[dmis-bof] Comments on the charter?

[William E. Allcock]

comments inline

-----Original Message-----
From: Allen Luniewski [mailto:luniew at almaden.ibm.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2005 1:53 PM
To: allcock at mcs.anl.gov
Cc: dmis-bof at ggf.org
Subject: Re: [dmis-bof] Comments on the charter?



Bill, 

If I had realized that the document was this short, I would have opened it
earlier! 

I think that the prose strikes the right balance between trying to be
general (which is something that is important with my OGSA-D hat on) and
being pragmatic.  I would be very unhappy if the first version of the spec
came out with a strong file orientation as that does not really help OGSA-D
meet its goals in data transfer.  So, I have no problems with the charter
statement but I do intend to be a nag about the generality aspects of this
as the spec comes into being.  
 
Good.  That will keep those of us with "right now production" pressures from
cutting too many corners :-). 

The timeline is, to say the least, aggressive!  Not much room for something
going awry...  A few comments on the timeline.  
 
Yes, but for our first quick victory, it is mostly just getting agreement
between different parties.  We have all done large parts of this already.
Trying non-file sources will be more difficult and time consuming,
particularly if and when it requires changes to the V1.0 spec.
 
        1. GGF-18.  I suspect that if we manage to get extensibility into
the spec, this interop is likely to be file only on this 
                schedule.  Not a problem, just an observation.  
 
Yes, I agree.
 
        2. GGF-19.  I suspect that this is the first time we will have a
chance to see non-file interop happening.  
 
Possibly.  I think this will largely depend on if someone has a non-file
need to justify the expenditure of effort to produce it.  There are several
of us that have something for files, and we recognize the advantages of
agreeing on a standard, so we will expend the effort to fix up what we have.
However, it is harder (though clearly not impossible) to justify doing the
work without a clear user community requirement driving it.  This makes me
think that we should add a parallel set of tasks which is to gather some
more formal use cases, particularly looking for communities with non-file
needs for such a service.


        3. GGF-20.  I do not know the GGF rules on what constitutes a valid
interop.  How much of the spec must be 
                tested?  The concern here is the potential mismatch between
the current file transfer facilities that 
                exist and potential extensibility aspects of the spec.
These issues could make this schedule 
                hard to meet.  
 
If what we do isn't sufficient to meet GGF standards, we will just call it
an informational document, or if that is a problem, we will just report on
what we do within the group.  For those of us with real users and real world
interoperability requirements for files, this is going to happen.
 
Bill 

Allen




"William E. Allcock" <allcock at mcs.anl.gov> 
Sent by: owner-dmis-bof at ggf.org 


10/25/2005 07:55 AM 


Please respond to
allcock



To
<dmis-bof at ggf.org> 

cc

Subject
[dmis-bof] Comments on the charter?

	




I haven't received any comments on the charter.  I would love to believe
that is because you are all waiting to have your computers repaired after
weeping uncontrollably on your keyboards due to the beauty of the prose...
unfortunately, it is more likely that you have not taken time out of your
insanely hectic schedule to review it :-).

Please do so.  It wont take long.  I opted for very little prose and then a
timeline.  If people could comment on if they think the text is sufficient,
and more importantly on whether the timeline is reasonable and has the right
things in it, that would be wonderful.

Please remember, this can only be a success if we have participation from a
variety of groups.  Particularly for this one since we have competing
existing implementations, and we will need to get some momentum behind this
to get people to change and conform.  They have to believe it provides some
advantage to do so...

So, now! quick! before another email distracts you! read it! send me
comments! I attached it again to this email to make it *REALLY* easy!

:-)

I had the above as "shouting", but then wondered how many spam filters would
tag it as spam...

Bill

---------------------------------------------------------------
William E. Allcock
Argonne National Laboratory
Bldg 221, Office C-115A
9700 South Cass Ave
Argonne, IL 60439-4844
Office Phone:  +1-630-252-7573
Office Fax:      +1-630-252-1997
Cell Phone:      +1-630-854-2842




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/dmis-bof/attachments/20051212/029ff357/attachment.html