Hey Keisuke, thanks for your patience. I wound up getting home from work last night, sorry to have missed the meeting. Yes, I would be happy to address the below questions/comments. Sorry to not have been able to attend the last GGF. You mention that: In the section "3.1.4 Relationship between AA and Job" (Page 14), you left the comment "D10" below: Perhaps we could say a unit of "configuration management" We didn't see problem here in the review at GGF15. Can you elaborate on this a bit more? I think the above statement did not outline a problem in the doc that needed fixing, but rather an opportunity to make the distinction between sofware components, configuration and runtime parameters/contraints[jsdl], and that these distinct components could be concidered one configuration mananaged package within the AA. (a managed unit w/ version) This is important for automated repeatability. This relates to some comments that Andrew Grimshaw had at the Sunnyvale face to face, that one can take a software unit, supply different parameters, and in essence wind up with a "new piece of software and function". At the time, to me it seemed important to capture a version and place for this new piece of software. So by treating job as part of AA content, this is possible. In this way, to run a job, one could pass to the "job manager" the EPR to an AA. I am not sure I can defend myself properly on this position, it seems on the surface plausible, but not mandetory. It seems more highly organized than having the JDSL somewhere out there, but also the idea seems to not be required in all use cases. Hope this helps to clarify :-) With respect to replication, what is written in 4.5 is fine. I think we should perhaps leave things to master/slave for now to be able to accomplish a version 1.0. My comments a few meetings ago about replication GUIDs are really only a concern in bi-direction replication, so we are ok for now. There are too many open GGF issues right now with repect to naming, which would be a key component of any replication scheme, and also, the orep-wg's inactivity (last time a looked [a few months ago]). I think what is written is excellent for now. Pete -----Original Message----- From: Keisuke Fukui [mailto:kfukui@labs.fujitsu.com] Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2005 4:12 AM To: Ziu, Peter Cc: acs-wg@ggf.org Subject: Your comments on the draft spec. Hello Pete, How is it going? We hope that we finish the version 1.0 in this month to make us released for the further step toward 2.0 and EMS discussions. So here are something for you to make it happen:-) I need clarifications for some of your comments seen in the draft 0.51 that we have reviewed at GGF15 sessions. --------------------------------------------------------------- In the section "3.1.4 Relationship between AA and Job" (Page 14), you left the comment "D10" below: Perhaps we could say a unit of "configuration management" We didn't see problem here in the review at GGF15. Can you elaborate on this a bit more? --------------------------------------------------------------- Is the current description for section "4.5 replication" good to you? If you have more to add, please let us review and merge it to the current one. --------------------------------------------------------------- I will appreciate it very much if you briefly address to the above here. I'm sorry for bothering you this time. Thanks in advance!! -Keisuke