Protocol Inconsistency Sample Clauses

Protocol Inconsistency. Another problem is protocol inconsistency in the perfSONAR implementations. For example, perfSONAR defines an Echo message that can be used to check if a perfSONAR service (for example, an MA) is operational. If this message is sent to different perfSONAR services, different reply messages may be returned. There is no complete specification of messages which could be used by service developers. Unfortunately, OGF NM-WG is not a final standard supported by a standardisation organisation Also, in current perfSONAR implementations, all messages are created and parsed manually without any formal XML validation. OGF NM-WG is specified using only Relax NG as the formal specification language. If the Relax NG schemas had been used by all applications for formal message validation, some of the inconsistency would have been avoided. Relax NG does, however, not have the necessary formalism to define all aspects of a proper information model [MLAng] [YANG]. It is therefore not possible to properly validate the XML messages in perfSONAR which can lead to inconsistencies between different implementations.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Protocol Inconsistency

  • Inconsistency In the event of any inconsistency between the provisions of the Schedule and the other provisions of this Master Agreement, the Schedule will prevail. In the event of any inconsistency between the provisions of any Confirmation and this Master Agreement (including the Schedule), such Confirmation will prevail for the purpose of the relevant Transaction.

  • Inconsistencies To the extent of any inconsistencies between the terms and conditions of this Amendment and the terms and conditions of the Loan Agreement, the terms and conditions of this Amendment shall prevail. All terms and conditions of the Loan Agreement not inconsistent herewith shall remain in full force and effect and are hereby ratified and confirmed by Borrowers.

  • Conflict or Inconsistency In the event of a conflict or inconsistency between any of the requirements of:

  • Attachments, inconsistencies and severability This Consortium Agreement consists of this core text and Attachment 1 (Background included) Attachment 2 (Accession document) Attachment 3 (List of Third Parties for simplified transfer according to Section 8.2.2) Attachment 4 (Identified Affiliated Entities) In case the terms of this Consortium Agreement are in conflict with the terms of the Grant Agreement, the terms of the latter shall prevail. In case of conflicts between the attachments and the core text of this Consortium Agreement, the latter shall prevail. Should any provision of this Consortium Agreement become invalid, illegal or unenforceable, it shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of this Consortium Agreement. In such a case, the Parties concerned shall be entitled to request that a valid and practicable provision be negotiated which fulfils the purpose of the original provision.

  • Consistency The Corporate Taxpayer and the Members agree to report and cause to be reported for all purposes, including federal, state and local Tax purposes and financial reporting purposes, all Tax-related items (including the Basis Adjustments and each Tax Benefit Payment) in a manner consistent with that specified by the Corporate Taxpayer in any Schedule required to be provided by or on behalf of the Corporate Taxpayer under this Agreement unless otherwise required by law. Any dispute as to required Tax or financial reporting shall be subject to Section 7.09.

  • Discrepancies in References In the event of a discrepancy between the model number referenced in the Bid Specifications and the written description of the Products which cannot be reconciled, with respect to such discrepancy, then the written description shall prevail.

  • Conflict with Regulations In the event that there is a conflict between the contents of this Agreement and any regulation made by the Employer, or on behalf of the Employer, this Agreement shall take precedence over the said regulation.

  • Consistency with Federal Laws and Regulations This Agreement shall incorporate by reference Section 22.9 of the CAISO Tariff as if the references to the CAISO Tariff were referring to this Agreement.

  • Program Description The employer agrees to provide a vision benefit to eligible employees and dependents. The vision benefit provided by the State shall have an employee co-payment of $10 for the comprehensive annual eye examination and $25 for materials.

  • Inconsistency of Name and Account Number Company acknowledges and agrees that, if an Entry describes the Receiver inconsistently by name and account number, payment of the Entry transmitted by Bank to the Receiving Depository Financial Institution might be made by the Receiving Depository Financial Institution (or by Bank in the case of an On-Us Entry) on the basis of the account number even if it identifies a person different from the named Receiver, and the Company’s obligation to pay the amount of the Entry to Bank is not excused in such circumstances.

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.