We already have a requirement about verification of configuration. I'm fine with that, although as an approach to verification I would encourage something more declarative, rather than thinking of it as a "test" that gets executed. In reality, the payload that supports verification of configuration may have to support scripts that run and *might* even include a "test" that causes the resource to execute, but I don't think that's best practice for configuration verification.
Self-test to me implies actually exercising the resource to test its correct operation. It implies a broader scope than just the correct configuration of the resource. It seems to me that a "self-managing" resource should come with the capabilities to self-test, and that these are no different from any other capability of the resource. So I think self-tests should be installed as part of the resource (possibly an optional feature), not as separate external scripts - and should be initiated by some standard self-test interface on the resource. Even if we did believe there should be a standard for "self-test packages" which let you specify external tests to run on a resource, I'd say it was outside of SDD scope.
Regards,
Christine
Senior Technical Staff Member
IBM, 11501 Burnet Road, Mail Point 901-6B10
Austin, TX 78758
1-512-838-3482 tl 678-3482
"Josh Allen" <jallen@macrovision.com>
