From: McDonald, Ira (imcdonald@sharplabs.com)
Date: Sat Jan 13 2007 - 15:08:35 EST
Hi Rick,
I actually favor the multiple properties approach.
But this will require some adjustment in the PWG
Semantic Model 2.0 work-in-progress.
Because the WIMS Subunits schema defines the complex
type "SubunitStates" - an array of "SubunitState"
of type "SubunitStateWKV" (e.g., 'Online' and
Transitioning') - used widely in Subunits schema
and the Alerts schema for notifications and history
for subunits (i.e., rows in prtAlertTable).
Editorial issue - explosion of multiple status
property definitions in CIM MOF.
Editorial issue - value names - the Subunits schema
uses them verbatim (e.g., 'AvailableAndIdle' and
'UnavailableAndOnRequest') - I prefer this.
Cheers,
- Ira
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Chair - FSG Open Printing Steering Committee
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839
phone: +1-906-494-2434
email: imcdonald@sharplabs.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-wims@pwg.org [mailto:owner-wims@pwg.org]On Behalf Of
Richard_Landau@Dell.com
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2007 11:51 AM
To: Richard_Landau@Dell.com; wims@pwg.org
Subject: RE: WIMS> CIM> How to represent SubUnitStatus in CIM?
Just spoke with Core leadership about this. The use of separate status
variables seems to be the new direction, rather than the use of arrays of
status enums. There are several new status variables being added (proposed,
anyway) to EnabledLogicalElement in a new CR. I think this is a reasonable
directon for us to take. If someone has a better partitioning of the items
than this traditional one, please elaborate.
rick
From: owner-wims@pwg.org [mailto:owner-wims@pwg.org] On Behalf Of
Richard_Landau@Dell.com
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 15:52
To: wims@pwg.org
Subject: WIMS> CIM> How to represent SubUnitStatus in CIM?
Ira, regarding our discussion on SubUnitStatus today, I think that there are
(at least) two choices: either a vector of enum values or several separate
variables. It might not be thoroughly unreasonable to break it into five
variables representing the five sections that were or-ed together in the
first place.
StatusAvailability enum
0 idle
1 on request, unavailable
2 standby
3 broken, unavailable
4 active
5 unknown
6 busy
StatusCriticalAlert Boolean
StatusNonCriticalAlert Boolean
StatusOnline Boolean
StatusTransitioning Boolean
It's an idea, anyway. Whaddyathink?
For comparison, here is the section from the MIB intro, from which I cribbed
the text above.
The PrtSubUnitStatusTC is an integer that is the sum of 5 distinct
values, Availability, Non-Critical, Critical, On-line, and
Transitioning. These values are:
Availability value
Available and Idle 0 000'b
Available and Standby 2 010'b
Available and Active 4 100'b
Available and Busy 6 110'b
Unavailable and OnRequest 1 001'b
Unavailable because Broken 3 011'b
Unknown 5 101'b
Non-Critical
No Non-Critical Alerts 0
Non-Critical Alerts 8
Critical
No Critical Alerts 0
Critical Alerts 16
On-Line
State is On-Line 0
State is Off-Line 32
Transitioning
At intended state 0
Transitioning to intended state 64
rick
----------------------
Richard_Landau(at)dell(dot)com, Stds & System Mgt Arch, CTO Office
+1-512-728-9023, One Dell Way, RR5-3, MS RR5-09, Round Rock, TX 78682
-- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.10/624 - Release Date: 1/12/2007 2:04 PM
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jan 13 2007 - 15:08:58 EST