[scrm-pvt] Revised WG charter
Hiro Kishimoto
hiro.kishimoto at jp.fujitsu.com
Wed Jun 8 02:50:30 CDT 2005
Thanks Bert and Dave,
Since all of your comments make sense to me, I've added them to
the draft charter and 7 Questions & answers.
Please have a look.
----
Hiro Kishimoto
----
Hiro Kishimoto
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Sidor [mailto:djsidor at nortel.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 12:55 PM
> To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
> Cc: Hiro Kishimoto; scrm-private at ggf.org
> Subject: Re: [scrm-pvt] Revised WG charter [was: Revised press release draft
> and charter document draft]
>
> Bert et al,
>
> I can agree with most of Bert's proposals but suggest an alternative for
> his first proposal. Instead I propose to revise the first paragraph to
> be consistent with the press release's first paragraph. Possible
> revision involves the removal of the SDO names from the first paragraph
> and the addition of a new second paragraph with the SDO names taken from
> the press release:
>
> "Several major Standards Development Organizations (SDOs) have been
> carrying on a dialogue for about one year to try to improve overall
> collaboration on next generation standards for web service based
> management of networked and individual resources. As a result of this
> discussion these SDOs have motivated the formation of a
> cross-institutional technical working group which will produce
> informational document with the primary objective of converging common
> terminology and organizing and summarizing the interplay of the various
> technology and specifications, an a taxonomy. This activity is called
> "Standards development organizations Collaboration on networked
> Resources Management" or SCRM (can be pronounced scrum).
>
> Organizations expected to participate in this round-table style
> collaboration include: the Distributed Management Task Force (DMTF), the
> Global Grid Forum (GGF), the Organization for the Advancement of
> Structured Information Standards (OASIS), the Storage Networking
> Industry Association (SNIA), the Tele Management Forum (TMF), and the
> World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). Other standards development
> organizations such as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and
> the International Telecommunication Union - Telecommunication
> Standardization Sector (ITU-T) have expressed interest in participating
> in this activity."
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" wrote:
> >
> > In the WG charter I see:
> >
> > Focus/Purpose
> > Several major Standards Development Organizations (SDOs),
> > including DMTF, GGF, IETF, ITU-T, OASIS, SNIA, TMF, W3C
> > have been carrying on a dialogue for about one year to
> > try to improve overall collaboration on next generation
> > standards for web service based management of networked
> > and individual resources.
> >
> > WOuld anyone have a problem to change the first few words from
> > Several major Standards...
> > into
> > Several people/individuals from major Standards...
> > I know that some of you speak "for their organization".
> > But I do not, I rather speak as an individual who happens to
> > also be AD for the IETF OPS and Management area.
> > I believe such is true for some others as well.
> >
> > I would also prefer reqording of the last para on page 1:
> > While this WG will be organized within GGF this does not
> > mean GGF will lead the SCRM work. Rather, GGF will just
> > provide the required infrastructure for SCRM-WG. All
> > participating SDOs can equally contribute to and promote
> > the SCRM work. The SCRM-WG is regular public WG in GGF
> > and anyone with relevant technical skills, interest and
> > commitment can participate
> > I would rather see something aka (again acknowledging that some
> > of us do not officially repersent our organisations):
> > While this WG will be organized within GGF this does not
> > mean GGF will lead the SCRM work. Rather, GGF will just
> > provide the required infrastructure for SCRM-WG. All
> > participating (people from) SDOs can equally contribute
> > to and promote the SCRM work. The SCRM-WG is regular
> > public WG in GGF and anyone with relevant technical skills,
> > interest and commitment can participate
> >
> > During teh call, I also suggested (and still believe such would
> > be a good idea) to change:
> > Deliverable 1/Milestone 1: Draft Landscape Document V1.0,
> > October 2005.
> > Deliverable 1/Milestone 2: Landscape Document V1.0 ready for
> > public review, January, 2006.
> > Deliverable 1/Milestone 3: Final Landscape Document V1.0,
> > April, 2006.
> > into something that more explicitly calls out review in each of
> > the organizations that are listed. So how about:
> > Deliverable 1/Milestone 1: Draft Landscape Document V1.0,
> > October 2005.
> > 1a: Review in each organization and
> > collect comments, November 2005
> > Deliverable 1/Milestone 2: Landscape Document V1.0 ready for
> > public review, January, 2006.
> > 2a: In paralelle review in each org
> > and collect comments or OK
> > Deliverable 1/Milestone 3: Final Landscape Document V1.0,
> > April, 2006.
> > If there are still comments from 2a, then a step 3a might be needed
> > to have the final review/ok from each organization.
> >
> > Similar additional steps for 2nd deliverable would be good.
> >
> > I am actually surprised that we do the "glossary" after the landscape
> > document. Seems to me we would do betetr to ensure we use agreed
> > upon terminology in our landscape document, so maybe we should
> > speed up the process of the glossary document.
> >
> > I am very concerned with having "Teleconferences every 2 weeks".
> > I do not find teleconferences very productive. Why cannot the
> > majority of the work be done on a mailing list? I personally have
> > far too many fixed-time weekly or bi-weekly conference calls
> > already. You do state that the primary communication channel is
> > documents and mailing list. So I do not see why there is such
> > a pressure on repetitive conf calls.
> >
> > Bert
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-scrm-private at ggf.org [mailto:owner-scrm-private at ggf.org]On
> > > Behalf Of Hiro Kishimoto
> > > Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 18:21
> > > To: scrm-private at ggf.org
> > > Subject: [scrm-pvt] Revised press release draft and charter document
> > > draft
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Thank you very much for joining today's call.
> > >
> > > The attached is a revised press release draft and charter document
> > > draft, Jay and I write-up based on the discussions we had today.
> > >
> > > We've agreed to do the following two things by this Thursday
> > > (June 9).
> > >
> > > (1) Review these documents and send back suggested changes.
> > > (2) Provide your supporting quote if possible.
> > >
> > > Thanks again,
> > > ----
> > > Hiro Kishimoto
> > >
> > >
> > >
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: GGF SCFRM-WG-Charter-Revision20050608.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 56320 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/scrm-private/attachments/20050608/c3d406d8/attachment.doc
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: SCRM-WG 7QA 20050608.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 43008 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/scrm-private/attachments/20050608/c3d406d8/attachment-0001.doc
More information about the scrm-private
mailing list