[DAIS-WG] Stepping Down as Co-Chair

[Ny Haingo Andrianarisoa]

Dear Malcolm Atkinson,

I thank you first for your opinion about the WSRF future. It reinforces 
us in going on and achieving our current DAIS-based project.

We have been informed about your OGSA-DAI outstanding project 
(publications and implementations). To my knowledge, your system has 
been retained and used by many of my former colleagues as a basis for 
their datawarehouse-over-grid project implementation.

Due to my company's strategy tightly bound to .NET technologies, we have 
adopted a .NET-based solution, that is the WSRF.NET framework from the 
Grid Computing Group of the University of Virginia (succeeding to their 
OGSI.NET implementation).

One of our aims is to build some tools based on WS-DAI implementation 
(relational realization) as a means for a datagrid mediation 
application. We currently enter the final debugging phase for our "first 
step" implementation; it is a question of weeks -or about one month at 
more- before we publish for the community.

I will probably contact you when our development work reaches a stable 
state.

With regards,
Ny Haingo.

Le 06/10/2006 09:18, Malcolm Atkinson a écrit :
> Dear Ny Haingo Andrianarisoa 
> 
> It is very interesting to hear about your implementation, that may be an
> important element in demonstrating multiple implementations and
> interoperability.
> 
> We (OGSA-DAI) go on developing systems using WSRF at present and I see
> no reason to assume that the WSRF standards won't continue for some
> time. We also develop WS-I ones.  Others also use other WSRF
> implementations with OGSA-DAI.
> 
> I assume that eventually there will be a proposal for WSRT that has been
> through standards processes and that is backed by major IT vendors.
> This is likely to offer similar functionality to WSRF as that
> functionality is necessary.  When there are implementations, I expect it
> to be relatively straightforward to map onto these as we map onto WSRF
> at present.  I suspect it will be a couple of years at least before this
> happens. But if there are early opportunities to explore and plan then
> that will be welcome.
> 
> Because of investment in and continuing development of WSRF, I can
> imagine that there will be a period of co-existence.  How long that will
> be I cannot guess. It depends a lot on how well crafted the revised set
> of standards are and how well they supply the required functions, such
> as access to management state information and life-time management that
> supports resource discovery up after partial failures.  It will also
> depend on the quality and accessibility of the implementations and the
> extent of support for the replacement standards.
> 
> Malcolm
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dais-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:dais-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On Behalf
> Of Ny Haingo Andrianarisoa
> Sent: 05 October 2006 15:34
> To: dais-wg
> Cc: N.Ha. Andrianarisoa (Aricie)
> Subject: Re: [DAIS-WG] [dais-wg] Stepping Down as Co-Chair
> 
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> I would first join Malcolm Atkinson in thanking Norman Paton and the 
> DAIS-WG main contributors for all the work that has been led and done 
> until the publication of DAIS specifications as GGF (should it be 
> henceforth called: OGF?) recommandation documents.
> 
> Nevertheless a piece of Norman Paton's sentences disturbed me a little: 
> "a demise of WSRF". What should I (we?) understand? Would WSRF 
> specifications be overshadowed by "simple" WS standards? For the rest, 
> WSRF seems to me too specific for grid services to be given up -I think 
> this observation looks obvious for anyone concerned with grids.
> 
> To my knowledge, WSRF still goes on (version 1.2 raised on April 2006). 
> One of our current leading projects is based on an implementation of 
> WS-DAI and its relational realization (according the latest 
> specifications) over the WSRF.NET framework (thanks to Marty Humphrey 
> and his team from the University of Virginia). Should we definitely 
> change our framework foundations? I hope we would not have to do so.
> 
> Thanks for your clarification. My apologizes in case this message is 
> sent (or felt to be sent) to an inappropriate place -although I believe 
> many people would be interested in the WSRF status.
> 
> With regards,
> Ny Haingo Andrianarisoa.
> --
>   dais-wg mailing list
>   dais-wg at ogf.org
>   http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dais-wg
>