[tsc] Technical Strategy Document

[Maguire_Tom at emc.com]

Page 3 (characteristics and goals) Infrastructure Virtualization
	It may be a characteristic of Grids (but not a necessary one).  I
don't think it is a goal either (at least w.r.t. Infrastructure).  I would
remove that one.  Further virtualization work is not being done
(infrastructure-wise) in OGF, storage, network and server virtualization are
all be defined, spec'd and implemented elsewhere.

Page 3 insertion in Collaboration grid 
	"and should no be" s/b "and should not be"

Page 5 2nd para below Fig 1
	"These three parts the requirements"  described was deleted.... s/b
describe?

Page 8 Capabilities table - lots of bookmark errors...

I like the addition of Maturity to Table 3.  For me it draws into focus the
areas that we need to agree upon and areas that need work.  I assume that
some in OGF would disagree with some of the characterizations of Maturity
for some of the capabilities.  Further, I assume that even though there is a
broad maturity associated with the capability there may be functional gaps
in the WG charter or specs referenced.  For instance, one could argue that
the liberty alliance federated identity handles the Multiple Security
infrastructures capability.  In fact, I think the heart of the issue we need
to wrestle to the ground is that "better is the enemy of good enough".  When
can we just adopt commercially available techniques and implementations vs
when must we define and build from scratch?  This undercurrent has been
running through GGF/OGF since I have been a participant.  We need to use
this document as vehicle to get those arguments on the table.  To that end,
how would someone disagree, how do we empower that discussion and what
artifacts do we need to capture from the outcomes....



Tom

_______________________________________________
Tom Maguire
+1(845) 729-4806


-----Original Message-----
From: tsc-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:tsc-bounces at ogf.org] On Behalf Of David
Snelling
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2007 11:48 AM
To: GFSG GFSG; TSC
Subject: [tsc] Technical Strategy Document

Folks,

This is now (I believe) ready for Public Comment. I have done as much  
as possible with the time and effort available (mine and other's).  
The process we agreed to at the F2F is as follows:

1) Between now and next Friday, this document is in "WG Last Call",  
with the combined forces of the GFSG and the TSC acting as the WG.

2) Please for minor changes send text-only based suggestions in an  
email to me, but the document should be pretty clean now.

3) Major suggestions for future work should be emailed to me for  
inclusion in the trackers for later versions.

3) Major objections at your peril.

This version is changed tracked, except for the tables 1 and 3, which  
are all new.

Enjoy.

-- 

Take care:

     Dr. David Snelling < David . Snelling . UK . Fujitsu . com >
     Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe
     Hayes Park Central
     Hayes End Road
     Hayes, Middlesex  UB4 8FE

     +44-208-606-4649 (Office)
     +44-208-606-4539 (Fax)
     +44-7768-807526  (Mobile)


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3654 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/tsc/attachments/20070119/b29db27a/attachment.bin