[acs-wg] Next Call

[Keisuke Fukui]

We are starting the conference now....

  -Keisuke
Keisuke Fukui wrote:
> Here is an info. for the call tomorrow.
> 
> My applogies that I ran out of time during the last call. To have
> meeting time concise and more effective, I added time allocation
> for Agenda.
> 
> See you there!
> 
>  -Keisuke
> 
> ### Logistics for the call
> Date & Time:               Apr 20 Tue 20:00 EDT/Apr 21 Wed 9:00 JST
> Dial-in Number:            1-831-600-1000 (Santa Cruz, California)
> Participant Access Code:   7771111
> 
> ### Proposed Agenda
> 
> 1. Agenda bushing and roll call. (5min)
> 
> 2. Date for F2F (15min)
> May 18 would be the fastest candidate for the meeting, considering
> the GGF guideline that call for four week advance announcement. It
> can be pushed a week or so, depending on the participants schedule.
> I believe that it is essential to get general agreement on how to
> create the Working Group draft of acs spec.
> Goal: Decide tentative dates and place for F2F.
> 
> 3. Research updates on CDDLM, security, etc.(15min)
> Please report your findings on these, if any.
> Goal: Find the refinement to the current requirements description.
> 
> 4. Issues list (30min)
> As Sachiko pointed out, it is worth think about what are the issues
> to create WG draft right now. Attached is my last post describing
> issues in my mind. Please raise your comments and/or bring up yours.
> Goal: Create an issues list with actions.
> 
> Sachiko Wada wrote:
> 
>> Hi team,
>>
>> Here is the proposed teleconference schedule from Keisuke.
>>
>>      Next call: Apr 20 Wed 20:00 EST/Apr 21 Thu 9:00 JST
>>
>> If anyone has problems with this, please feel free to respond to this 
>> message.
>>
>> # Keisuke, let us know the calling info.
>>
>>
>> By the way, I assume that we have agreed to cooperate to develop ACS
>> specification but I don't think that we have agreed the process. I 
>> wonder how I can contribute to our work.
>>
>> We are going to write up a first working draft by GGF14, late June. It
>> is about time to take some concrete actions. Deciding who writes which
>> part of the document is one way, but there may be some issues left
>> that need to be discussed before starting to write. If there are such
>> issues I want to summarize them first. (Keisuke listed up such issues
>> previously and we have already been discussing about Naregi
>> requirements, but do they enough?)
>>
>> So, I'd like to hear your opinion about this at the next telconf. ... 
>> Does this make sense?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Sachiko Wada
>>
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Subject:
> Re: [acs-wg] For the WG draft of the ACS Spec.
> From:
> Keisuke Fukui <kfukui at labs.fujitsu.com>
> Date:
> Thu, 24 Mar 2005 13:44:47 +0900
> To:
> acs-wg at ggf.org
> 
> To:
> acs-wg at ggf.org
> 
> 
> Folks,
> 
> As I announced I propose agenda for our discussions.
> 
> I believe we need to visit a number of issues and considerations prior
> to have a WG draft of the ACS specification, which includes:
> 
> - the new requirements from NAREGI PSE,
> - relationship to other GGF WGs, such as CDDLM-WG and planned WGs
>   for Execution Management System,
> - collaboration with IUDD standardization group and
> - recruiting involvement from the European communities.
> 
> I will describe them in a bit more detail below:
> 
> a) the new requirements from NAREGI PSE
>   - including source code to be compiled for each target platform at
>     or prior to the deployment of the application.
>   - storing compiled binaries for target platforms in the repository.
>   - storing (caching) the input and output data pairs through the lifecycle
>     of the multiple executions of the application.
> b) relationship to the deployment API and component mode being discussed in
>    the CDDLM-WG.
>    - 'addFile' interface in the deployment API looks to be a candidate
>      contact point with ACS, for example, "register" interface of ARI.
>    - where the ACS interfaces should stand in the CDDLM's lifecycle model.
>    - other (expected) GGF WGs such as OGSA design teams.
> c) collaboration with IUDD standardization group
>    - Archive standard will be output from IUDD standardization. How can
>      we contribute to it, to archive the common format for the grid
>      deployment. Probably we should discuss Grid specific consideration at
>      ACS, then report our outcome to the IUDD group.
>    - Repository interface standard for Grid system will be output from GGF
>      ACS.
> d) recruiting involvement from the European communities.
>    One of the comments I got after the sessions is that we should seek for
>    the participants from European Grid communities since they share much
>    with our usecase and scope. We need a research on this possibility.
>    UniGrid, EGEE, omii, and more...
> 
> My plan is having a brainstorming on all of these agenda. Originally, it 
> was
> planned to discuss about our plan including the above at ACS-WG#2 
> session. It
> turned out, however, more difficult to perform this at the presence of the
> audience explaining what is being discussed and with the limit of time. 
> To do
> the brainstorming the items, we have options below:
> 
> - Tele-conferences
>   several times, one or two hours each.
> - Face-to-face meeting
>   probably one or two days. At the U.S. East coast or in Japan.
> 
> We can do either or both depending on our schedule, in addition to the 
> regular
> mailing list discussion. Since we have not discussed the items at the 
> GGF13,
> I hope we discuss on this as soon as possible. Can we have a 
> tele-conference
> to talk about these next week? My proposal for the time is 3/30 Wed 
> 19:00EST
> (3/31 Thu  9:00JST). Please respond if this works for you.
> 
> Also, please feel free to add agenda and give your feedback to the above.
> I hope that we are starting a great work from here.
> 
>  -Keisuke
>