[graap-wg] Telecon on 3/21

[Karl Czajkowski]

Wow!  I thought we'd discussed this ad nauseum in GRAAP face-to-faces,
so I neglected to mention it.

I see GRAM as being obsolete once WS-Agreement is available to form
agreements bearing JSDL terms.  The only bits of GRAM that might
need to remain are some extended operations or RPs on the Agreement
itself.

karl


On Mar 21, Jon MacLaren loaded a tape reading:
...
> The GRAAP-WG charter does not address job submission.  It addresses 
> resource allocation.  We used advance reservation for computational 
> jobs as a use case.  However, we make clear that the claiming of the 
> resources, i.e. the job submission part of that use case, is not 
> something that the GRAAP-WG would address.
> 
> >This is why I frame this as a misunderstanding/public relations
> >problem.  There are not open questions for how WS-Agreement SHOULD
> >handle jobs except that we haven't publicized the the answers well
> >enough. :-)
> 
> I can understand that the decoupling of the resource allocation from 
> the job submission is only one architectural viewpoint.  In private 
> discussions that I've had with non-GGF participants, they have wanted 
> to view the resource allocation, job submission, and job execution as a 
> single "business transaction".  That's a completely valid viewpoint.  
> However, it is different from the one described in the charter, where 
> we view these as separate concerns.
> 
> Perhaps this is where people's misconceptions come from.
> 
> Perhaps you could clarify exactly where you view a GRAM-type protocol 
> fitting in with WS-Agreement?  Perhaps some sort of sequence diagram.  
> Do you envisage the user have a separate interaction with GRAM to 
> create/submit/launch the underlying computational job?
> 
> Jon.

-- 
Karl Czajkowski
karlcz at univa.com