[graap-wg] [Fwd: RE: EMS session agenda (Re: Proposed agenda for Sept. 7th call)]

[Jim Pruyne]

Here's the follow-up message from Ravi regarding my presentation on 
WS-Agreement on the OGSA telecon. yesterday.  I think the discussion 
went very well, and we're perhaps poised to interact more with them in 
EMS in the immediate future, and perhaps in other design teams in the 
future.

--- Jim

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	RE: EMS session agenda (Re: Proposed agenda for Sept. 7th call)
Date: 	Wed, 7 Sep 2005 17:35:55 -0700
From: 	Subramaniam, Ravi <ravi.subramaniam at intel.com>
To: 	Jim Pruyne <jim_pruyne at hp.com>, Hiro Kishimoto 
<hiro.kishimoto at jp.fujitsu.com>, Ogsa-Wg <ogsa-wg at gridforum.org>
CC: 	Andrew Grimshaw <grimshaw at cs.virginia.edu>, Milojicic, Dejan 
<dejan at hpl.hp.com>, Stuart Schaefer <Sschaefer at softricity.com>, Michael 
Behrens <behrens at r2ad.com>, Nakata Toshi <t-nakata at cw.jp.nec.com>



Hi,

Here is a synopsis of the agreed next steps from today's OGSA telephone
meeting. Attendees, please review and update as required.

GRAAP:
Jim: Thanks again for the introduction to WS-Agreement today. We
appreciate your taking time to engage. 

I would like to reiterate the couple of areas of focus we had discussed
at the F2F 
a. Understand the domain terms that may apply in agreements in a
specific EMS scenario (BES?)
b. Look at how one might apply WS-Agreement to the multi-entity (for a
single operation) scenario that is EMS. (Cluster girds have a single
entity (scheduler?) to handle all resources and requests and so that
could fit the two party model of WS-Agreement but I was thinking of EMS
outside of this space where responsibility is distributed).

CDDLM:
Dejan/Stuart: Thanks for attending this session. Sorry for any mixup
here. I hope you did get something useful from Jim's presentation. Based
on our discussions around CDDLM, here is what I captured:

a. Hiro will send out the pointers to the interaction of EMS services
for the 3 scenarios that was developed at the last OGSA F2F.
b. Stuart will take a look and see how the CDDLM architecture would
address these scenarios and start and email thread in the OGSA mail
list.
c. Ravi would collect any difficult or long drawn discussion topics (as
suggested by the respondents) as agenda items for discussion at the next
OGSA telecom.
d. The OGSA WG will study the high level scenarios from CDDLM that were
the model for the CDDLM specs. Need to reconcile these into the EMS/OGSA
space.

We will *not* have a parallel small team meeting this week but will
schedule over the longer term (beyond GGF15) to do so as an ongoing
activity as we work to resolve the approaches.

Speaking for myself right now: I would suggest that an output of this
activity be the OGSA EMS diagram fleshed out with the provisioning
services from CDDLM (this could be either a blowing up of the
provisioning box or a refactoring that may be dictated by this joint
activity). Thoughts?


OGSA:

Anyone on the call today, please let me know if I have missed any of the
outcomes of the discussion here. Any other suggestions and topics for
discussions and/or focus with CDDLM and GRAAP are welcome.

Thanks!

Ravi