OGSA Teleconference - 16 May 2005
=================================

* Participants

  Mike Behrens (R2AD, LLC)
  Mathias Dalheimer (Fraunhofer-ITWM)
  Hiro Kishimoto (Fujitsu)
  Fred Maciel (Hitachi)
  Takuya Mori (NEC, ANL)
  Andreas Savva (Fujitsu)
  Jem Treadwell (HP)
  Ken Wood (Hitachi)
  Pete Ziu (Northrop Grumman)

  Minutes: Andreas Savva

* May F2F Agenda review

** Sunday
  - Still waiting for a draft BES agenda

** Monday
       
*** RSS 

  - Correction: Use cases will not be from RSS but from the GSA-RG
    - Also it is not a document review but a presentation
  - The plan is to make sure that the EMS architecture and what the
    RSS group have in mind fits.
  
*** Profile template

    Both Tom & Dave are in the Bay around at the moment so they can't
    make the call. But the group can expect an 'almost final' document
    review.

** Thursday
  
  ByteIO agenda will be provided after that group's call tomorrow

* GGF14 schedule review

  - Tuesday is the plenary. So our sessions should be Wednesday and
    Thursday

  - Session 10: the security team will discuss security issues
    relating to the basic profile

* EGA reference model introduction 

  [The EGA Reference Model can be downloaded from the EGA site:
   http://www.gridalliance.org/]

  Not many people have read at the EGA document. Fred gave an
  introduction of the EGA reference for those who have not had the
  chance to look at it yet.

** Introduction

   - Overview of purpose of EGA.
   - The focus is on Enterprise grid computing requirements.
   - The impression is that they focus at a more basic(lower) level
     than the OGSA group.

** Reference model
   - Defined term 'grid component' to capture the 'smallest' unit of
     interest (and so avoid the grid resource/service definition
     problem that OGSA had).

   - The basic modeling of the problem is expressed in the reference
     model; and how to deal with things is based on this model.
   - Lifecycle of components is defined around provisioning

   - There is a grid management entity (GME) (fig 1.)
     - This entity is not defined in detail. It may or may not include
       brokering and so on.

   - Grid component classes: not normative. Can be mapped to other
     specifications.
     - The view of components seems to be defined around provisioning.

   - Grid view defined by management scope:
     - Accounting & billing is a 'first class entity' maybe to
       accomodate chargeback and internal accounting mechanisms.

   - The approach seems to be the opposite to that of GGF. GGF is
     coming from a higher level trying to define a framework. While
     EGA tries to solve a narrower problem (and possibly generalize
     later).

   - Component lifecycle
     - A component out of the defined lifecycle states is not under
       the control of the GME.

   - The way that things are defined by the Reference model and how
     things are packaged into products may be different. The view
     given in the document is a logical view.

   - Figure XVII: Nothing really contradictory with OGSA; perhaps
     indicating an alignment with OGSA/GGF

     Sometimes the EGA document provides a more concrete rendering of
     ideas (a middle to bottom level rendering).

** Use cases
   - The use cases are at lower level than the OGSA ones. (Close to
     UML use cases.)

** Glossary

   Defines a small set of terms.

** Overall

   - Could look at the EGA document as a set of requirements.
   - There was a proposal to merge use case documents. But the level
     of the two documents is different and it would be difficult to do
     a straight merge

   - A joint-session is being planned at GGF14.