[ogsa-wg] GGF-DMTF Work Register
Tom Maguire
tmaguire at us.ibm.com
Tue Aug 2 07:21:14 CDT 2005
owner-ogsa-wg at ggf.org wrote on 08/02/2005 06:49:20 AM:
> Hi Tom,
>
> Thank you very much for your Milestone proposal.
> I will make no objection about this proposal but have some
> reservations.
>
> Even though CIM is the most promising and widely adopted resource model
> in the world, OGSA-WG is still discussing our strategic direction of
> resource modeling. Reasonable work process is something like:
>
> (1) Determine the strategic direction including resource model
> selection (CIM?).
> (2) List up and prioritize requirements on models.
> (3) Ask external experts to fulfill each requirement.
Question (1) is moot given that we are talking specifically about
the GGF-DMTF Work Register.
Question (2) is irrelevant to the additional milestone since both the
OGSA-D milestone and the addtional milestone are 'common' mapping
requirements which are orthogonal to specific resource modeling
requirements
(eg. changes/additions/deletions of properties, operations, associations or
classes).
That being said IMO we should be asking external experts (DMTF in this
context) to provide us with these high level constructs.
> Since we will make (3) in parallel with (1) and (2), I see two risks;
>
> (a) We ask DMTF and they make it on time (Feb. 2006) but we are not
> ready to utilize them at that time or end up using only small part of
> their work, or
> (b) We ask DMTF and they ask us back which is the highest priority
> item since our request is broad range. But we cannot answer until
> we sort out (1) and (2).
On point (a) I suspect anyone using CIM uses only a small part of it so
I think that one is ok. On point (b) I would suggest that the OGSA-D
milestone is more time critical; so I would prioritize that above this
additional work. As I pointed out above this is 'common' mapping work
so I do not believe it is tied at all to the resource modeling work.
> So, I propose not to specify deadline request for this milestone from
> us. Instead Let DMTF say when they might be ready with this work item.
> Then OGSA and DMTF discuss priority together.
I think a milestone without a date will be ignored. Further I am fairly
certain that the DMTF TC will request a date.
> And specific question/comment follows;
>
> > The DMTF will define and publicize abstract wsdl:portType for
> > classes inthe CIM model (February 2006)
>
> Do you ask all of CIM classes (there are tons of them) or small number
> of subset?
We are asking for a common mapping to wsdl
>
> > Each 'extrinsic' operation on a CIM class will be modeled
>
> What is 'extrinsic' operation?
Operations that are expressed in the CIM schema on CIM classes
>
> > as a wsdl:operation
> > Properties of the CIM class which are rendered in XML
> > schema (detailed in previous deliverable) will be
>
> What is "previous deliverable"? Is it wsdl:operation (above line) or
> namespace and XML schema (previous paragraph)?
I was assuming that the OGSA-D XML schema would be logically place
above/before this milestone/deliverable
>
> > available throughthe wsdl:types section
> > It is envisioned that some set of qualifiers will be mapped to xml
> > schema and wsdl constructs. The specifics of this mapping are
> > viewed as explicitly part of the work to render the model. As such
> > GGF has no specific requirements at this time but may have
> > requirements as the workproduct develops.
> > The intent of this deliverable is to make available a set of
> > standard wsdl:portTypes representing the CIM modeled aspect of
> > classes (extrinsics and properties only). It is envisioned that
> > these portTypes will be mixed in with additional capabilities from
> > Grid disciplines to support Basic Execution Services, Data
> > Virtualization and other areas as they are developed.
>
> p.s.
> Since WS-CIM call this week is canceled, we have time to think it over.
This is not a discussion for WS-CIM directly. It is a discussion with the
DMTF TC and they meet today. Further, any work register requires DMTF
board approval and the board meets on 8/11. After that our next board
meeting is in September.
Tom
> Thanks,
> -----
> Hiro Kishimoto
>
> Tom Maguire wrote:
> > Folks,
> > On the OGSA-WG telecon 8/1 I took an AI to add a milestone/deliverable
to
> > the GGF-DMTF Work Register. Specifically, the milestone reflects the
> > urgent desire of the OGSA-WG to have a normative WSDL for classes
expressed
> > in the CIM schema. This milestone builds on the current addition to
the
> > work register from OGSA-D; namely the namespace and xml schema for the
> > properties of CIM classes. The addition to the work register being
> > proposed is as follows:
> >
> > The DMTF will define and publicize abstract wsdl:portType for
classes in
> > the CIM model (February 2006)
> > Each 'extrinsic' operation on a CIM class will be modeled
as a
> > wsdl:operation
> > Properties of the CIM class which are rendered in XML
schema
> > (detailed in previous deliverable) will be available
through
> > the wsdl:types section
> > It is envisioned that some set of qualifiers will be mapped to xml
> > schema and wsdl constructs. The specifics of this mapping are
viewed as
> > explicitly part of the work to render the model. As such GGF has no
> > specific requirements at this time but may have requirements as the
work
> > product develops.
> > The intent of this deliverable is to make available a set of
standard
> > wsdl:portTypes representing the CIM modeled aspect of classes
> > (extrinsics and properties only). It is envisioned that these
portTypes
> > will be mixed in with additional capabilities from Grid disciplines
to
> > support Basic Execution Services, Data Virtualization and other
areas as
> > they are developed.
> >
> > Note: Abstract wsdl:portType refers to wsdl:portType definitions
without
> > bindings.
> >
> > OGSA-WG members please give me your feedback and edits ASAP.
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
> >
> > Frey’s Law: “Every 5 years the number of architecture components double
and
> > the ability to comprehend them halves”
> >
> >
> > Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when
> > there is nothing left to take away. – Antoine de Saint-Exupery
> >
> >
> > T o m M a g u i r e
> >
> >
> > STSM, On Demand Architecture
> >
> >
> > Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
> >
> > owner-ogsa-wg at ggf.org wrote on 07/29/2005 07:40:26 PM:
> >
> >
> >>Hi all,
> >>
> >>Tom Roney, GGF forum-level liaison to DMTF, ask us to review
> >>updated GGF-DMTF Work Register document. OGSA-WG already has
> >>dialogue with DMTF folks and I think this document is consistent
> >>with our on going activity.
> >>
> >>Thus I would like to put this item into next Monday call agenda.
> >>
> >>Thanks,
> >>--
> >>Hiro Kishimoto
> >>
> >>----- Message from Tom Roney <troney at ncsa.uiuc.edu> on Tue, 26 Jul
> >>2005 09:23:32 -0500 -----
> >>
> >>To:
> >>
> >>mark.linesch at hp.com, hiro.kishimoto at jp.fujitsu.com, tmaguire at us.ibm.
> >>com, fred-m at crl.hitachi.co.jp, malaika at us.ibm.com, norm at cs.man.ac.
> >>uk, dave.pearson at oracle.com, dejan.milojicic at hp.com, tkojo at mvi.
> >>biglobe.ne.jp, eboyd at internet2.edu, rich at a3.ph.man.ac.uk, M.J.
> >>Leese at dl.ac.uk, david.wallom at bristol.ac.uk, jputley at earthlink.net,
> >>lfm at psc.edu, Shoshani at lbl.gov, pkunszt at mail.cern.ch, Jon.
> >>Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk, travos at nortelnetworks.com, mulmo at pdc.kth.se,
> >>dane at fnal.gov, asm100 at doc.ic.ac.uk, darrenp at cadence.com, ali at epcc.
> >>ed.ac.uk, dder at ecs.soton.ac.uk, carole at cs.man.ac.uk
> >>
> >>cc:
> >>
> >>Tom <troney at ncsa.uiuc.edu>
> >>
> >>Subject:
> >>
> >>GGF-DMTF Work Register
> >>
> >>
> >>All,
> >>
> >>Attached is a draft of the GGF-DMTF Work Register, a document
> >>describing the collaboration between the two organizations. You
> >>are receiving a copy of the draft because your name appears in the
> >>document as having some role in the collaboration. Please review
> >>the document and let me hear back from you, either accepting the
> >>document in its entirety, or requesting additions, subtractions,
> >>or modifications to the document. The final draft will then be
> >>presented to the GGF Steering Group and the DMTF Board for their
> >>comments and approval.
> >>
> >>Your careful consideration is appreciated. If you are aware of
> >>a GGF working group not listed but having a role to play in this
> >>collaborative effort, please do make this known.
> >>
> >>Tom
> >>
> >> Note: It occurs to me now that I have forgotten the
> >> Semantic Grid Research Group. Listed as co-chairs
> >> will be David De Roure and Carole Goble.
> >>
> >>[attachment "GGF-DMTFWorkRegisterDraft.doc" deleted by Tom
> >>Maguire/Hawthorne/IBM]
> >
> >
> >
>
More information about the ogsa-wg
mailing list