[ogsa-wg] RE: GRIDtoday Edition: Tony Hey: 'Challenging Times for GGF & Standards'

[Dennis Gannon]

hi Ian,
i agree that this consistency is critical.  But how much WSRF or
ws-trans/ws-enum must be visible to the application builder?  Perhaps
it is essential that one or the other must be exposed.  i don't know.
perhaps doing so just adds another layer abstraction layer as frank
suggests. but it may also be that we have defined the wrong abstraction
layers to start from.  again, i don't know.

my other point is this: i don't see this as a debate with MS.  i see a
debate right in the core of GGF membership.  from what i can see, MS is a
no-show at this party.

dennis

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Ian Foster wrote:

> Dennis:
>
> I'm not sure that the "we don't need WSRF" is the heart of the debate. If
> it was, then I think things are fairly clear: WSRF is just some conventions
> for the messages that you send to do certain things (e.g.,
> getResourceProperty to get state, Terminate to destroy something, or
> whatever the names are) in a WS context. If you don't have those
> conventions, then everyone ends up defining their own, so that e.g. a job
> management interface might have "getJobStatus" and "destroyJob", a file
> transfer interface might have "getTransferStatus" and "destroyTransfer".
> This lack of consistency just makes life difficult, without providing any
> benefits.
>
> The debate with MS, as I understand it, seems to rather relate to the fact
> that they are promoting a *different* set of conventions for doing similar
> things, e.g., WS-Transfer instead of WS-ResourceProperties.
>
> Ian.
>
>
>
> At 10:23 PM 2/28/2005 -0500, Dennis Gannon wrote:
> >hi Sam,
> >i don't think MS has any orchestrated view on WSRF at all (but i may
> >be wrong.)  I think it is more the case that there are people working on
> >grid standards (outside of microsoft) that feel that what exists in the
> >ws-spec world is sufficient. hence if there is any onus, it is on those
> >folks to show us that this is true.  what tony is saying is that users,
> >i.e. application builders, should not have to deal with these details. The
> >should see clearly defined OGSA services and they should have an easy
> >to understand set of interaction patterns to use these services to build
> >thier applications.  the OGSA point of view is that to be precise in
> >the definition of these behavior patterns requires a framework like wsrf.
> >
> >i actually feel that these things can all coexist.  but from the politics
> >of "what is simple", we seem to live in interesting times.
> >
> >dennis
> >
> >On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Samuel Meder wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2005-02-28 at 14:38 -0800, Frank Siebenlist wrote:
> > > > Could anyone summarize MS' WS-view, and how it differs from WSRF?
> > >
> > > So far I have not seen any substantial difference between the two
> > > approaches and I definitely believe the onus is on MS to show why people
> > > should adopt their proprietary specifications vs. adopting something
> > > that is being developed in a open standards body, is getting very close
> > > to a 1.0 version and has multiple implementations behind it.
> > >
> > > /Sam
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Thanks, Frank.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hiro Kishimoto wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >Hi all,
> > > > >
> > > > >Absorbing article by Tony Hey.
> > > > >
> > > > >http://news.tgc.com/nview.jsp?appid=360&print=1#342708
> > > > >----
> > > > >Hiro Kishimoto
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>                                GRIDtoday
> > > > >>             NEWS AND INFORMATION FOR THE GLOBAL GRID COMMUNITY
> > > > >>                    --- February 28, 2005: Vol. 4, No. 8 ---
> > > > >>           ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > > >>SPECIAL FEATURES
> > > > >>==============================================================
> > > > >>
> > > > >>[ ] M342708 ) WSRF? WS-*? Where is GGF's OGSA Headed?
> > > > >>              By Tony Hey, Contributing Editor
> > > > >>
> > > > >>  Tony Hey, director of e-Science for the Engineering and Physical
> > > > >>Science Research Council, continues to elaborate the need for open
> > > > >>standards in the realm of Web services-based Grid computing. He
> > > > >>discusses the great debate of WSRF vs. WS-*, and lays out what the
> > > GGF
> > > > >>must do with OGSA in order to give e-Science application developers
> > > > >>something to rally around.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > --
> > > Sam Meder <meder at mcs.anl.gov>
> > > The Globus Alliance - University of Chicago
> > > 630-252-1752
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> Ian Foster                    www.mcs.anl.gov/~foster
> Math & Computer Science Div.  Dept of Computer Science
> Argonne National Laboratory   The University of Chicago
> Argonne, IL 60439, U.S.A.     Chicago, IL 60637, U.S.A.
> Tel: 630 252 4619             Fax: 630 252 1997
>          Globus Alliance, www.globus.org
>