OGSA Teleconference June 2, 2004 ================================ * Participants Sachiko Wada (Ascade) Jem Treadwell (HP) Ravi Subramaniam (Intel) Latha Srinivasan (HP) Frank Siebenlist (ANL) Andreas Savva (Fujitsu) Takuya Mori (NEC) Fred Maciel (Hitachi) Hiro Kishimoto (Fujitsu) Bill Horn (IBM) Dave Berry (NeSC) Minutes: Andreas Savva Note: This was a 3 hour call. * Early discussion ** May 26 minutes approval - Context section - Minutes say to leave it in as a reminder even though there is no text. - Hiro thought that there was one more proposal to delete it and put in a tracker to revisit later. - Noone recalled it and Andreas thought the consensus was to leave it in. - Fred pointed out that since "Context Services" are on the Marketing picture it would be confusing not to have it in the document. - Agreed to leave the section in, empty. - Agreed that minutes do not need change. - Minutes approved with no change. ** Early discussion - Approval of Secretary change - No objections raised on the list or in this call - Approved. - Jem proposed to add Andreas as Editor to the OGSA document given that he has been doing most of the work to put this version of the document together - Hiro seconded - No objections raised. - (Follow typical approval procedure, i.e, formally finalize when the minutes are approved.) - Contributors discussion - Andreas has received some input. Will draw up a list and post to the list before making the changes. Action: Send Andreas names of people you think should be added to the Contributors list asap. ** OGSA specification - Andreas described the state of draft v17 - EMS text is old - Security section is not reviewed (will review this call) - Ravi's text is not included yet - (Also not sure whether to add the marketing picture or not) - Requirements section needs another minor revision - So far have only been doing section reviews. The document also needs a good overall review. - Frank agreed to doing a revision of the Security section by early Thursday - Andreas will try to contact Andrew to see when a new EMS version can be expected. - Document review schedule - Agreement that it is not ready to send to the Editor before GGF11 - Fred suggested the approach to be taken by CMM-WG - Put up final document before GGF and give people a few weeks to comment - Revise based on comments (and more thorough review by the group) - Submit to the Editor - Jem volunteered to review the version to be submitted before GGF. - Anybody else can also do so in parallel - Send comments to Andreas who will merge and upload by Sunday ** Glossary - Planning to submit Glossary for GGF11 - Hiro to add it on the agenda for discussion - Agreed to leave color scheme to shows maturity of definitions - Frank is down for supplying some terms - Pointed to an existing security glossary in GGF * GGF11 update - Will have a line/speaker phone in each session - Jem suggested adding SOAP (version, encoding) discussion to the agenda - Agreed to add Infrastructure services in one of the design team sessions. Two possibilities - Session #3 (security) has only one topic. - Frank needs the whole 90 minutes. He is arranging enough topics to use the entire session (discussion on X509, OTP etc). - Session #4 - Jem may not be able to make that session. To ask Steve Loughran if he can attend instead. * Security section review - Frank to use Takuya's and Nataraj Nagaratnam comments (not reproduced here) for next version - Frank to add some statement that this section is not aimed to replace OGSA-Security work but to complement it. - There is already a statement to that effect in the document already. (Maybe restate.) - Fig.2. is an example; state it explicitly 'Example Input..." - WS-Trust is referred. What is its status? - Will reword as example - Frank to add one more picture - Rewrite for clarity the following statement: "Note that in the picture ... stubs, and outside and transparent..." - Properties section - Some confusion over what should go here. - Data section gives a good example of how to write it - Not requirements but how to address aspects of requirements that do not (cannot) appear under the functional capabilities. - Performance/Availability via replication was raised as one example - Frank to rethink and try to do a draft - Least Privilege Delegation - This might be a property - The example described here is top-down - Some discussion on whether the decision always comes down to the resource or whether some 'central' server is assumed - (The better intermediate layers understand the authorization document the better.) - Not clear if it is a requirement that every service has to be able to understand what is being delegated to them - (A side discussion also raised the issue of whether a job submission language should be extended with authorization or whether it should be defined in such a way to allow existing authorization languages to be plugged in) - Frank also will add a note for WSRF link: How to associate VO context with an interaction. - There is no Example Scenarios section. - The contents of Interactions with OGSA (e.g., Least Privilege Delegation) seem more like example scenarios. Not sure if it is worth re-writing. - Takuya volunteered to write 1-2 paragraphs together with a figure to describe the Digital Library use case. - Fig. 6: Change the title to "Secure logging in a distributed environment" - Final section needs some rewording so as not to end on a "it's a hard problem" note * Ravi's framework document - Aim is to provide an overall view and set the context - Review focused on Ravi's use of terminology - Fig 1. - Virtualization - Do we need to discuss it in OGSA? - Also this maybe the only place in the document that this term appears. If included then it must be explained later - Arrows from the bottom of the figure towards the top - Trying to depict that everything comes together to deliver QoS to the 'user' of the system - It's not clear that they convey this meaning is clearly; delete or redo. - Minor issue with coloring - Lighter/or less use of color is better - "OGSA purview" - Why does it include Infrastructure? - Might be better to limit 'purview' to middle layer to make it easier on the reader (more consistent with the rest of the document) - Some discussion on meaning of 'purview' and whether it should be changed - Agreed to reduce brackets to just middle layer (exclude Infrastructure) And Change Purview to 'Focus' - Middle layer (left hand side) says 'Infrastructure services' - In OGSA document Infrastructure services now refers to WSRF, WS-N etc. The things that OGSA assumes. - Ravi is calling these 'Grid fabric' instead - Fred emphasized the need for consisten usage of terminology. He has had to re-do terminology in the CMM document to make sure it is consistent with the OGSA document. - Agreed to change the terminology including the figure to fit with current OGSA document terminology - Agreed to re-visit the terminology post-GGF11 - Keep Ravi's first draft as input (e.g., upload to a tracker) - Fred's proposal: "Set of services that are not directly used by the user" - Fig 2: - Change "Grid fabric" to "Infrastructure services" - What is "Plumbing?" - What is needed (enabling functionality), not just hardware. - Need some more explanation to make this clearer. - 'flow of control and logic' or rather 'that enables the flow' - Side discussion on a virtualization of resource as a resource and that aspects of plumbing are virtualized as resources in order to use them. - Leading to a revisit the bottom of Fig. 1 - Fig 1 - Bottom part is virtualization of entities. The names used are the same as the entity that is virtualized. - So the 'plumbing' is actually at a lower level and is not visible in this figure. - Some concerns raised that a lot of concepts are not explictly described and sometimes are not consistent with the rest of the document (e.g., plumbing) - Problem of how to fit this with the rest of the document and make it consistent. - Fred's proposal: simplify terminology (e.g., plumbing, virtualization etc) espl terms not used in rest of the OGSA document - Agreed to revise this draft to make it less controversial: - Change plumbing to physical environment - Make connection/difference between Fig.1, 2 clearer - "OGSA is not a software architecture..." - This is somewhat misleading; rewrite - The next statements are stated very strongly in the negative. Consider re-phrasing. Action: Ravi to make another revision as soon as possible. * Common Resource Model - Unfortunately Jay could not make the call. - Fred has already commented on the list. - Agreed that we need to deal with models. Not sure if there is agreement with the approach sometimes mentioned (i.e., single unified model) - CMM document sections: 4 & 6 are relevant to this discussion. Consider reviewing. - Allocate some time to discuss this topic in one of the design teams (e.g. cross session with WSDM, or Utility Computing) and reach agreement on way to move forward - Not so much a technical problem but a social problem - Unfortunately Jay will not be attending GGF11 - Will arrange to have line for people to call in - Need to get some clarification from Jay in advance just in case - Proposal to also mention this problem and that it will be discussed in one of the earlier OGSA sessions - Fred volunteered to mention in one of the sessions (ARCH #1)