Comments on AGN doc

Justin Binns binns at mcs.anl.gov
Fri Aug 9 15:06:52 CDT 2002


My comments included - mostly grammatical.

My main issue at this point is that I feel the division between these two
conceptual spaces (AGN and VV) are either too distinct, or not distinct
enough.  The VV architecture, as I understand it, is designed to
explicitly support things like what the AGN document calls 'application
streams', but in a wholly different way than the AGN document describes.  
At the same time, without such support in the VV, I'm not really sure what
a VV is.  We should either draw a clear line around what the AGN does vs.
what the VV does, then define the interfaces and (if there are any)
exceptions in a very clear way, or decide that they're all different
aspects to one big oval and resolve the design differences inherent here.  
I'm leaning towards making them two different boxes, in which case the
application stream stuff, at a minimum, and possibly the media stream
stuff becomes part of the VV box (otherwise, what is a VV?), while the
control and node-specific organizational stuff stays in the AGN box.

Justin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: AGNArchitecture3.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 360960 bytes
Desc: 
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/ag-dev/attachments/20020809/0d32f67a/attachment.doc>


More information about the ag-dev mailing list