[glue-wg] New types

[stephen.burke at stfc.ac.uk]

glue-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:glue-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On
> Behalf Of Florido Paganelli said:
> My only concern is that these names should come from implementor of the
> services/interfaces, not from users. Did the IGE project developed these
> services by themselves, or it's globus services?

IGE are developers, not users (Initiative for Globus in Europe, now called something else I think):

http://www.ige-project.eu/

> also a serviceType org.globus.gsissh sounds very weird to me. All in all this
> repetition of names between Services and InterfaceNames makes me think
> we have no common understanding of the concepts.

I don't think we do have a clear understanding of the ServiceType, but nevertheless we have to publish something, it's a mandatory attribute. For Services which only have one type of Endpoint, copying the InterfaceName seems the simplest solution.

> Here it seems there is a 1 to 1 relationship between Service and Endpoint. Is
> it so? Service for me is some kind of grouping of endpoints dedicated to to
> something, that's why we have ComputingService and StorageService.

The structure of the schema is that an Endpoint must have an associated Service, so we have to publish it like that even if there is only a single Endpoint (as is quite often the case).

> Moreover, we should only accept Open Enumerations that come with a
> description. Can they provide such a thing?

I assume Tilo can do that, although gram and gsissh are well-known.

Stephen

-- 
Scanned by iCritical.