[orep-wg] WS-ReplicaCatalog specification

[Steve Crumb]

Peter, All,

Might I also suggest that if this document is application specific (sorry, 
I've not read the document), and submission as a recommendations track 
document is not in order (as Peter implies), that you consider submitting 
this as an Experimental document.  GGF has four types of documents and one 
usage of an Experimental type document is to submit (for broader review by 
the community) a more specific implementation for consideration (and 
abstraction) toward defining a recommendation track document.

Steve

At 10:34 AM 8/5/2005, Peter Kunszt wrote:
>hi rob and ann,
>
>without wanting to sound rude or out of place, please allow me
>to tell you that in my opinion the current scope definition of
>the document and also the introduction is not suitable
>for a GGF standardization document.
>
>it cannot be that a standard is tied to a very specific implementation
>of a very specific product. a standard should be a just the pure interface
>definition with its semantics defined, so that every group that intends to
>implement the standard, can do so in a well-defined way. its scope has
>to be addressing a well-defined set of requirements in a specific manner,
>and it also has to mention explicitly what it does not define, and how it
>relates to other efforts.
>
>currently the document's first few pages read like an introduction to
>a work plan for the 'WSRF-ification' of the globus RLS, not like the intro
>to a GGF standards doc.
>
>just my 2c,
>
>peter
>
>ps. other than this immediate general one, i have also technical comments 
>- coming soon ;-)
>
>
>
>----------
>From: owner-orep-wg at ggf.org [mailto:owner-orep-wg at ggf.org] On Behalf Of 
>Robert Schuler
>Sent: 05 August 2005 02:56
>To: orep-wg at ggf.org
>Cc: annc at isi.edu; Robert Schuler
>Subject: [orep-wg] WS-ReplicaCatalog specification
>
>Hello OREP WG members,
>
>
>
>Ann and I would like to share with you a draft specification for a 
>WS-ReplicaCatalog interface. The intention is to define a WS-RF interface 
>for a Replica Catalog, similar in functionality to existing replica 
>catalogs (e.g., the RLS Local Replica Catalog service). As you know, the 
>earlier OREP specification treated replica information as individual 
>resources and was an extension of the WS-ServiceGroup specification. While 
>that approach lends itself to fine-grain manipulation and inspection of 
>replica location information, it lacks the concept of "bulk" operations 
>that are so important for scalability. It is also more difficult to digest 
>some of its concepts. In this new specification, the interface should be 
>conceptually similar to the interface provided by existing replica catalog 
>services (e.g., RLS LRC, and others). We also expect that this interface 
>will be complementary to the earlier work on the OREP spec, though it does 
>not depend on it in any way.
>
>
>
>If you find time to review it, we certainly would like to hear your 
>thoughts, suggestions, and comments.
>
>
>
>Cheers,
>
>
>
>rob
>
>


Steve Crumb
Executive Director, Global Grid Forum
+1 630-252-8610 (Office)
+1 630-915-3324 (Cell)
scrumb at ggf.org