Issue 8984: Information about Port Delegations Lost In Planning                                                                                                                                                     (deployment-rtf)
Source: Mercury Computer Systems (Mr. Frank Pilhofer, fpilhofe@mc.com)
Nature: Uncategorized Issue
Severity: 
Summary: The resolution for issue 6392 introduced the ability
for a monolithic implementation to delegate some of its
ports to a resource.


To this effect, the ImplementationRequirement element
has three attributes, "resourceUsage", "resourcePort"
and "componentPort" to identify how the component
instance uses the resource.


In the deployment plan, the InstanceResourceDeployment-
Description element captures which resource was chosen
to satisfy the requirement. It has a "resorceUsage",
but neither "resourcePort" and "componentPort"
attributes.


This information is necessary in the deployment plan.


Proposed resolution:


Add "resourcePort" and "componentPort" attributes to
the InstanceResourceDeploymentDescription element, to
carry the information from the original implementation
requirement.


In section 6.8.12.2, add two attributes:


  resourcePort [0..1]: The resource port used by the
      component instance. Copied from the original
      ImplementationRequirement.


  componentPort [0..1]: The component port delegated
      to or used by the resource. Copied from the
      original ImplementationRequirement.
Resolution: 
Revised Text: In section 6.8.12.2, add two attributes:


  resourcePort [0..1]: The resource port used by the
      component instance. Copied from the original
      ImplementationRequirement.


  componentPort [0..1]: The component port delegated
      to or used by the resource. Copied from the
      original ImplementationRequirement.

Disposition:	Resolved

Actions taken:
August 31, 2005: received issue
June 7, 2006: closed issue
Discussion: 
Resolution:
Add "resourcePort" and "componentPort" attributes to the InstanceResourceDeploymentDescription element, to carry the information from the original implementation requirement.

End of Annotations:=====
ubject: Information about Port Delegations Lost In Planning
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 14:25:20 -0400
Thread-Topic: Information about Port Delegations Lost In Planning
Thread-Index: AcWuWVg7/cga7xcAQnCrhDLLyHYQvw==
From: "Pilhofer, Frank" <fpilhofe@mc.com>
To: <deployment-rtf@omg.org>
Cc: <issues@omg.org>
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by amethyst.omg.org id j7VIhWhh009956


The resolution for issue 6392 introduced the ability
for a monolithic implementation to delegate some of its
ports to a resource.


To this effect, the ImplementationRequirement element
has three attributes, "resourceUsage", "resourcePort"
and "componentPort" to identify how the component
instance uses the resource.


In the deployment plan, the InstanceResourceDeployment-
Description element captures which resource was chosen
to satisfy the requirement. It has a "resorceUsage",
but neither "resourcePort" and "componentPort"
attributes.


This information is necessary in the deployment plan.


Proposed resolution:


Add "resourcePort" and "componentPort" attributes to
the InstanceResourceDeploymentDescription element, to
carry the information from the original implementation
requirement.


In section 6.8.12.2, add two attributes:


  resourcePort [0..1]: The resource port used by the
      component instance. Copied from the original
      ImplementationRequirement.


  componentPort [0..1]: The component port delegated
      to or used by the resource. Copied from the
      original ImplementationRequirement.