[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

A small start?

Friends of comprehensive modeling:

As the discussion progresses on the scope, schedule and desirability
of a comprehensive model, I'd like to suggest that someone put a
taxonomy or ontology or class diagram on the table. Even if it's an
example of what the majority would consider an inappropriate model, it
would be valuable for the sake of concreteness. 

Ideally, from my perspective at least, it would be a UML class
diagram. Nothing fancy or complete or anything like that. Just a
simple graph, where the nodes are classes and the arcs are
generalization, association, aggregation and composition, and perhaps
a half dozen or so other relation(ship)s that might be illustrative. 

How's this for a start?: endsystem, intermediate system. Or host,
router. Or whatever. And what about objects that aren't pieces of
equipment, say, routing/switching tables, and highly organized objects
like protocols and the FSMs that describe/define their behavior? What
other perspectives and classifications of the objects might there be?
What forms might these objects take?

Alternatively, if anyone knows of a non-proprietary, web-accessible
whitepaper or hardcopy published report that intends to be a
comprehensive UML model of the Internet, please send me the URL or
bibliographic information.

-- Cheers, 
Tom Nelson Scott             Vedatel Co
1411 Sheffield Dr.           Bowling Green OH 43402
"In IP We Trust"   "Java Rules"   "E Pluribus Unix"