Subject: Re: clarifications on FE Model

From: "Khosravi, Hormuzd M" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 11:26:52 -0700

Alistair, All

Thanks for your reply. Pls see my comments below... 

-----Original Message-----
From: Forwarding and Control Element Separation
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Alistair Munro
> Does the LFB Type, Instance Id essentially identify a single Table for
> that LFB instance, which can be configured ? or Could a LFB Instance
have
> multiple Tables ? If there are multiple tables (I don't suspect this),
> how is this information conveyed to the CE ?

We've found it convenient to have more than one table to manage multiple
namespaces, e.g. it may be convenient to have several blocks of meters
in
an LFB meter instance that are indexed by rule ids that originate from
multiple rule sets. So the metadata includes TABLE_ID and RULE_ID to
access
the specific meter. TABLE_ID is an optional (conditional?) external
metadatum because we don't expect it to be invoked very often.
[HK] Is this the thinking of the ForCES Model team as well ? Joel,
Ellen, others..any comments ?

However, isn't it the protocol's job to express this functionality
between
the FE and CE? I'm not sure if the model need say how it happens and the
text of 03 seems adequate to me. 
[HK] If there are multiple Tables in an LFB, this should be reported as
part of the LFB capabilities...how many tables and the table IDs. I
didn't find this in the Model draft, could you point me to a section
that talks about this ? And no, this is not part of the protocol draft,
its very much a part of the Model draft which is defining these
capabilities.

> For static LFB Topologies, how is the LFB topology represented or
> defined, so that the CE can query this ? I found text around this but
did
> not find the precise definition.

Again, isn't the representation part of the protocol? The model text
seems
to say sufficient about the topology graph. 
[HK] Again no, I think its part of the Model draft. The model draft
defines FE Topology, LFB Capabilities in much detail, but I didn't find
much on LFB Topology, except section 5.2.2.3. Is there anything more on
this that I am missing ? I would think this deserves a separate
sub-section atleast.

Any pointers will be helpful,

Thanks
Hormuzd

---

From: "Khosravi, Hormuzd M" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2004 22:14:16 -0700

Hi Steve,

-----Original Message-----
From: Steven Blake [mailto:[email-masked]] 
 
> If you could throw some light on the LFB Topology question that I
> asked in my previous email, that would be helpful.

Sec. 5.2.2.3 covers LFB Topology, and you suggested that this wasn't
enough.  What more do you want to see?
[HK] I wasn't sure if there was more text on this one, in the draft that
I missed,
so I asked. Ideally, I would have liked to see a little more text on
this 
(in the initial sections), but 5.2.2.3 is fine as well.

> Also, I assume that if there are multiple Tables in an LFB, the Table
> Ids will be reported as part of the LFB Capabilities ?

Right.  The number of tables supported by an LFB instance will be a
capability of that instance that the CE can query.  The valid table IDs
might simply be the indexes 0 - N-1.
[HK] Sounds good, thanks.

Regards
Hormuzd