[ur-wg] Mailing List Discussions: Comment #3c

[Sven van den Berghe]

I think that the area covered by the user identification requires  
some more
thought. A UR needs to allow the recording of (at least?) two  
different things:

1) Who has paid/will pay for the resources consumed

2) Under whose authority the job was run

These may not be the same entity. The fields could be complex e.g.
    user -> project -> VO
or but may also need to represent a chain of delegation
or local account used
or ...

How much is needed in a UR? How much should be delegated to delegated to
the original authorities for this information?


On 4 May 2006, at 22:17, Donal K. Fellows wrote:

> Laura F McGinnis wrote:
>>>     3c)     Section 3.18: ProjectName fits well in Grid projects  
>>> like LHC and EGEE, but not in terms of virtual organisations  
>>> which form a natural grouping. We recommend an additional field  
>>> called "VirtualOrganisation" or "VO".
>>>
>>> Evaluation: Defer discussion to mailing list
>
> My main objection to a VirtualOrganization name field is figuring out
> how to make that have even the slightest chance of being  
> interoperable.
> Should it be a string (if so, what is in the string), a URL  
> (pointing to
> what), a complex type (containing what) or ...?
>
> Donal.
>

Sven

Sven.vandenBerghe at uk.fujitsu.com
Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe
+44 208 606 4651