GRAAP session #1 ---------------- Thursday, 9-10:30am, Willow Topic: progress since OGF 19, 3rd public comment period, status of the WS-Agreement specification OGF IPR presented. For details, please see the slides at GridForge. Public comment -------------- * 23 issues (9 editorial, 5 WSDL/XML related, 9 to be discussed) * Finalisation of the specification soon after OGF 20. * Final call to GRAAP planned for first week of February. * All issues presented (see slides), statements for clarification given. No discussion on the sensibility of decisions made. * Q [Omer]: What has to be done? - A: Finalise specification -> final call to the group (will include discussion on WS-Agreement faults; one week period) -> editor pipeline -> review by ADs -> GFSG has to react within 15 days * Discussion on faults: + Spec. version in public comment has no WS-Agreement specific faults in there. + No comments on that during the period, problem has been raised shortly after. + [Stephen] Only minor changes to the specification, a new discussion on faults may omply another public comment. + [Ramin] Suggestion: Inserting section referring to a next version of WS-Agreement. -> Agreed by Wolfgang. + Q: [Stephen] Sure, that there was no reference to faults in the spec. in the last public comment? If so, an addition would be ok. - A: This has to be checked. + [Oliver] Agreement factory may create specific faults, that should be handled, e.g. SLA creation constraints are not met. Suggestion: Add a general WS-Agreement fault to the spec. to make it consistent (very simple), and do a more sophisticated fault discussion later. + [Stephen] Add WS-Agreement fault as "placeholder" to the spec. to make it consistent. Issues has been raised targetting the public comment (although a bit late, which shouldn't matter). -> Agreement by the group to do so. * [Ramin] OGF will provide a place where schemata can be accessed directly using the namespace URL. A stable WS-Agreement schema should go there. * [Ramin] Use latest OGF document draft. [Action, Wolfgang] Contact Jim wrt to finalisation of comments. [Action, Oliver] WS-Agreement base fault. [Action, Wolfgang] Final call. Implementation and interoperability issues ------------------------------------------- * Gather information on existing implementations as part of the use case document. Mature implementations may go into a software repository. * Known candidates + VIOLA MSS + CATNETS + CCS * Potential candidates + SORMA + BREIN + BeinGrid + CoreGRID + University of Georgia + Phospherus + University of Liverpool * GSA-RG interoperation will use WS-Agreement * Comment from Stephen about the web page: not enough and outdated content. -> Link from front page to Wiki with the following topics + Implementations + Use cases + Projects + Events + Publications + Related work wrt to SLAs * Use case document (template on GridForge). Input from: + VIOLA MSS + CATNETS * Interoperability + Create a profile. Terms based on JSDL. + Q [Oliver]: Level of interop.? What are the requirements? - A [Ramin]: Two independent implementations needed plus a document describing the interop. experiments. + [Oliver] Interop. test on protocol level. Same version of WSRF is needed. + [Omer] Template created by one implementation and filled in by another implementation. Could be done for OGF 20. [Oliver] Does not agree that this can be easily done using VIOLA MSS due to the implementation status. [Omer] Set up a telecon between Cardiff and Fraunhofer SCAI to discuss the interoperability (including scenario, versions, etc.). This should result in a document describing the interop. scenario. + [Wolfgang] Suggestion: Write interop. scenario and ask the AD/GFSG whether the realisation of this scenario is sufficient for tetsing interop. + [Ramin] Interop. should not be too simple, no toy implementation. Easier to realise if you have implementations in the same domain. [Action, Philipp] Check GridForge software repository capabilities [Action, all] Input to use case doc until end of Feb. [Action, Cardiff/Fraunhofer SCAI] Telecon to discuss interop. GRAAP session #2 ---------------- Thursday, 11-12:30am, Willow Topic: Continuation of discussion of preparation of the interoperability scenario document OGF IPR presented. Scenario document has to be an informational one that undergoes public comment period First telco on the document Friday February 16, 15:30 - results to be published to the GRAAP list State of the CREMONA implementation to be ckecked by Jean Pierre Prost Industrial use-case from the reliability and robustness workshop How industry uses penaltiy clauses Negotiation part of WS-Agreement? Negotiation profiles seem to be a solution (QoS BoF this afternoon) Omer to participate Are there use-cases from this group? Omer to report later. Discuss scenario document with HPC profile group Potential to include one profile with WS-Agreement + JSDL TerraGrid use cases for negotiation, e.g. co-allocation, offer+counteroffer Projects using/considering WS-Agreement we are aware of: - VIOLA MSS - CATNETS - University of Munich (Tianchao) - University of Georgia (semantic issues with SLAs) - CREMONA (state?) - CSS Resource Management System/Scheduler (planned) - PHOSPHORUS (planned) - SORMA (planned) - G-Lambda (probably, under consideration) GRAAP session #3 ---------------- Thursday, 14-15:30am, Willow This session was cancelled.