Mike and Pete, Thank you very much for reporting the OGSA F2F. I also read the minutes and content materials on the GridForge. It sounds great that there was great progress in the relationship between ACS and other EMS activities! I have some questions.
We had a good meeting today with the CDDLM team during the OGSA F2F. The minutes from today will contain details, however I wanted to capture some additional points specific to ACS:
1. A need for an integration point between ACS and CSG (Candidate Set Generator) was raised today, by Andrew I believe. This means that the CSG would need to be able to get the application metadata in order to make an appropriate decision on where a particular job can execute. I propose therefore that this be considered to ensure that either the entire property set be defined in our spec or that the spec allow for dynamic properties which could be provided by the client when constructing the archive (admin data?). These would be accessible by the CSG via WS-ResourceProperties, as stated in the strawman. Is there a standardized namespace to cover such things that would be required (memory utilization, disk space, time, speed, bandwidth, OS, containers, etc)?
I remember that JSDL defines resource requirement terms such as memory, disk space, OS, etc. Was there any mention of JSDL regarding this topic?
2. Andrew also raised a use-case which involves making a copy of an AA and creating a new AA from it by extending it and overwriting some of the contents with perhaps different DD information which might have some particulars for a different organization. This would mean that the new AA would have a new EPR. We may want to consider this and whether or not our current set of portypes is sufficient.
I think this may be done by retrieving entire archive by "GetArchive" then creating new AA with local modification.
3. Work shall proceed to design a more complete abstract interaction diagram which captures all the moving parts: EMS: BES, EPS, CSG, JSDL, CDDLM, WS-Agreement, WS-Naming, etc. This would build on the EMS box slide and would contain boxes representing all the parts to represent more of the ideal goal. It will most likely be presented at the next GGF.
Sounds good.
4. We should also probably use WS-Names instead of EPRs. WS-Naming will be discussed tomorrow.
What is WS-Names? Is it the name of XML types? or name of specification? What is the difference between WS-Names and WS-Naming?
5. Idea of using NFS or CIFS as a protocol/means to read/write was mentioned.
See you on the call! Sachiko