[cddlm] Re: Session at GGF between CDDLM and related SRM groups, DRMAA, GRAAP, and JSDL

[Keisuke Fukui (on the road)]

Hi Dejan,

We are having an ad hoc meeting at the Boardroom due to unavailability
of a member in the afternoon. The room is in the 3f reserved for nomcom.
Please call us if you specifically need us.

 -Keisuke
Milojicic, Dejan S wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> This is a reminder that the session dedicated to meeting between CDDLM
> and other working groups within ex-SRM and current Management technical
> areas will be held today at 9am at Regent#1 conference room. All chairs
> and members of other WGs are invited.
> 
> Looking forward to talking to you. As a reminder we already have had
> dedicated sessions with OGSA EMS, ACS, and WSDM groups and in each case
> it was very useful.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Dejan.
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Milojicic, Dejan S 
>>Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 9:32 AM
>>To: 'Andreas Haas'
>>Cc: Hrabri Rajic; asm100 at doc.ic.ac.uk; darren at pulsipher.org; 
>>ali at epcc.ed.ac.uk; pruyne at hpl.hp.com; v.sander at fz-juelich.de; 
>>Wolfgang.Ziegler at scai.fraunhofer.de
>>Subject: RE: Session at GGF between CDDLM and related SRM 
>>groups, DRMAA, GRAAP, and JSDL
>>
>>Hi,
>>
>>Thanks to all who replied, I will go ahead and a request a 
>>CDDLM session on this topic, specifying other groups as 
>>preferred non-conflict. Wrt BES (Jim brought this up), I 
>>agree that we are related and I am in the process of talking 
>>to them about a joint session since the last GGF. I would 
>>prefer that we address our mutual relationship within our 
>>technical area (even if it is going to change soon) prior to 
>>talking to BES as a group of WGs. Bringing them in right now 
>>may be too much.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Dejan. 
>>
>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Andreas Haas [mailto:Andreas.Haas at Sun.COM]
>>>Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 1:52 AM
>>>To: Milojicic, Dejan S
>>>Cc: Hrabri Rajic; asm100 at doc.ic.ac.uk; darren at pulsipher.org; 
>>>ali at epcc.ed.ac.uk; pruyne at hpl.hp.com; v.sander at fz-juelich.de; 
>>>Wolfgang.Ziegler at scai.fraunhofer.de
>>>Subject: Re: Session at GGF between CDDLM and related SRM groups, 
>>>DRMAA, GRAAP, and JSDL
>>>
>>>Hi Dejan,
>>>
>>>I agree such a talk is reasonable and will try to participate.
>>>I just submitted DRMAA WG session and specified overlap with CDDLM 
>>>sessions should be prevented.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Andreas
>>>
>>>On Wed, 25 May 2005, Milojicic, Dejan S wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Hi,
>>>>
>>>>This email goes to the chairs of DRMAA, GRAAP, and JSDL. 
>>>
>>>CDDLM groups
>>>
>>>>is interested in holding a session between our four 
>>
>>groups. We have 
>>
>>>>close to completed all our planned specs in he area of
>>>
>>>configuration
>>>
>>>>description, deployment, and lifecycle management, and we
>>>
>>>are moving
>>>
>>>>towards reference implementations for the GGF in Fall. 
>>
>>This is the 
>>
>>>>good time for us to discuss with you how we relate and if we are 
>>>>mutually compliant. We had some ongoing informal 
>>
>>discussions in the 
>>
>>>>past, this time I would like to schedule a session only for this 
>>>>purpose. I will do so if you are interested. Please comment
>>>
>>>asap so that I can request a slot in a timely manner.
>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>Dejan.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Milojicic, Dejan S 
>>Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 4:16 PM
>>To: 'Hiro Kishimoto'; 'John Tollefsrud'
>>Cc: 'Keisuke Fukui'; pete at ziu.net; 'Thomas Studwell'
>>Subject: RE: Session at GGF between CDDLM and related SRM 
>>groups, DRMAA, GRAAP, and JSDL (fwd)
>>
>>Hi Hiro and John,
>>
>>Thanks for your feedback!
>>
>>
>>>Hi John and Dejan,
>>>
>>>Yes, it is GREAT idea.
>>>Is it possible to add ACS-WG to this cross-WG session?
>>
>>Certainly, although I think that these two groups have much 
>>more in common and I prefer that in addition we stick to our 
>>already planned 1:1 session ACS-CDDLM. Now that I think back, 
>>I went over all SRM groups listed on the Web site and that is 
>>the only reason I missed ACS, but as I said, we are already 
>>in the process of talking directly to each other.
>>
>>Since you already raised the issue of other groups 
>>attendance, how can we arrange to have BES attend this 
>>session or should I schedule a separate session for BES only? 
>>Also, can we attend one of the OGSA sessions prior to GGF to 
>>present where we are with CDDLM, this is the right time to 
>>engage? I presume that it is appropriate to have discussions 
>>directly with BES instead of OGSA, what is your recommendation?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Dejan.
>>
>>PS BTW We have had practice of the inter-group meetings in 
>>most past GGFs, it might have not been as visible, but we 
>>already met or exchange visits/presentations with DRMAA, 
>>GRAAP, WSDM, DMTF Application group, etc.
>>
>>
>>>I think ACS-WG's work is another closely related one to CDDLM.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>----
>>>Hiro Kishimoto
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>From: John Tollefsrud [mailto:john.tollefsrud at sun.com]
>>>>Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 12:38 AM
>>>>To: dejan.milojicic at hp.com
>>>>Cc: Hiro Kishimoto
>>>>Subject: FW: Session at GGF between CDDLM and related SRM groups, 
>>>>DRMAA,
>>>
>>>GRAAP,
>>>
>>>>and JSDL (fwd)
>>>>
>>>>Hi Dejan,
>>>>
>>>>Good idea! Lert me know if I can help.
>>>>
>>>>I'm looking forward to a meeting of the new Management area
>>>
>>>at GGF14,
>>>
>>>>and would appreciate having there a WG overview and update
>>>
>>>from WG/RG
>>>
>>>>chairs, and this would be a good meeting to recap in a
>>>
>>>CDDLM overview. 
>>>
>>>>I'll have more later on the GGF14 area meeting.
>>>>
>>>>Thanks -
>>>>jt
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>>>Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 10:52:07 +0200 (MEST)
>>>>From: Andreas Haas <andreas.haas at sun.com>
>>>>To: "Milojicic, Dejan S" <dejan.milojicic at hp.com>
>>>>Cc: Hrabri Rajic <hrabri.rajic at intel.com>, asm100 at doc.ic.ac.uk,
>>>>     darren at pulsipher.org, ali at epcc.ed.ac.uk, pruyne at hpl.hp.com,
>>>>     v.sander at fz-juelich.de, Wolfgang.Ziegler at scai.fraunhofer.de
>>>>Subject: Re: Session at GGF between CDDLM and related SRM groups, 
>>>>DRMAA, GRAAP,
>>>>     and JSDL
>>>>
>>>>Hi Dejan,
>>>>
>>>>I agree such a talk is reasonable and will try to participate.
>>>>I just submitted DRMAA WG session and specified overlap 
>>
>>with CDDLM 
>>
>>>>sessions should be prevented.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>Andreas
>>>>
>>>>On Wed, 25 May 2005, Milojicic, Dejan S wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>>This email goes to the chairs of DRMAA, GRAAP, and JSDL. CDDLM 
>>>>>groups is interested in holding a session between our
>>>
>>>four groups. 
>>>
>>>>>We have close to completed all our planned specs in he area of 
>>>>>configuration description, deployment, and lifecycle
>>>
>>>management, and
>>>
>>>>>we are moving towards reference implementations for the
>>>
>>>GGF in Fall. 
>>>
>>>>>This is the good time for us to
>>>>
>>>>discuss
>>>>
>>>>>with you how we relate and if we are mutually compliant. 
>>>
>>>We had some
>>>
>>>>ongoing
>>>>
>>>>>informal discussions in the past, this time I would like
>>>
>>>to schedule
>>>
>>>>>a session only for this purpose. I will do so if you are
>>>
>>>interested. 
>>>
>>>>>Please comment asap so that I can request a slot in a
>>>
>>>timely manner.
>>>
>>>>>Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>>Dejan.