sacm
commented
9 years ago Hi,
+1 to Lisa's definitions of software package/component/instance.
Cheers,
- Ira
Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect) Co-Chair - TCG Trusted Mobility Solutions WG Chair - Linux Foundation Open Printing WG Secretary - IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group Co-Chair - IEEE-ISTO PWG Internet Printing Protocol WG IETF Designated Expert - IPP & Printer MIB Blue Roof Music / High North Inc http://sites.google.com/site/blueroofmusic http://sites.google.com/site/highnorthinc mailto: blueroofmusic@gmail.com Winter 579 Park Place Saline, MI 48176 734-944-0094 Summer PO Box 221 Grand Marais, MI 49839 906-494-2434
On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 8:37 AM, llorenzin notifications@github.com wrote:
During the requirements working session this morning, we discussed the difference between a software component and a software instance, which are defined in the information model but not (yet) in the terminology draft. Looking more closely at the information model, I think there is still some clarification required here.
My initial impression was that a "software component" is a software package installed on an endpoint, with a unique serial number (i.e. Microsoft Word 2013, product ID $foo) and a "software instance" is a running instance of the software component (i.e. one logged-in user has one instance and another logged-in user has another instance).
However, upon re-reading the definitions in information model section 4.2, it seems to indicate that a "software component" is the generic software package (i.e. Microsoft Word 2013) and a "software instance" is the software package installed on the endpoint with the unique serial number (ie.e Microsoft Word 2013, product ID $foo). Is that the intent? If so, then my previous understanding (up to and including this morning's requirements session) was incorrect, and it seems like a confusing use of the term instance.
I propose we consider creating three separate terms here:
Software package: a generic software package (i.e. Microsoft Word 2013) Software component: a software package installed on an endpoint, including a unique serial number if present (ie.e Microsoft Word 2013, product ID $foo) Software instance: a running instance of the software component (i.e. on a multi-user system, one logged-in user has one instance of Word running and another logged-in user has another instance of Word running, or on a single-user system, a user could have multiple independent instances of a single software component running).
The information model currently says that a software component can be an asset, and it does not say whether a software instance can be an asset. If we use the three definitions above, I believe we need state that both a software package and a software component instance can be an asset. (For example, an audit may require identification of software packages and their unique serial numbers to ensure that serial numbers are not re-used across multiple machines.) I don't have an opinion one way or the other on whether a software instance is also an asset.
— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/sacmwg/draft-ietf-sacm-terminology/issues/18.
sacm mailing list sacm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sacm
adammontville
jimsch
henkbirkholz
During the requirements working session this morning, we discussed the difference between a software component and a software instance, which are defined in the information model but not (yet) in the terminology draft. Looking more closely at the information model, I think there is still some clarification required here.
My initial impression was that a "software component" is a software package installed on an endpoint, with a unique serial number (i.e. Microsoft Word 2013, product ID $foo) and a "software instance" is a running instance of the software component (i.e. one logged-in user has one instance and another logged-in user has another instance).
However, upon re-reading the definitions in information model section 4.2, it seems to indicate that a "software component" is the generic software package (i.e. Microsoft Word 2013) and a "software instance" is the software package installed on the endpoint with the unique serial number (ie.e Microsoft Word 2013, product ID $foo). Is that the intent? If so, then my previous understanding (up to and including this morning's requirements session) was incorrect, and it seems like a confusing use of the term instance.
I propose we consider creating three separate terms here:
Software package: a generic software package (i.e. Microsoft Word 2013) Software component: a software package installed on an endpoint, including a unique serial number if present (ie.e Microsoft Word 2013, product ID $foo) Software instance: a running instance of the software component (i.e. on a multi-user system, one logged-in user has one instance of Word running and another logged-in user has another instance of Word running, or on a single-user system, a user could have multiple independent instances of a single software component running).
The information model currently says that a software component can be an asset, and it does not say whether a software instance can be an asset. If we use the three definitions above, I believe we need state that both a software package and a software component instance can be an asset. (For example, an audit may require identification of software packages and their unique serial numbers to ensure that serial numbers are not re-used across multiple machines.) I don't have an opinion one way or the other on whether a software instance is also an asset.