[ogsa-wg] Re: Notes from the OGSA EMS & CDDLM meeting

[Hiro Kishimoto]

Hi Pete,

Good point, I think it is part of "Defining architecture relationship"
discussion scheduled at 1:45-3:15. Although, it is rather advanced
feature of EMS, I agree it is a time to start exploring.

Thanks,
----
Hiro Kishimoto

Ziu, Peter wrote:
> Hiro, 
> 
> I thought it might be useful to push up some concept visuals for
> autonomic/automated provisioning, that may assist in generating some
> thought and discussion at the face2face.
> 
> Pete. 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ogsa-wg at ggf.org [mailto:owner-ogsa-wg at ggf.org] On Behalf Of
> Hiro Kishimoto
> Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 7:35 PM
> To: Milojicic, Dejan S
> Cc: cddlm-wg at ggf.org; ogsa-wg at ggf.org
> Subject: [ogsa-wg] Re: [cddlm] Notes from the OGSA EMS & CDDLM meeting
> 
> Thanks Dejan for the meeting notes,
> 
> I've put proposed joint session agenda into F2F schedule and update
> attendees list accordingly.
> 
> https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/OGSA-2005-Aug-F2F-
> agenda
> 
> If you have any farther questions/comments, please let me know.
> ----
> Hiro Kishimoto
> 
> Milojicic, Dejan S wrote:
> 
>>By phone, 8/3, 2pm-3pm PST.
>>
>>Attendees: Mark Morgan, Hiro Kishimoto, Chris Smith, Stuart Schaefer, 
>>Jun Tatemura, Ravi Subramanian, Mike Behrens, Steve Loughran, and 
>>Dejan Milojicic.
>>
>>Notes taker: Dejan Milojicic.
>>
>>Agenda:
>>
>>1. Go over the two documents (CDDLM Foundation document for EMS people
> 
> 
>>an the OGSA architecture document for the CDDLM people.
>>
>>Dejan suggested that CDDLM is part of the EMS, but there are other 
>>pieces which are out of scope.
>>
>>Chris asked about activity v. solution. The answer was that we support
> 
> 
>>solutions not activities.
>>
>>Hiro: can we also support C code, Cobol, etc. The answer is yes, but 
>>we need to support the environments.
>>
>>Ravi: we need to resolve the terms between the two groups prior to the
> 
> 
>>meeting.
>>
>>Hiro: there is a glossary document. Good suggestion (Dejan), that way 
>>we can get consistent independently. It is linked off of 
>>https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/docman/draft-ggf-ogsa-spe
>>c/
>>en/23.
>>
>>Ravi: There is a space for provisioning in the EMS document, we try to
> 
> 
>>plug in the CDDLM as a virtual exercise. We try to effectively see if 
>>CDDLM is compatible with OGSA. Chris, there are issues with
> 
> containers.
> 
>>Chris: extending JSDL (extensions) with CDDLM or embedding the
> 
> schemas.
> 
>>Steve: it is batch -centric. Chris: it is not really. Ravi: keep 
>>provisioning separate from JSDL. Dejan: summary, this is a good 
>>proposal, but for simplicity reasons, we'll keep it out of our 
>>immediate objectives for the time being.
>>
>>2. Agenda for F2F (8/16, 1:30-5 in Sunnyvale):
>>
>>Action preparation for the meeting: sync up with glossary (Ravi: also 
>>check up the glossary if we have any comments).
>>
>>A) (1:30-1:45) Introduction (learn more about EMS broader picture, in 
>>the past wee overviewed CDDLM)
>>B) (1:45-3:15) Defining architectural relationship (This is really 
>>related to the pictures we discussed above, Fig 5 in the OGSA arch & 
>>Fig
>>7 in CDDLM Foundation)
>>C) (3:15-3:45) Indebt overview of the CDDLM interfaces (if needed)
>>D) (3:45-4:15) Description and integration of ACS & CDDLM (Ravi: added
> 
> 
>>BES as well).
>>E) (4:15-4:45) Integration roadmap
>>F) (4:45-5:00) Next steps
>>
>>(Dejan: above times are approximate, they may change as needed, e.g. 
>>if we cover some of the later items in earlier sessions)
>>
>>Ravi: is this similar to BES interfaces activities. Chris: this was 
>>exactly how I was thinking wrt BES container. We can jump ahead to 
>>conclusion that CDDLM also created container. it is definitely in the 
>>context of BES cause we will run through the BES and we will 
>>automatically se how it fits with BES. The same applies to RSF. It is 
>>almost looking through a use case how do we do with something that is 
>>given to job provisioning.
>>
>>Hiro: There is one more important component, ACS. Dejan/Steve, we came
> 
> 
>>to some agreement with ACS at GGF 14 and there is no need for changes 
>>to CDDLM wrt ACS. Hiro: ACS had a F2F meeting in North Carolina. Mike 
>>prepared a document describing relationship between CDDLM and ACS.
> 
> Ravi:
> 
>>we can add the ACS diagram to the figure. (as well as BES), this way 
>>we can tackle multiple birds at the same time. Mike: ACS has taken 
>>requirements wrt contents, there are some security considerations and 
>>creation time issues that would require something other than URL, 
>>maybe service invocation, we can go over these details at F2F.
>>
>>3. Techniques and expectations: 
>>
>>Dejan: informal approach, discussions, drawing pictures, agreeing on 
>>interfaces, it is ok to have a few more open issues, but resolve them 
>>at latest at GGF15.
>>
>>Ravi: can someone bring digital camera, take a snapshot and then send 
>>it, put it on Webex.
>>
>>Hiro: expects architectural diagram and text describing components, so
> 
> 
>>that they can come into the next version of architectural document.
>>
>>Ravi: when is the time (Hiro: 1:30-5pm)
>>
>>
>>
> 
>