[98] in Zephyr_Comments
Re: comments on August 9 draft
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (John T Kohl)
Thu Sep 22 11:52:35 1988
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 88 11:52:13 EDT
From: John T Kohl <jtkohl@ATHENA.MIT.EDU>
To: Jerome H Saltzer <Saltzer@ATHENA.MIT.EDU>
Cc: zephyr-comments@ATHENA.MIT.EDU
In-Reply-To: Zephyr_Comments:[0092]
Thank you for your comments. I am preparing a new draft which should be
in your physical mailbox by the end of today.
Some comments on your comments:
8. I gather section 5 (client library) isn't finished?
Well, sort of. This section will probably get some of the general info
in the current programmer's manual, but most of the nitty-gritty useful
info will remain in the programmer's manual.
10. I haven't seen the other Zephyr documents mentioned at the
bottom of page one, but it seems surprising that there aren't any
design considerations mentioned here that cater to installation and
operations.
There are, but they are hiding and not explictily denoted as derived
from installation or operation needs.
For example,
"As the notification service is a distributed service
intended to serve a large number of workstations, it is important that
all aspects of service maintenance and operation be easily
controlled and manipulated remotely."
and
"A Zephyr server requires no maintenance for daily operations; changing
access control lists or default subscriptions can be accomodated by
remote logins to the server host or by automatic database-fed updates
(such as those provided by the Athena Service Management System
@cite[sms])."
There really aren't any design considerations influenced by
installation requirements; these requirements really only affect the
implementation.
John
