======================================================================
ACS F2F DAY2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date and Time: May 24 8:00-17:00 EDT 2005
Location: Northrop Grumman, Washington, D.C.
Participants:
  Keisuke Fukui (Fujitsu)
  Peter Ziu (Northrop)
  Thomas Studwell (IBM)
  Michael Behrens (R2AD)
  Sachiko Wada (ASCADE) - minutes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8:00 NAREGI integration
Guests: 
  Hitohide Usami (NII)
  Motohiro Yamada (Fujitsu)
  Shigeo Kawata (Utsunomiya Univ.)
Material:
  NAREGI PSE (NAREGI) 
  [https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/acs-wg/document/NAREGI_PSE/en/1]
Conclusion:
  In current NAREGI architecture:
  - Source files and binary files are stored in separate repositories.
  - Deployment is done statically prior to execution phase.
  - Relationship information among the archives are maintained outside of 
    the ACS repository. The structure is simply flat.
  - Relationship information is just for deployment and not for execution 
    time.
  The NAREGI use case is one of the simple case of using ACS and is very good 
  input for ACS requirements. We agreed to continue collaborating with NAREGI 
  PSE team and exchange information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
9:40 agenda bashing & re-scheduling timetable
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10:10 Interface between ACS and CDDLM
Material: 
  CDDLM overview (Sachiko) 
  [https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/acs-wg/document/CDDLM_overview/en/2]
Conclusion:
  "AddFile" method in the deployment API is a push to the system interface.
  When ACS repository work with CDDLM services, it is expected that the 
  contents would be pulled from the ACS repository since they are already 
  stored inside of the grid domain. We will make the a sequence diagram to 
  continue further discussion.
  We discussed whether the naming of ARI method "Register" is appropriate. 
  One of the opinion is that it should be "Create" since the operation in fact
  creates an archive in a repository. Other than "create", "Add", "Store" are 
  proposed as alternatives. Tom will make a proposal on this (AI-3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11:10 GGF14 session plan 
Conclusion:
 Plan two sessions:
  - #1 Joint session with CDDLM
  - #2 Detailed discussion based on the first session.
 avoiding conflict with(*):
  - CDDLM, CDDLM/WSDM joint session
  - OGSA EMS 
  - JSDL(if possible) 
 required equipment
  - phone connection

(*) After the meeting, OGSA EMS is added as per a request from Hiro of OGSA-WG,
    and JSDL is given a lower priority than CDDLM and EMS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11:45 Other items in issues list 
* WSDM management interface in ACS.
Material: 
  RelatedActivities (p.1-10)(Mike)
  [https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/acs-wg/document/RelatedActivities/en/1]
Conclusion:
 We agreed to create manageability-related section in the draft which says
 like "manageability is provided through MOWS".
 We may specify the ACS specific manageable capabilities in addition to WSDM
 required/optional capabilities. Specific capabilities regarding to the WSDM 
 that are required or defined as an option will be specified in the final 
 draft. 
   - WSDM required
   - WSDM optional
   - ACS required (and WSDM optional)
   - ACS optional (and WSDM optional)

* Updates on OGSA naming activity.
Material: RelatedActivities (p.14-18)(Mike)
  [https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/acs-wg/document/RelatedActivities/en/1]
Conclusion:
  We can use EPRs in the spec, because WS-Naming will be a extension of 
  WS-Addressing (EPR). We can relay on WS-Naming concerning resiliency of the 
  reference. We simply follow the output of the WG and need not to 
  specifically discuss about this inside ACS.

* Specification on the data transport to be used with ACS.
Conclusion:
  We recognized the importance of data transportation but couldn't discuss
  in detail lack of the input. We will continue this discussion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12:40 LUNCH break
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13:45 New use cases (Mike; 1 hour) 
Guest: Mike Fetterman (DISA)
Material: 
  Sample Usecase CM capabilities (Mike F.)
  [https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/acs-wg/document/Sample_Usecase_CM_capabilities/en/1]
Conclusion:
  Mike F. explained his use case, which can be relevant to future ACS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15:20 WG draft writing plan
Material: draft-ggf-acs-spec-20050527 (Keisuke)
  [https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/acs-wg/document/draft-ggf-acs-spec-20050527/en/1]
Conclusion:
  We reviewed and revised the TOC of the initial draft.
  The modified version was uploaded on the ACS project page.
  [/Current Drafts/draft-ggf-acs-spec-20050527]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16:20 Management and/or strategy in the ACS activity. 
Conclusion:
  Schedule for weekly (at least by GGF14) regular teleconference is confirmed:
  - Wed 8:00 pm(EDT)/Thu 9:00 am(JST), every week
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16:30 Wrap up F2F meeting and review of action items. 
Material:  
  Action Items (Keisuke) 
  [https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/acs-wg/document/Action_Items/en/1]
  Issues List at May2005F2F (Keisuke)
  [https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/acs-wg/document/Issues_List_at_May2005F2F/en/1]
Conclusion:
  We reviewed the issues list and established action items.
  The issues list with action items was posted to the ML.
  [30 May 2005, "[acs-wg] Issues List and Action Items from the F2F."]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
17:00 End of DAY2
======================================================================