[RUS-WG] [UR-WG] OGF20 Session recommendations

[Gilbert Netzer]

Hi Rosario, hi Xiaoyu and Everyone,

I am chopping up this email into smaller bits and pieces to allow for an 
easier discussion about different subjects, I hope you don't mind.

Rosario Michael Piro wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Xiaoyu Chen wrote:
>> Hello, Gilbert and Everyone,
>>  
>>
>>           There are some comments and recommendations to OGF 20 sessions
>>  
>>           For Resource Usage Service OGF20 Session:
>>           1). Agenda 
>>               It would be considerable to have a short discussion on fault handling and access control or Configuration as well.
> 
> I don't know if I would use our precious time for that, since these 
> issues are implementation-dependent and not directly related to the 
> interface (your implementation can handle access control however it 
> wants, the same for configuration, etc.). We should focus here only on 
> the interface to the service, bnot how the service is implemented.
> That doesn't that it isn't interesting how different tools or developers 
> handle these things, but that is just a matter of exchange of 
> experiences, not the definition of the interface. I would say we can 
> talk about that if we have some "spare time" left at the end of the 
> session, but I doubt there will be.
> ... Cutted here

 From my point of view, what is in scope for the interface specification is 
the following:
- For fault handling:
   1. How do we report back faults so in our case how should the XML look 
like and what type of faults do we have (e.g. ProcessingFault, 
PermissionDenied etc.)
   2. How do we handle partial faults, that is in what state should the RUS 
be after a partial fault.

- Access Control:
   I guess we have to decide on how implementation dependent we have it. I 
would suggest, inline with Rosario that authorization is completely in the 
hands of the implementation. However I think that we need to specify what 
authentication we need so that we can keep a audit record.
   I think we still need to reach some consensus about what should be 
written in the specification.

- Configuration:
   I guess that Xiayou was refering to the "Cofiguration" operations 
section, that currently only contains the listMandatoryUsageRecordElements 
(certainly misspelled!) operation. I think that this method is currently 
implemented a little bit odd, my guess is that it slipped through, and it 
would be nice talk about fixing that.

To sum up I can see issues in all of this points that we at least should 
talk and specify, but as Rosario pointed out we will have to see if we have 
time, however it could be worth putting it up in the open in case we have 
time left.

Best Regards
Gilbert