Re: two issues of terminology

Thus spake Vicraj Thomas on Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 11:19:43AM -0600:
> I propose:
>     - We distinguish between programming tools and experimenter tools
>     - The distinction is not based on whether the tools run inside a slice
> or outside.  Rather the distinction is based on whether the tool is used to
> program slivers or to manage experiments.  (I realize this isn't a precise
> distinction---I'll try to come up with something better.)
>     - Experimenter tools include provisioning tools, experiment control
> tools, instrumentation tools, collaboration tools, etc..

I think this definition is basically going in the right direction.  Let
me take a couple tries at alternate versions.

Still vague:

An experimenter tool *sets up* the environment in which a system under
test runs, a programming tool is (may be?) *part* of that environment.

More specific, but maybe not quite right:

A programming tool is one that is in the "codepath" (broadly defined) of
the system under test - that is, it's directly involved in the
experiment because my application calls it as a library, makes syscalls
into it, sends packets through it, etc. An experimenter tool is outside
this codepath in that the interaction is one way - the experimenter tool
might "call into" the SUT to start it, modify its configuration, etc,
but the SUT doesn't "call into" the experimenter tool. (And in the case
of collaboration tools and similar things, the tool may never really
interact with the SUT at all.)

--
/-----------------------------------------------------------
| Robert P Ricci <ricci@...> | <ricci@...>
| Research Associate, University of Utah Flux Group
| www.flux.utah.edu | www.emulab.net
\-----------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
services-wg mailing list
services-wg@...
http://lists.geni.net/mailman/listinfo/services-wg