Minutes -- Telecon 4 April 2005 Attendees --------- Mark Morgan (Minutes) Allen Luniewski Jay Unger Fred Maciel Dave Berry Dave Snelling Hiro Kishimoto Mathias Dalheimer (Fraunhofer) Kazushige Saga (NAREGI) Soonwook Hwang (NAREGI) Chris Smitth Ian Foster Ravi Subramamiam Andreas Savva * Telecon Minutes Approval Minutes should indicate that there was a meeting with Mathias Dalheimer about EMS. Hiro to talk to Jem to fix minutes * Agenda Bashing F2F Meeting Update OGSA WG Charter Discussion Postpone Design team WG promotion OGSA Profile Definitions How many people have read the Profile definitions? Not many so probably doesn't make sense to talk about that yet. Decision to postpone Profile Discussion for next time -- Wed, April 6th * F2F Meeting - Chose date and place for F2F -- week of May 22 in London. - Can we host in Imperial College? Dave Berry to ask. - Hiro to set up new inquiry on who is to attend, but typically it's 10 to 15 people. - Last time we agreed to have some data related meeting on Wednesday. Dave thinks this OK. - Chris planning on going to BES part on Sunday, hasn't decided on other meetings. - Mathias will attend on Sunday and maybe Monday for BES and EMS. - If there is going to be an EMS discussion on Monday, then Chris will try to stay for Monday as well. * WG Charter Discussion -- 4 charters. *) First is BES. - Not a whole lot of changes since Korea. - Only problem is timeline. Is it too aggressive? -- Maybe this isn't such a big issue. -- Seems like keeping the timeline aggressive is good. - Hiro is suggesting that all OGSA-WG meeting should review the activites in all of the WG. It's overhead, but it seems necessary. - Definite agreement to make sure that whatever comes out of these conforms to the Basic Profile. - If the profile mandates WSRF, then there will be a lot of discussions about this. - If you are going to model resources, use WSRF, if you don't need to, you don't need to. - A lot of the profile right now is saying that "If you use this ability, use it in this way." -- for example, "if you are going to do lifetime, then use WS-Lifetime." -- This could be a conflict point. - OGSA-BES WG will be based on OGSA-Profile, but doesn't mean they will use WSRF. Will only use WSRF if it is necessary. - When you submit a job to the container, there may be some entity. In such a case, Resource Properties would be the way to access those. But nothing says that the job submit interface has to talk about this. -- This is for the WG to describe. - If the WG charter says that they are going to build on basic profile, then things that get required in basic profile will be in BES. - The original proposal had a lot of things that a more functional job interface would want. Question is, do we want something more minimal? - Two things to possibly add to charter. -- 1 is the added words about synchronizination with OGSA main architecture document. -- The second is to be OGSA Basic Profile referant or not. - Put a note on the list to update the charter -- (who ever has the pen). -- Mark to talk to Andrew about this when he gets back. *) ByteIO - Scope says based on WSRF but shouldn't. - Add a synchronizing statement similar to BES. - Hiro suggested a different acronym OGSA-BIO but this seems like it might confuse the biologist people. - Some disagreement with having OGSA prefixed to WG names. -- Seems like there are a lot of working groups which may produce things which will be incorporated into profiles but seems like giving them OGSA names beforehand is confusing. -- People don't yet know whether or not it will infact be a part of OGSA. -- At the moment there are two guiding principles for including OGSA. --- One is linking to OGSA architecture. --- The second is aligning with OGSA profile. -- Have been discussions in GFSG about what to doing about existing working groups. -- Need to have some policies for the ogsa prefix. *) OGSA-D - Draft charter fine with Hiro. - Synchronizing method in charter -- good. - Good job was done. *) OGSA-naming - Should be revised because it's a little bit old. - Could only find GGF13 version. - Does Andrew intend to revise. - At this moment, it seems appropriate to drop RNS from charter. -- Mark, talk to Andrew about this. - Also add the synchronization mechanism to this charter as well. - Seems like any chater which we want to have the ogsa tag on should have this. - Any OGSA Chater should have a reference to the OGSA Profile, and a statement about this synchronization. - Seems like it wouldn't have to mandate basic profile. - Name could be changed to WS-naming. -- Is it the case that Andrew intended for the WG to be OGSA, but specification to be simply WS-naming. -- Mark, ask Andrew. - Dave suggested that in BES charter it might be sensible to list some things in the charter that are out of scope so as to avoid scope creep. -- Don't the 7 questions cover some of these scoping issues. --- No, their is no list of out of scope functionallity. --- Mark, ask Andrew to add these to charter. *) At the end of the call, Ravi agreed to hold an EMS session on Monday during the F2F in London