INFOD Pending Actions ==================== 10 Update R-GMA scenario with operations as per Chicago F2F June 05 - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Steve F - Target date: This cannot be performed until a later INFOD spec supports the POBOX 29 Write up consumer service requirement - is this addressed by POBOX? - Date: 21 Jul 2005 - Owner: Steve F. - Target date: 31 Define late binding and determine where late binding is supported Expanding recipient list from logical EPR? Late binding refers to delaying the resolution of logical EPR to physical EPR. That operation has been moved to the advanced infod specs document. FYI: workaround for based infod specs is to support a list of physical EPRs. Similar to existing WSN support. - Date: 21 Jul 2005 - Owner: Shailendra, Cecile - Target date: 43 Describe the two approaches: (1) Re-pacakaging a message at each hop in a new header (2) Removing the header and adding a new appropriate message header after transformation The following should be incorporated by Cecile into the spec which is currently locked. Since the get data call returns just the body of the message. In my understanding we need another call: getMsgInfo,+which will return an opaque message metadata back to the client. The client can call getAttribute on this opaque data to get the necessary info. Similiarly the publish call needs to take this opaque data as an Argument which can be populated through setAttribute call. The getAttribute, setAttribute operate on a descriptor and one of the ways we populate them is as under: SetAttribute(MsgDesc, MsgPropertyNm, MsgPropertyVal); GetAttribute(MsgDesc, MsgPropertyNm, MsgPropertyVal); Cecile is not happy with this yet End-users who want to implement non-repudiation checks need to be able to access the manifest section of the message, at Consume time. So this is a consumer operation. Issues like authorization to view the manifest, maybe decoding/ decrypting need to be considered. For now though, we give the raw message to the Consume operation, as described in 3.9.1 of the specs (v12). So delay the delivery of these new operations to the 'advanced infod specs', which will also include the getData operation, so will address both getting (pulling) data and getting (pulling) metadata. - Date 3 Oct 2005 - Owner: Shailendra, Cecile - Target: 48 Define sequence number,operationalCharacteristics more clearly The following should be incorporated by Cecile into the spec which is currently locked: Sequence no is used to group messages based on message/selector attributes. The publish and getData api needs to enhanced substantialy to handle grouped messages. Here is an example: Consider a set of messages which need to be Grouped together: We call begin_group() which establishes the group context. Now call publish() once for each message in the group. Call end_group(). The Api?s implicitly associate sequence no. for each message in the group. Now on the get side: Call get_first_group() which establishes the message group context. Call get first message using the group context. Now call get_next message until all messages in a group are exhausted. Now call get_next_group and so on. This allows a user to manipulate a group of messages. Then it will be DONE Something we need to spec as this is a differentiator from base notifications, however doesn't belong in base infod specs (grouping messages' concept). So needs a place-holder to describe in the 'advanced INFOD specs'. - Date 3 Oct 2005 - Owner: Shailendra, Cecile - Target: 50 Explain the need for incorporating information in the INFOD messages to deal with the integration of SOAP and asynchronous messaging On successful call to consume operation, a message is transferred to the consumer. As the services supporting the INFOD protocol do not need to know the details of the message structure the message need not be necessarily type checked at the web services (soap transport layer). There for a message may be wrapped inside a soap message as a binary object. As messages are binary objects, introduction of new message formats does not require services to be dynamically rebinding for runtime type checking. Binary format also provides the messages to have a different encryption key then the messages. Therefore there exists a canonical mapping between SOAP messages and INFOD messages. - Date 3 Oct 2005 - Owner: Shailendra and Vijay - Target: 61 Produce proposal for managing groups and transactions - Date: 3 Nov 2005 - Owner: Dieter - Target: Proposal has been produced but need to do something about it! 62 Consider how to do alter - Date: 13 Mar 2006 108 Define "plugin" interface - i.e. we don't use plugin but WS - Date: 12 Feb 2006 129 Find how to deal with nested vocabularies in XML - Date: 17 May 2006 - Owner: Susan - Target: 140 How do we deal with "delta messages"? - Date: 17 May 2006 141 How do we do the full getMetadata ? - Date: 17 May 2006 142 Distributed registries - Date: 17 May 2006 147 Alternative way of defining property constraints - Date: 1 Jun 2006 154 Which (if any) components support transformations? Are they supported by consumptions? consumption  has different use-cases: replication, fan-out with same subscription and different consumer transforms, different channel options for a given consumer, (followup at http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/infod-wg/2005/06/msg00017.html ) - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Shailendra and Dieter - Target date: 155 How do we deal with retention periods? Separation of data retention from data publishing - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Dieter - Target date: 156 How do the propagation interface(s) differ from the consume interfaces and what is stored in the registry? - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Shailendra, Cecile - Target date: 157 Should we be looking at other rule specifications and consolidate/align with them? E.g. This applies to transform definitions. Specs need to document approach taken. Also we are oriented towards putting things in multiple queues right now. But the consumer may not want to be able to see those queues, especially cross-VO. So we need a mechanism for replaying past events without the producer understanding the ID structure of the consumer. The consumer just wants to get the information; it shouldn't have to know what the underlying structure was. - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Shailendra - Target date: 158 Should we add a workflow Use Case - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owner: Dieter - target date: 159 Can INFOD implement R-GMA semantics? - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owners: Steve F - target date: Not yet because of lack of POBOX 160 What's special about INFOD disseminators? * Retention of information * Querying information * Auditing and tracking - Date: 1 Jul 2005 - Owners: Abdeslem - Target date: