[ogsa-bes-wg] Attempted distillation of "Questionsandpotential changes to BES, as seen from HPC Profile point-of-view"

[Ian Foster]

Marvin:

If we are support WS-Transfer, I think that means we need a WS-Transfer 
binding for BES?

Ian.


At 05:02 PM 7/15/2006 -0700, Marvin Theimer wrote:

>So to summarize...
>
>
>
>----------------
>
>There are four implementation options that should be supported by the
>
>spec for obtaining public state data:
>
>
>
>1) WS-Transfer,
>
>2) WSRF,
>
>3) public state accessor operations,
>
>4) basic interop.
>
>
>
>An accessor operation for obtaining the activity status MUST be included
>
>in each of the above implementation options.
>
>
>
>Official QNames SHALL be defined for options 1-3.
>
>
>
>The GetInteropData operation MUST return a list of QNames that
>
>represents which of the above options is supported. An empty list
>
>implies that ONLY option #4 is available.
>
>----------------
>
>
>
>We should also define what port types option #2 implies or break it up
>
>into three different options for each of the three port types used for
>
>resource property queries in WSRF (wsrp:GetResourceProperty,
>
>wsrp:GetMultipleResourceProperties, and wsrp:QueryResourceProperties).
>
>
>
>This sounds good to me.  I presume that basic interopmeans just the two 
>accessor operations for activity status and complete activity infoset?
>
>
>
>Marvin.

_______________________________________________________________
    Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute
Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago
Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439
Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637
Tel: +1 630 252 4619.  Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu.
       Globus Alliance: www.globus.org.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/ogsa-bes-wg/attachments/20060719/cf7764ab/attachment.htm