Post by thorstenweller on Jun 21, 2022 11:00:12 GMT
After a view meetings with my PO we are the opinion that we are not able to describe a DC in total via Redfish. The physical security is missing like access management for a rack or a room, building, site and some other minor points. Is this not inside the focus of redfish or doesn't nobody take care about it - or could we take care about it and support Redfish to enhance the specification or should we use the oem section for this?
As far as viewing things at the data center-level is concerned, to date the only requests we've had for functionality in Redfish is to show the containment hierarchy so users can understand things like affected power domains and physical placement of equipment. This is what drove the current "Facility" model we have in place.
However, if there is a need for Redfish to model other types of data center-level information, we can certainly take that as feedback for future growth. Having examples for what you'd like to see in Redfish would be useful as a discussion point.
Just want to pull on that thread of "... and some other minor points". Are those related to physical security, or separate topics?
As Mike said the data model doesn't address physical security/access - but we'd certainly be interested in any proposals for that area. And if you have unrelated "minor points" that need to be addressed, please share those!
Post by thorstenweller on Jun 23, 2022 8:13:23 GMT
We try to put our portfolio over the protocol and check if the portfolio is covered. That is our first step. The second step is - as with pdu - to check whether redfish, in our experience, does not generate too much overhead in operation. The embeded devices have limited processing power and we regularly reach the limit with snmp. Our goal is to be able to map more than 500 racks with 2 PDU's each and further physical information. I will collect in the next days all our input and will share it asap.