TELECON, 26 July

## Attendees

- Orano
- Roger
- Mike Day
- Chip Vincent
- Karl
- Mike
- Martin Kirk.
- Ellen Stokes

## Agenda

I propose that we should discuss the following

- Status of development build to date
- Interfaces comments and updates (starting with Chip's Note last friday morning)
- Programming Guidelines (New version attached)
- What we need to do to achieve portability.
- Status of major work going on now (indications, threads interfaces).
- Plans for the input to CVS for next two weeks.

## Notes and Discussion

### Portability.

Mike talked through the ground rules for portability. Today we are putting portability ground rules into a file called

ACTION: Issue maintainer list for each platform. KS

### Provider Issues

The enumerateInstance interface as we have it today for the client is incorrect. We specify today that the return today is CIMInstance. The specification requires that a object namedInstance must be returned which is an instance/name pair. We have agreed that we have to correct this rapidly.

Chip noted that this affects also the provider interface.

Question for the provider interface is whether the provider should return the complete set of keys and/or the instancename.

Agreed that the CIMOM needs to filter the instance properties against the propertylist filter.

The question of whether the provider provides the complete set of keys or the instance name is open. Not sure

ACTION: Mike Brasher - Add the namedInstance to the client APIs. This is a change that will break existing clients so the clients must be changed also.

NOTE: We have agreed that you cannot change the keys in a modify instance.

ACTION: MB Confirm that the documentation and the code reflects this.

There is a provider programmer problem here. How do you assure that the instancename and the key properties always match in any instance maintained by the provider.

It is the CIMOM responsibility to assure that the instancename and the key properties in the instance do match. That is a requirement for consistency.

Note that we have not imposed a requirement the provider to execute the property list filter on those options where the property list has been provided.

The CIMOM Handle. Right now the CIMOM handle is through the

The privileged provider - We need to define these. They 1) go back to the CIMOM to get information.

We can create a completely different tool to get internal information for those providers that need the information, the privileged providers.

NOTE: Ellen noted that the subjects of the remote provider and opaque data.

Mike noted that they are looking at the issues of error returns on the providers. We need also to start to build in the concepts of quality-of-service and/or cost. Thus we could ask for a certain a quality-of-service and the other side could refuse if it could not meet that quality of service (ex. response time).

ACTION: review the of creating other CVS repositories in the same group (MSB). MB, KS HIGH Priority.

Activities this next week and checkins

MB rework some of core for more general listener.

Client interface for namedinstance.

Coding standards.

Mike Day / Markus - Additional inputs on threads

Roger/HP - A number of changess: 1) additional WBEMExec, 2)

Mike brought up the iterator - Mike B will make a first interface proposal

ACTION: Mike Brasher - generate initial proposal.