[gsa-rg] First framework of GSA-Requirements Document

[Ramin Yahyapour]

I would like to second Philip's comment. Not much more to add.
The addition of user cases is always possible and appreciated.

As I wrote before, I am not really happy with the current set of
use-cases as they are quite different in terms of presentation.
Maybe, it was not clear what prupose the use-cases serve.
They should show what kind of scheduling is required and what
functional requirements arise from this use-case.

For instance, some scenarios may require that a scheduling
system should create advance reservations. In that case, we should
indicate that the scheduler requires this. 
The use-case should give others some background about your scheduling
scenario as well it should show that there is actually interest in certain
Grid functionalities. That is, we make sure that we do not deal with 
any problems which are not backed by actual requirements.

In my opinion, while the current use-cases include this information,
some appear more like the description of a current project implementation.
So it would be nice, if we could make them more coherent in presentation.

Ramin




Philipp Wieder wrote the following on 18.01.2005 15:38:
> Hi Jarek,
> 
> it is definitely possible to contribute a use case, since every use case 
> will help us to get a more precise understanding of the required 
> functions, properties and services we need. With respect to the focus it 
> would be helpful if the use case concentrates more on the scheduling 
> processes and requirements than on describing an existing solution. This 
> make it easier to compare the different use cases and incorporate the 
> results into the requirements section (see also the following thread 
> form the GSA list 
> http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/gsa-rg/2004/07/msg00000.html).
> 
> Thank you, Philipp.
> 
> Jarek Nabrzyski wrote:
> 
>> Ramin Yahyapour wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> finally I and Philip Wieder found the necessary time to start the 
>>> work on the GSA framework document which had been discussed at the 
>>> last GGF meeting in Brussels. We copied the items we had during our 
>>> GGF session into
>>> corresponding sections in Sect. 3. In the next step, we can split up the
>>> work to extend the different sections. Several people volunteered to 
>>> work as editors on this document for the different parts for required 
>>> services, protocols for a Grid Scheduling Architecture. I would 
>>> suggest that we should get a first complete draft ready to be 
>>> presented and discussed at the next GGF in Korea. It would be great 
>>> if we can split up the work accordingly.
>>> Maybe the volunteers from the Brussels meeting as well as whoever 
>>> else would like to join the work can indicate in which part the feel 
>>> they would
>>> like contribute.
>>>
>>> Any other commments are of course also appreciated.
>>> BTW, we added an additional section for linking to OGSA. We have been 
>>> asked from the OGSA design team for Execution Management Services to 
>>> contribute
>>> to their work. This could be link were we can combine the efforts.
>>>
>>> Ramin
>>>
>> Dear Ramin and Philipp,
>> I will contribute to the Requirements section. do you think it is 
>> still possible to contribute a use case?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jarek
>>
> 


-- 
Dr.-Ing. Ramin Yahyapour         | mailto:Ramin.Yahyapour at uni-dortmund.de
Computer Engineering Institute   | phone: +49 (231) 755-2735
University of Dortmund           | mobil: +49 (179) 5261973
44221 Dortmund / Germany         | fax:   +49 (231) 755-3251