Hi, This is a reminder that the session dedicated to meeting between CDDLM and other working groups within ex-SRM and current Management technical areas will be held today at 9am at Regent#1 conference room. All chairs and members of other WGs are invited. Looking forward to talking to you. As a reminder we already have had dedicated sessions with OGSA EMS, ACS, and WSDM groups and in each case it was very useful. Thanks, Dejan.
-----Original Message----- From: Milojicic, Dejan S Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 9:32 AM To: 'Andreas Haas' Cc: Hrabri Rajic; asm100@doc.ic.ac.uk; darren@pulsipher.org; ali@epcc.ed.ac.uk; pruyne@hpl.hp.com; v.sander@fz-juelich.de; Wolfgang.Ziegler@scai.fraunhofer.de Subject: RE: Session at GGF between CDDLM and related SRM groups, DRMAA, GRAAP, and JSDL
Hi,
Thanks to all who replied, I will go ahead and a request a CDDLM session on this topic, specifying other groups as preferred non-conflict. Wrt BES (Jim brought this up), I agree that we are related and I am in the process of talking to them about a joint session since the last GGF. I would prefer that we address our mutual relationship within our technical area (even if it is going to change soon) prior to talking to BES as a group of WGs. Bringing them in right now may be too much.
Thanks,
Dejan.
-----Original Message----- From: Andreas Haas [mailto:Andreas.Haas@Sun.COM] Sent: Friday, May 27, 2005 1:52 AM To: Milojicic, Dejan S Cc: Hrabri Rajic; asm100@doc.ic.ac.uk; darren@pulsipher.org; ali@epcc.ed.ac.uk; pruyne@hpl.hp.com; v.sander@fz-juelich.de; Wolfgang.Ziegler@scai.fraunhofer.de Subject: Re: Session at GGF between CDDLM and related SRM groups, DRMAA, GRAAP, and JSDL
Hi Dejan,
I agree such a talk is reasonable and will try to participate. I just submitted DRMAA WG session and specified overlap with CDDLM sessions should be prevented.
Regards, Andreas
On Wed, 25 May 2005, Milojicic, Dejan S wrote:
Hi,
This email goes to the chairs of DRMAA, GRAAP, and JSDL. CDDLM groups is interested in holding a session between our four groups. We have close to completed all our planned specs in he area of configuration description, deployment, and lifecycle management, and we are moving towards reference implementations for the GGF in Fall. This is the good time for us to discuss with you how we relate and if we are mutually compliant. We had some ongoing informal discussions in the past, this time I would like to schedule a session only for this purpose. I will do so if you are interested. Please comment asap so that I can request a slot in a timely manner.
Thanks,
Dejan.
-----Original Message----- From: Milojicic, Dejan S Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 4:16 PM To: 'Hiro Kishimoto'; 'John Tollefsrud' Cc: 'Keisuke Fukui'; pete@ziu.net; 'Thomas Studwell' Subject: RE: Session at GGF between CDDLM and related SRM groups, DRMAA, GRAAP, and JSDL (fwd)
Hi Hiro and John,
Thanks for your feedback!
Hi John and Dejan,
Yes, it is GREAT idea. Is it possible to add ACS-WG to this cross-WG session?
Certainly, although I think that these two groups have much more in common and I prefer that in addition we stick to our already planned 1:1 session ACS-CDDLM. Now that I think back, I went over all SRM groups listed on the Web site and that is the only reason I missed ACS, but as I said, we are already in the process of talking directly to each other.
Since you already raised the issue of other groups attendance, how can we arrange to have BES attend this session or should I schedule a separate session for BES only? Also, can we attend one of the OGSA sessions prior to GGF to present where we are with CDDLM, this is the right time to engage? I presume that it is appropriate to have discussions directly with BES instead of OGSA, what is your recommendation?
Thanks,
Dejan.
PS BTW We have had practice of the inter-group meetings in most past GGFs, it might have not been as visible, but we already met or exchange visits/presentations with DRMAA, GRAAP, WSDM, DMTF Application group, etc.
I think ACS-WG's work is another closely related one to CDDLM.
Thanks, ---- Hiro Kishimoto
-----Original Message----- From: John Tollefsrud [mailto:john.tollefsrud@sun.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2005 12:38 AM To: dejan.milojicic@hp.com Cc: Hiro Kishimoto Subject: FW: Session at GGF between CDDLM and related SRM groups, DRMAA, GRAAP, and JSDL (fwd)
Hi Dejan,
Good idea! Lert me know if I can help.
I'm looking forward to a meeting of the new Management area at GGF14, and would appreciate having there a WG overview and update from WG/RG chairs, and this would be a good meeting to recap in a CDDLM overview. I'll have more later on the GGF14 area meeting.
Thanks - jt
---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 27 May 2005 10:52:07 +0200 (MEST) From: Andreas Haas <andreas.haas@sun.com> To: "Milojicic, Dejan S" <dejan.milojicic@hp.com> Cc: Hrabri Rajic <hrabri.rajic@intel.com>, asm100@doc.ic.ac.uk, darren@pulsipher.org, ali@epcc.ed.ac.uk, pruyne@hpl.hp.com, v.sander@fz-juelich.de, Wolfgang.Ziegler@scai.fraunhofer.de Subject: Re: Session at GGF between CDDLM and related SRM groups, DRMAA, GRAAP, and JSDL
Hi Dejan,
I agree such a talk is reasonable and will try to participate. I just submitted DRMAA WG session and specified overlap with CDDLM sessions should be prevented.
Regards, Andreas
On Wed, 25 May 2005, Milojicic, Dejan S wrote:
Hi,
This email goes to the chairs of DRMAA, GRAAP, and JSDL. CDDLM groups is interested in holding a session between our four groups. We have close to completed all our planned specs in he area of configuration description, deployment, and lifecycle management, and we are moving towards reference implementations for the GGF in Fall. This is the good time for us to discuss with you how we relate and if we are mutually compliant. We had some ongoing informal discussions in the past, this time I would like to schedule a session only for this purpose. I will do so if you are interested. Please comment asap so that I can request a slot in a timely manner.
Thanks,
Dejan.