[lsg-rg] new impetus...?

[Catlett Charlie]

I like these suggestions because of the word "real."

A number of us who are managing real grid infrastructure (TeraGrid,  
NAREGI, EGEE, OSG, DEISA, APAC, KGrid, ChinaGrid, Taiwan Nat'l Grid,  
UK NGS) have been working together since SC05 to develop action plans  
to achieve basic interoperation among our grids in four areas within  
the next 6-12 months, sooner where possible.  We chose four areas to  
tackle with existing solutions (not waiting for the next best  
standard)- authentication, data movement, job submission, and  
information services.

At SC05 we identified the areas and wrote draft plans, which are here:

https://forge.gridforum.org/tracker/?atid=829&group_id=165&func=browse

We held a workshop this week at GGF-16 ("Grid Interoperation NOW")  
and within a few weeks these plans will firm up based on discussions  
this week.

We are looking to partner with a small number of application teams  
who need access to resources in multiple Grids.

Might be a good match (certainly we are in line with your thinking  
below).  The project is here:

forge.ggf.org/projects/mgi  (in the document area is our report from  
SC05)

There is a mailing list as well - if you are interested send email to  
majordomo at ggf.org with "subscribe mgi" in the body of the message  
(MGI = multi grid interop)

A workshop report will be out in a week or two as well.

CeC


On Feb 16, 2006, at 2:57 PM, Richard Sinnott wrote:

> Hi Folks,
> it seems clear that there needs to be some more impetus to this  
> group at GGF.
>
> Here are a couple of ideas which we might take forward/discuss. I'd  
> welcome agreements/disagreements - silence is normally golden but  
> not on email lists!!!
>
> Split into a healthGrid group and a life science group (here I'm  
> thinking of a bioinformatics Grid)
>
> 1. Let us develop a real HealthGrid with folk who are interested in  
> this area (I am one and we have already built various prototype  
> systems accessing and using "representative" patient data sets  
> using existing solutions across the NHS here in Scotland).
>
> 2. Let us develop a real life science Grid. We are interested in  
> this and have bioinformatics data Grids and compute Grids already  
> in place.
>
> Is this of interest? I think it will help to make this group have a  
> goal. We might want to agree on the scope of these, e.g. whether we  
> just want to look at exploring basic secure services for access to  
> and usage of healthcare data sets, incorporating anonymisation and  
> de-anonymisation scenarios, data linkage perhaps from patient  
> records to imaging data etc.
>
> We are already working with advanced authorisation infrastructures  
> using results from GGF standards groups such as AuthZ and ShibGrid.  
> This group (in my humble opinion should be doing these kinds of  
> things) if it is to be "GGF". If it isn't using GGF standards and  
> technologies then one coule argue that it should be handled  
> separately, e.g. through other conferences and workshops.
>
> What do folk think?
>
> Rich
>
> PS I am happy to provide more information on what we are up to at  
> the National e-Science Centre, and am willing to lead/be involved  
> in both of these Grid development activities if there is interest  
> from folk that it should happen. Let's do stuff!
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/lsg-rg/attachments/20060216/7e769783/attachment.htm