[Pgi-wg] [EGI Technical Forum 2010] Abstract 74: Standardization of Distributed Data Processing - Useful Standards and Interfaces

[Etienne URBAH]

Steven,

Concerning Abstract 74 for my poster proposed at the EGI Technical Forum 
2010 :

After logging in INDICO, I can read the content of my abstract, but the 
'modify' button in NOT active (both on IE and Firefox).

Therefore, I am providing the abstract in literary English below.


    This poster presents two UML diagrams concerning standards which may 
be useful for grid computing middleware, and interfaces which should be 
taken into account for proper design of grid middleware permitting 
operation in production.  Selection and then widespread adoption of 
adequate standards would permit grid interoperability.

    The web page http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc15990?nav=1 
contains a draft version of a first UML diagram presenting official and 
de facto standards which may be useful for the design of middleware 
permitting remote data processing (cloud computing) and distributed data 
processing (grid computing).  The main point is that the GFD.147 
recommendation of OGF, named GLUE Specification v. 2.0, permits to 
describe grid and cloud entities.  This allows different GLUE compliant 
grids to discover and understand each other, so that this GLUE 
specification should be used as foundation for all other grid and cloud 
standards and recommendations for interoperability.

    The web page http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc15981?nav=1 
contains a draft version of a second UML diagram presenting interfaces 
between Clients, Functionalities and Resources existing in remote data 
processing infrastructures (clouds) and in distributed data processing 
infrastructures (grids).
    This second diagram uses color coding, with grid and cloud 
functionalities and resources in green, interfaces permitting to access 
them in blue.  Besides, official and de facto standards are inside 
square brackets.
    Final Users are scientists, which are interested only in 'payload' 
functionalities, like data, instruments, activities, and jobs, but grids 
and clouds require also 'support' functionalities, in particular 
information publication and discovery, security management, monitoring, 
logging and accounting.  Therefore, interoperability requires to 
standardize all 'client interfaces' shown in blue, at the left.
    Grid and cloud functionalities are not independent of each other, 
but most functionalities require to access resources managed by other 
functionalities, in particular information items, security descriptors, 
logging records and accounting records.
    So, if we do not standardize 'backend' interfaces shown in blue, at 
the right, then different instances implementing the same functionality 
will not be able to correctly access required resources, and 
interoperability will not be achieved.  Therefore, we have to 
standardize also these 'backend' interfaces.  This task is huge, so we 
have assess, for each 'backend' interface, if standardization is really 
needed, and we have to prioritize, with following suggestions :
    Firstly, cloud and grid computing require information publication 
and discovery.  For interoperability, we already have the GLUE 
specification as foundation, and we urgently need GLUE renderings, in 
particular for LDAP, XML, and SQL.  Clients performing queries do not 
need that the information records are really kept in a relational 
database, but that queries may be expressed in a (perhaps limited) SQL 
syntax.
    Secondly, clouds and grids are valuable targets for criminal 
organizations, so that clouds and grids absolutely require high-grade 
security management, and interoperability between grids (an later 
clouds) require a common set of standards.  We should confirm IGTF as 
Trust Anchor and SPG (formerly JSPG) for general security policies.  For 
authentication, we should phase out GSI proxies in favor of 
RFC3820-compliant X509 proxies as soon as possible.  For authorization, 
VOMS extensions of X509 proxies work correctly, but SAML assertions 
issued for example by VOMS servers also permit restrictions of 
authorization, and perhaps easier delegation.
    Thirdly, security audit absolutely requires log records for jobs and 
other activities which clients can submit.  Interoperability between 
grids require that the format of the log records is standardized.  We 
have no published standard yet, and we urgently need one.  The JSDL 
working group of OGF is working on such a standard named 'Activity 
Instance Document Schema'.  We should quickly assess if the draft 
available at http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc15395?nav=1 is 
appropriate.  If yes, we should help the JSDL working group finalize it 
as an OGF recommendation, and implement it.
    Fourthly, accounting will become more and more important, as grid 
computing evolves from a research topic to a valuable commodity like 
cloud computing.  The GFD.98 recommendation of OGF, named 'Usage Record 
- Format Recommendation', is already published.  We should assess if 
this recommendation is appropriate, and if necessary, improve it, then 
implement it.
    By contrast, job management is used by very few other 
functionalities.  As long as the four functionalities mentioned above 
are correctly implemented according to common standards, interoperation 
of job management between different clouds and grids could then be 
quickly achieved using bridges implementing an adequate adapter for each 
job management idiom, though perhaps with reduced scalability compared 
to full interoperability using the GDF.108 recommendation named 'OGSA® 
Basic Execution Service Version 1.0'.


Now that I have finished, I thank Steven very much :  This makes a good 
start for an academic paper.

Best regards.

-----------------------------------------------------
Etienne URBAH         LAL, Univ Paris-Sud, IN2P3/CNRS
                       Bat 200   91898 ORSAY    France
Tel: +33 1 64 46 84 87      Skype: etienne.urbah
Mob: +33 6 22 30 53 27      mailto:urbah at lal.in2p3.fr
-----------------------------------------------------


On Thu, 05/08/2010 15:42, Steven Newhouse wrote:
> Dear Etienne,
>
> We would like to accept your poster but feel the abstract needs to be
> revised to better reflect the proposed content. Can you please submit a
> better abstract - one where the text is easier to read rather than a
> series of bullet points - immediately.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steven

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5073 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/pgi-wg/attachments/20100805/ca90f557/attachment-0001.bin