[Pgi-wg] Gridiron, or standardization gone backwards

[Morris Riedel]

Dear Oxana, 

  thanks for your summary.


(1)
In fact, I can deeply understand your sadness of what the path for PGI - initially was - and now finally became.



(2)
Nevertheless, PGI was created with participation of a small community (only EU) but since then it was a constant struggle in process because of numerous reasons that I don't want to list all.

Examples include that we at least doubled the initial three involved technologies to six and beyond that are currently involved in PGI thus extending to Asia and US. This leads to a huge increase in time required for the agreement processes and discussions, but also significantly increase the impact of PGI.

Another example, is the initial lack of funding leading to best-efforts-only and the proposal process in Europe, then US, that in turn was limiting our time to work with PGI with the necessary enthusiasm.



(3)
But instead of complaining - important is that we agreed at OGF to move back to the use cases process because of numerous reasons!

Like a graph algorithm in a complex graph, it might be sometimes necessary to perform one or more 'back steps' in order to achieve a solution and to find 'the path'.



(4)
More importantly, the first time the very major technology providers of our distributed computing community actually 'sit on the same table' together to produce something useful t o g e t h e r.

I therefore still believe that we can achieve something in PGI, although partly struggling, we managed to get the right players on board to hopefully have a much higher impact of PGI than initially aimed for.



(5)
So, let's don't give up so quickly. 

We already have a much better mutual understanding in PGI as before - let's build on this and keep on working little by little achieving something.


Your co-chair,
Morris

>-- -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>-- Von: pgi-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:pgi-wg-bounces at ogf.org] Im Auftrag von
>-- Oxana Smirnova
>-- Gesendet: Sonntag, 18. Juli 2010 02:39
>-- An: pgi-wg at ogf.org
>-- Betreff: [Pgi-wg] Gridiron, or standardization gone backwards
>-- 
>-- Hi all,
>-- 
>-- I intended to comment on use cases, but feel like commenting on the very
>-- fact of their appearance.
>-- 
>-- When the PGI founders first met in September 2008 (yes, 2008), they produced
>-- a very advanced draft, almost a ready-made specification. The only reason
>-- they could not call it a specification was that they were nobody - that is,
>-- OGF did not know of them.
>-- 
>-- They didn't have to waste time on formalizing use cases and requirements,
>-- because all these were in their heads.
>-- 
>-- In football terms, they played by similar rules, and didn't have to explain
>-- to each other the gory details. They were driven by the desire to produce
>-- common rules of the game for themselves, such that they can play in the same
>-- league.
>-- 
>-- Then OGF kindly adopted the team, but at the cost of putting forward formal
>-- requirements. No forward movement happened since. First step backwards was
>-- to trim the specs to a "strawman". Second step backwards was to drop the
>-- strawman and collect requirements. The third step backwards was to go back
>-- to use cases. I dread to think what will be the next PGI decision? To create
>-- itself?
>-- 
>-- In September 2008 we thought that by December same year we'll have the core
>-- specs. Two years later we are discussing what is the best template for use
>-- cases and which teleconferencing tool to use. This is, well, unbelievable.
>-- 
>-- And Ithink I know the reason.  We try to compare incomparable things.
>-- 
>-- Imagine an international football federation that brings together
>-- association football, American football, rugby, Australian rules football
>-- and all such things. And imagine this federation introducing common rules.
>-- What would this rule be? Right, "the game is played on a large field by two
>-- teams". Is there any practical use of this rule? No, every league will have
>-- to keep own "extensions".
>-- 
>-- Despite often looking brain-damaged, footballers are clever enough not to
>-- invent common football rules. They realize that the term is overloaded, and
>-- they manage to disambiguate it.
>-- 
>-- Grids brought together by PGI are as different as gridiron is different from
>-- soccer. Let's face it. They still can be played on the same pitch - meaning,
>-- they can use same hardware - but attempts to device common
>-- rules/specifications so far lead nowhere. It is as if gridiron guys would be
>-- keeping insisting that soccer has to be played with a ball that doesn't even
>-- look like a ball, and rugby folks would be agreeing, and soccer guys would
>-- be scratching their heads and meekly saying that their use case is actually
>-- to kick it with feet, not carry in armpits.
>-- 
>-- The analogy is probably not exactly accurate, but I am quite frustrated, as
>-- I can see no progress whatsoever. Of the original PGI "creators" only three
>-- are still attending the meetings - Johannes, Aleksandr and myself.
>-- 
>-- Any suggestions are welcomed.
>-- 
>-- Cheers,
>-- Oxana
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3550 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/pgi-wg/attachments/20100720/7154bc94/attachment.bin