[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference azur::mcc

Title:	DECmcc user notes file. Does not replace IPMT.
Notice:	Use IPMT for problems. Newsletter location in note 6187
Moderator:	TAEC::BEROUD

Created:	Mon Aug 21 1989
Last Modified:	Wed Jun 04 1997
Last Successful Update:	Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:	6497
Total number of notes:	27359

155.0. "REGISTER NODE4, DOMAINS, et.al. vs. THE NAMESPACE" by RACER::DAVE (Dave Lyons - Networks DCC - 226-5934 - LKG2-1/S4) Tue Jun 19 1990 15:06

With the new (EFT) MCC, register node4 takes a 'fullname'.  However, MCC
is not particularly friendly about dealing with DNS.

MCC needs to be able to create directory trees for nodes and domains when
they are created, and not require the MCC user to exit from MCC and run
DNS$CONTROL to create those directories.

Almost and set of assumptions made about where to place the directories in
clearinghouses would be better than what currently exists.

E.G. if I do a CREATE DOMAIN .DAVE.FRED.WORK.SCRATCH.DOMAIN1

MCC should try to place the object directly.  If that fails, try to create 
.DAVE.FRED.WORK.SCRATCH in the same clearinghouse as .DAVE.FRED.WORK.  
If that fails, recurse on the name. stripping off levels.

Keep this up until it either works, or MCC gets a protection error,
then create the list of directories until the domain can be created.

This should work for all objects placed in the namespace.

If you are really paranoid, pop up a dialog box and ask if it is ok to 
create the directories.

In any case, PLEASE dont make the user get out of MCC and run DNS$CONTROL.
MCC users should not have to EVER explicitly run DNS$CONTROL.  Leave that
for the namespace guru who understands about placing directories in
clearinghouses and replications and skulking and all that junk.  The network
manager who runs MCC is a network manager, not a namespace designer.

T.R	Title	User	Personal Name	Date	Lines
155.1	What version?	CHRISB::BRIENEN	Christopher J. Brienen	`Tue Jun 19 1990 16:31`	3
	Very interesting... What version of MCC are you running?
155.2	we don't make policy decisions for the user	TOOK::NELSON		`Wed Jun 20 1990 12:45`	36
	RE: .-1 >>With the new (EFT) MCC, register node4 takes a 'fullname'. However, MCC >>is not particularly friendly about dealing with DNS. >>MCC needs to be able to create directory trees for nodes and domains when >>they are created, and not require the MCC user to exit from MCC and run >>DNS$CONTROL to create those directories. The decision concering the construction and protection of the DECdns namspace is a policy decision that is left to the customer site. After discussing the situation with our design center customers, it was clear that they preferred that the directory structure be created by the namespace administrator. At most sites, only a very few persons will have write access to the namespace. It is not a resource that is updated willy-nilly. Consider it a corporate resource similar to the large, centralized databases at commercial sites. Updating of information needs to be tightly controlled. Remember session control uses the namespace to find addresses for connection purposes. This leaves a large window open for trojan horses, viruses, etc., if the namespace is unprotected. >>In any case, PLEASE dont make the user get out of MCC and run DNS$CONTROL. >>MCC users should not have to EVER explicitly run DNS$CONTROL. Leave that >>for the namespace guru who understands about placing directories in >>clearinghouses and replications and skulking and all that junk. The network >>manager who runs MCC is a network manager, not a namespace designer. Please lobby with the DECdns group to produce a namespace AM that plugs into MCC. ...kjn
155.3	Thanks, but...	RACER::DAVE	Dave Lyons - Networks DCC - 226-5934 - LKG2-1/S4	`Wed Jun 20 1990 14:32`	9
155.4		TOOK::STRUTT	Colin Strutt	`Wed Jun 20 1990 15:45`	15
	Dave, I disagree with your original assertion that MCC should create the DNS directories automatically. I do not believe MCC should create DNS directories - it is perfectly technically possible to do so, but I think it is the wrong thing to do. Do you expect your favorite O/S (eg. VMS or TOPS-10 to automatically create subdirectories when you try and create a file in a subdirectory that does not (yet) exist? $CREATE [.foo.bar.xyz.abc]x.x only complains that the directory is not found - it doesn't even tell you which directory! Colin
155.5	One writer's opinions	WORDY::JONG	Steve Jong/T and N Pubs	`Wed Jun 20 1990 16:03`	9
	Dave, I do agree that DECmcc users should not be forced into DNS$CONTROL for normal operations. That's an important point! I would disagree, as Colin disagrees, that DECmcc should make DECdns directories automatically. Possibly your pop-up dialog box idea would work, but even that is debatable. Finally, I disagree that Reply .3 was either long or condescending. As a dispassionate observer, I thought it was a perfectly civil answer.
155.6	MCC and DECdns...	KEEL::SAVAGE	Peter Savage	`Wed Jun 20 1990 17:47`	10
	Dave, The MCC group is very much interested in responding to open issues with our product. I do not believe that we are pointing fingers in saying that we need an AM that manages the name space. This capability will exist over time and I believe that the correct folks to provide this capability within MCC is the DNS folks. Peter
155.7	My 2 cents...	TOOK::PLOUFFE	Jerry	`Thu Jun 21 1990 09:18`	30
	RE: .4 > Do you expect your favorite O/S (eg. VMS or TOPS-10 to automatically > create subdirectories when you try and create a file in a subdirectory > that does not (yet) exist? > > $CREATE [.foo.bar.xyz.abc]x.x > only complains that the directory is not found - it doesn't even tell > you which directory! YES! I for one would like my favorite O/S to create the directory for me! Two wrongs do not make a right! Kathy's comments in .2 seem nearer to the mark: > The decision concerning the construction and protection of the DECdns > namspace is a policy decision that is left to the customer site. But, Shouldn't our management tools provide network managers with the ability to set the policy that they desire. At the very least our soft- ware should provide the choice. The pop up box idea based on some management parameter sounds reasonable to me. I suggest that this be considered as a future... - Jerry
155.8	Creation of directories - Some day...	RACER::DAVE	Dave Lyons - Networks DCC - 226-5934 - LKG2-1/S4	`Fri Jun 22 1990 13:35`	3
	After a somewhat convoluted discussion with Colin Strutt, I understand the position taken for V1.0. This type of issue needs to addressed on a much larger scope, with the creation of directories for nodes being only one example.