OGSA Teleconference - 20 October 2004
=====================================

* Participants

  Jem Treadwell (HP)
  Latha Srinivasan (HP)
  Andreas Savva (Fujitsu)
  Mark Morgan (UVa)  
  Hiro Kishimoto (Fujitsu) 
  Bill Horn (IBM) 
  Abdeslem Djaoui (RL)
  Michael Behrens (R2AD, LLC)

  Minutes: Andreas Savva

* Oct 13 minutes approved no changes 

* F2F update

  - Hiro to contact Jay for more detailed information (venue, etc).

* OGSA UC update

  - Jeffrin updated UC document and passed it to Jem.
  - Jem is moving the document to the current GGF template; to finish
    it within the next day and pass it to Hiro.

* Glossary v1 comments review

  [Continue review of comments from last week.]

  - Resource:
    - singular/plural comment: agreed; fix.
    - See no problem with terms being defined using other terms (as
      long as there is no recursion.)
    - A more general comment raised elsewhere is that the definition
      should be against the simpler term rather than the more
      complicated one: Agreed and will fix as far as possible.

  - Resource deployment: Following previous conclusion the generic
    definition should be against deployment; more specific one if
    necessary against this one.
    - A number of other issues were discussed:
      - Is it a good idea to define deployment in terms of 'installing
        data, binaries' to 'resource'? Is the term used in any other
        way?
      - Should the glossary make the distinction between
        resource/service.
    - Also should consider Andrea's more general comment on the
      definition of 'manageable resource'

    - Agreed that we want to keep the glossary simple and closely tied
      to OGSA v1. (It is not the intention to do a grid glossary.)

  Action: Hiro to do a first try on 'service' & 'resource' wrt the
          above discussion and discuss with a small group before
          bringing back to the call.

  - DRM: Agreed to delete it since it is not used in OGSA v1

  - Service: Agreed to keep the definition we have. The proposed
    change is not an improvement.
    - "implements one or more endpoints" seems wrong here; 'provides'
      sounds better.
    - Decided to drop the above statement as 'service' is defined in
      terms of 'component' and 'component' is defined as 'implements
      interfaces'.

* OGSA v1 comments review 

  - Information services section review based on Abdeslem's revised
    text.

  - 107: 'producer/consumer': Andreas to followup.

  - 108: Removed UML & elaborated on relationship with WSN, etc
       - Don't refer to WS-ReliableMessaging as it is not a
         standard.
         - Use WS-Reliability; it is already in the references.
       - Added a paragraph to Producer/consumer to capture what was
         previously described by the UML diagram
         - WS-N specific text is under Model section: Agreed that
           this is implementation (rendering) and it should be moved
           somewhere under Functional capabilities. 

   Action: Bill to edit the document and move WS-N specific text to
           Functional capability
           
  - 109: Reference added
  - 110: Reference added
  - 111: Section hierarchy: Fixed

  - 112: GMA use case: Added a sentence to clarify that it is the
         broker that is using the information service results to make
         decision.

  - 113: Section hierarchy: Fixed

  - 114: Naming definitions: Andrew's assignment. But no obvious
         contradiction after a quick cross-check with the glossary.

  Action: Andreas to ask AndreaW to clarify the comment.

  - 115: Naming hidden in IS: Discussion whether to move it or not and
         if so where 
         - Infrastructure is one option, but agreed that it is too
           early to do so.
        - Agreed to leave it under IS but add a sentence pointing to
          it in the infrastructure section. >Andreas
         
  - 116: Done (but need to check consistency of document)

  - 117: Agreed to include CIM in the last sentence of 'standard event
         data model': "...which accomodates CIM..."
  
        Also will work in Andrea's other comment: "...it is very
        valuable to tie together..."

  Followup: 
    - Bill holds the pen; Will update and send to Abdeslem;
    - Abdeslem will check it and send final version to Andreas

* F2F agenda discussion

  - Things to do before F2F
    - Refine/update Mike's standards chart and review in 1 or 2 weeks
      time.
    - Identify and approach stakeholders
      - Want more buyin from other groups. Need to approach them and
        ask them to be involved.
      - First need to identify relevant groups/projects and then
        assign liaisons.

      - Trying to identify stakeholders for "Information services"
        - EGEE: information services are based on R-GMA (Abdeslem)
        - XML implementation of information services: MDS
        - INFO-D: 
        - Also need to clarify relation to resource management: DMTF,
          WSDM

      - Note: Naming is a separate category

  Action: Hiro to do a draft template:
          - name of group, contact, one-line-description
 
  Action: Hiro to ask each design team leader to draw list of
          stakeholders.

* AOB

  - Takuya: Volunteered to discuss OGSA v1 security comments next
    week.
  - Hiro asked Takuya for list of stakeholders (security)