RE: Final Requirements Process for SMIng: - #46 (cardinality)

["Andrea Westerinen" <andreaw@cisco.com>]

#46 is also documented in the Requirements Draft, although not cleanly ...

"If you have an association between classes A and B, the cardinality of A
indicates how many instances of A may be associated with a single instance
of B."

Our discussions in Minneapolis indicated that we want to convey "how many"
instances are associated in order to define the best mapping algorithm -
whether a new table, a single pointer, etc.  For example, do we use
RowPointer or an integer index into another table?  Do we map to a table
that holds instances of the association/relationship itself?

Andrea

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sming@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-sming@ops.ietf.org]On
Behalf Of Durham, David
Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 7:44 AM
To: 'sming@ops.ietf.org'
Subject: RE: Final Requirements Process for SMIng:


This message is to announce that we are now in the second phase of the SMIng
requirements finalization process. Please review the original message below.
The WG now will focus on identifying problematic requirements, and
specifying the reasons why a particular requirement may be problematic.
Don't be bashful... If you have any issue with any proposed requirement, you
have until April 30th to voice your concerns before the requirements
document goes to last call.

The current proposed requirements list can be found at:
http://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/projects/sming/issues.html
http://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/projects/sming/issues.txt
And the SMIng requirements document in which they were originally defined
can be found at:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sming-reqs-00.txt

Note that unmotivated new requirements (new = not already in SMI/SPPI) will
now be removed from the requirements list.

Thanks,
-Dave