Meeting minutes GRAAP-WG OGF 20, Manchester, UK May 9, 2007 -------------------- - GRAAP session #1 - -------------------- [NOTE: see presentation '01_graap_sessions.pdf'] Agenda: + State of the spec + Last changes before submission (Toshi Nakata, 20 min) + Implementation * VIOLA Implementation (Oliver Wäldrich, 20 min) * AssessGrid: SLA structure & GT4 implementation issue (Dominic Battre, 20 min) + Discussion of features not considered in WS-Agreement V1.0 Status of the WS-Agreement specification ---------------------------------------- + IPR presented + GFSG discussed the spec yesterday, but since the GFSG was not complete, it was decided to wait anoter week for the final call Latest changes to the spec (Toshi Nakata) ----------------------------------------- [Note: see presentation '02_status_ws-agr_spec.pdf'] + Toshi reported mainly minor bug fixes "VIOLA WS-Agreement implementation" (Oliver Waeldrich) ---------------------------------------------------- [Note: see presentation '03_viola_wsag_implementation.pdf'] + Lessons learned from a first version presented + Status of current implementation presented: follows the latest draft + Implementation available (meta-scheduler and WS-Agreement for Java (WSAG4J)) "AssessGrid: Implementation Experiences with WS-AG" (Dominic Battré) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ [Note: see presentation '04_assessgrid_implementation.pdf'] + Based on Globus + Details on SLOs and guarantee terms presented on request + Implementation tries to be as close to the WS-Agreement spec as possible Discussion on features not considered in WS-Agreement 1.0 --------------------------------------------------------- [Note: Please also refer to slide 6 of the presentation '01_graap_sessions.pdf'. Wolfgang collected the issues online during the discussion.] + Toshi: Common set of service description terms (considered JSDL, but does not fulfil all requirements) * Covers things like CPU, memory, etc. * Things like "response time" etc. are not covered * Question: what kinds of terms do people need? -> Omer: This is very domain-specific and you will always have people who miss stuff. * Ariel: GSA-RG work could be used [Note Philipp: i.e. work on JSDL profiling for scheduling and a language to describe scheduling terms for the GSA-RG interop. use case], should be investigated, continue discussion at GSA_RG session (Wed. 9, 6pm, Exchange 2/3) + Define application domains for SLAs, use cases * Omer: use case from markets * Oliver: scheduling & RMS use case * To be ready before OGF 21 + Proposal (Dominic): Share WS-Agreement templates (repository) + Paul Strong (co-chair of reference model) defining terms for OGSA + Creation constraints, evaluation of XPATH expressions when using SOAP messages + Monitoring: how to verify SLAs? Not a topic to be resolved in GRAAP, but could provide hints -> Wolfgang: First two issues are the most urgent currently -------------------- - GRAAP session #2 - -------------------- [NOTE: see presentation '01_graap_sessions.pdf'] Agenda + Implementation/Interoperability discussion * Hosting environment issues (recommendation?) * Interoperability activities started + Scenarios/use cases for dynamic SLAs and negotiation Hosting environment ------------------- + Most crucial: WSRF, WS-Adressing + Oliver: Problems: Globus implements draft version of WSRF-RP/BaseFaults, also WS-Adressing + Dominic: Namespace problem; structural problem + Philipp: Gobus roadmap? -> Dominic: On the roadmap, but no times given. -> Contact Globus Alliance Interoperability activities --------------------------- [NOTE: please refer to http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dd2wwjk8_0d7b58b (shared Google document). Edited online during the session.] + Question [Wolfgang]: Suggestions by the GFSG wrt to interop? -> [Ramin] No. Up to the group. + Contact to ETSI, maybe a possibility to do this interop. test in a more formal way. + Document for the GFSG needed describing interop. scenario and what is validate. Ready by OGF 21. + Negotiation discussion started [see slide 8 and 9 of '01_graap_sessions.pdf'] Scenarios/use cases for dynamic SLAs and negotiation ---------------------------------------------------- [NOTE: Please refer to slide 10 of '01_graap_sessions.pdf'] -------------------- - GRAAP session #3 - -------------------- Agenda: + Performance comparison between a 3 phases and a 2 phases negotiation protocol (Antoine Pichot, 20 min, see '05_protocol_comparison.pdf') + AssessGrid Negotiation Scenarios in AssessGrid and implications for negotiation procedures (Dominic Battre, 20 min, see '06_assessgrid_neg_scenarios.pdf') + Implementing negotiation protocols in Ontogrid (Shamima Paurobally, 20 min, see '07_ontogrid_negotiation.pdf') * Switch to WS-Agreement evaluated. Interested only in the vocabulary, not protocol. [NOTE: Wolfgang took notes during the session, please refer to '01_graap_sessions.pdf', slide 12 and 13. for the presentations and slide 14 and slide 15 for more on implementations and the interop discussion]