirements of WBMM that I
    would like to see addressed

    1. More expressive than the Printer MIB
      - While the Printer MIB is an EXCELLENT standard from the point of view of
    adoption and functionality... there is room for improvment
      - Specifically, we could be more expressive and clearer regarding State,
    Status and Error reaaons.
        - You who are smiling know what I'm talking about (i.e. nix the decoder
    ring...)
    2. Expressed in XML
      - More than a clique, XML will aid developers in designing and
    implementing compliant applicatins with modern tools
    3 Usable by a wide variety of applications
      - Experience with the Printer MIB has demonstrated that the range of
    interested applications includes
         - Device Management
         - Accounting
         - Enterprise Managemtn
         - Remote Serviceing and Help Desk
         - Self configuring Drivers
    4. Optomized for interoperatility
      - Care should be given to the use of mandatory and optional
      - Min/Max access to settable attributes should not be a mystery
      - Consider a self describing data model vs. embedding definitions in the
    protocol
    5. More... I'm sure. Please join in...
    ----------------------------------------------
    Harry Lewis
    IBM Printing Systems
    ----------------------------------------------



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 30 2003 - 19:53:27 EST