[Federated-fs] Discussion of FSN resolution: what is required vswhat is expected

[Black_David at emc.com]

> Yes, sorry I forgot to note that.
> 
> The NSDB is a service.  The name is perhaps somewhat misleading (but
it's
> better than half a dozen names we came up with first...).
> 
> I think it's likely that we will need another term here, to
distinguish the
> name resolution service from the administration service for the
individual
> NSDBs.  When performing resolution, maybe it doesn't matter which NSDB
> instance you ask -- it will either know the answer, or route your
request
> along to someone who does,  When performing admin tasks, I think it's
more
> likely that it does matter -- in this case it makes sense to talk
directly
> to the NSDB that owns the FSN.

Lets try FNRS - F(S)N Resolution Service.  The discussion of admin tasks
makes sense - one wants to talk directly to the responsible NSDB that
can
then export the appropriate update into an FNRS that may span multiple
NSDBs.

> The reason I think that there is a distinction here is because of the
> different security models for the different kinds of queries. It might
be
> OK for everyone to do resolution (and everyone else to know about it),
but
> admin operations might be more private and protected in a 
> different manner.
> 
> What do you think?

Makes sense.  We need to make sure not to inadvertently exclude a
single-NSDB-scoped FNRS, as that's a fairly obvious simple
implementation.

Thanks,
--David
----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Technologist
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
black_david at emc.com        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------