- glue-wg - lists.ogf.org

GLUE WG teleconference, Tuesday, June 3, 2014
by Navarro, John-Paul F. 06 Jun '14

06 Jun '14

Greetings GLUE WG, Our next GLUE WG teleconference will be: : Tuesday, June 3, 2014 : 15:30-17:00 Central Europe, 8:30-10:00 AM US Central We will try a new teleconference and screen sharing tool: : Web: https://meet.illinois.edu/herrio/V57YV10Q : --> Cancel login dialog, click guest "Sign in here instead", enter name, click "Join the meeting" : Phone: 1-888-983-3631, International 1-217-332-6338 or 1-312-994-8410 : Conference ID: 6759150 If the new teleconference tool doesn't work well, we will revert to our normal tool: : Web: https://webconf.vc.dfn.de/ogf-glue-wg/ (Adobe Connect) : Login as Guest using your real name Meeting materials folder: : http://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf/glue-wg?folder_id=6586 Proposed agenda: 1) LDAP rendering (JP/Shiraz: 10 minutes) Discuss status, voting, and release for public comment. Previous action items: > Action 1: Everyone review Florido's specification edits, Shiraz/JP approve and accept changes > Action 2: Florido will share schema diffs in ~1 week, everyone please review and comment > Action 3: After changes accepted advance internal document version to 7.3, fix naming, and upload to this Drafts folder:https://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf/glue-wg?folder_id=14 > Next call we will vote to approve document(s) and release for public comment. 2) Enumerations (Florido: 5 minutes) Discuss status. Previous action items: > Action 1: Florido will update and move practice document to Drafts/, everyone please review and comment. > https://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf/glue-wg?folder_id=14 3) Cloud extensions (Salvatore/Warren/all: 5 minutes) Plan discussion for future meeting. Previous action items: > We will discuss advantages and disadvantages compiled by Salvatore and Warren at next meeting on June 3rd 4) JSON rendering (Warren/Shiraz: 30+ minute presentation) Warren presentation, discuss vote/approval and public comment. Previous action items: > Warren will look over David's edits, corrections. > Action 1: Warren will post final document by May 27th, everyone please review and comment. > Action 2: JP/Shiraz will announce vote on list so for individuals that can't make the June 3rd meeting. > Action 3: Warren will present (~30 minutes) the JSON rendering material in June 3rd meeting for group to vote/approve and send to public comment Regards, JP and Shiraz

4 9

JSON rendering & Extension
by Warren Smith 04 Jun '14

04 Jun '14

We were discussing on the call that the way that extensions are defined in the JSON schema (in Entity https://github.com/OGF-GLUE/JSON/blob/master/schema/Entity.json) doesn't exactly match the GLUE 2 spec. We've got them defined as a JSON object (key/value pairs) in Entity. One issue was that there isn't a LocalID in the JSON schema, but there is in the spec. After the call, I thought that one approach to address this is that in the JSON rendering, the LocalID is implicit - it is the same as the key. This makes it straightforward to map to a different rendering (create a LocalID that is the same as the key in the JSON document) and map from a different rendering to JSON (just drop the LocalID). Another issue was that the JSON schema doesn't define a separate Extension object. I think this is fine since it follows the same pattern we used for enumerations - embed them directly into the object definitions where they are used for readability. A final issue we discussed was that the spec specifies that the Value of the Extension is a String. I would like to allow the value to be any simple type (string, number, or boolean), since this fits the JSON style and makes the JSON documents easier to use. To convert a JSON GLUE2 document to a different rendering, it is easy enough to turn a number or boolean into a string and to convert from a different rendering, it is also easy to try to parse the value as a number or boolean before defaulting to string. To me, this is within the bounds of rendering the abstract GLUE 2 spec into a specific representation. Warren

2 1

Associations added to JSON rendering
by Warren Smith 03 Jun '14

03 Jun '14

I just finished adding Associations objects. I updated the schema and examples in github (https://github.com/OGF-GLUE/JSON) and the Google doc (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1BDemCYaJ2hkYMFvyLyJ8ZiFUwB8tBZESo4KSFT2…) It seems to all work fine - I was a little concerned that the "merging" of multiple Associations (e.g. an AdminDomain object that has Associations defined in both the AdminDomain and Domain schemas) wouldn't work, but it appears to. Warren

1 0

GLUE WG teleconference, Tuesday, May 6, 2014
by Navarro, John-Paul F. 02 Jun '14

02 Jun '14

Greetings GLUE WG, Our next GLUE WG teleconference will be: : Tuesday, May 6, 2014 : 15:30-17:00 Central Europe, 8:30-10:00 AM US Central Teleconference and screen sharing: : https://webconf.vc.dfn.de/ogf-glue-wg/ (Adobe Connect) : Login as Guest using your real name Meeting materials folder: : http://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf/glue-wg?folder_id=6585 Proposed agenda: 1) LDAP rendering (JP/Shiraz: 10 minute status update) Previous action items: > Agreed to embed the normative LDAP schema in an appendix (based on XML precedence). > Action item 1: Florido will clarify the wording on Page 6 based on Shiraz Comment[10]. > Action item 2: Florido will upload a new normative schema and e-mail diffs to the list along with a bulleted summary of the changes > Action item 3: Shiraz/JP will update authors, embed the schema in the appendix, accept all changes, and share with wg for review > Action item 4: Shiraz/JP will submit new document for public comment after one week of wg comment/discussion 2) Enumerations (Florido: 10 minute status update) Enumerations process, policies, and guidelines. Specific proposed new enumerations. Previous action items: > Everyone provide feedback thru list on Florido's process document > Florido will update document with modified format to enable cat'ing of multiple numerations into a single file 3) Cloud extensions (Salvatore, Warren, and others: 70 minute status update) Discuss two proposed approaches of using new entities (EGI/Salvatore), existing entities (FutureGrid/XSEDE, Warren). Request Salvatore and Warren each produce lists of benefits and disadvantages of both their own proposed approach and the alternative (placed in above folder). Suggest we discuss and merge these lists to produce a summary we can use to reach a decision. Regards, JP and Shiraz

1 2

GLUE WG teleconference, Tuesday, April 8, 2014
by Navarro, John-Paul F. 05 May '14

05 May '14

Greetings GLUE WG, Our next GLUE WG teleconference will be: : Tuesday, April 8, 2014 : 15:30-16:30 Central Europe, 8:30-9:30 AM US Central Teleconference and screen sharing: : https://webconf.vc.dfn.de/ogf-glue-wg/ (Adobe Connect) : Login as Guest using your real name NOTE: we only have one hour! Proposed agenda: 1) Cloud extensions (Salvatore, Warren) March 25th action items: > 5) Warren will post to list information on his use of compute entities for clouds and areas he sees/needs improvement > 6) Salvatore will post the list the main factors that motivated separate entities rather than leveraging compute entities > 7) Salvatore will contact CERN on whether they want to participate in federated cloud discovery effort in the GLUE WG Warren posted glue2 cloud examples March 26. If Salvatore is available we will discuss the factors that motivated separate entities and attempt to reach consensus. 2) LDAP rendering Review Shiraz's and JP's feedback on rendering document and agree on changes to final document: http://redmine.ogf.org/dmsf/glue-wg?folder_id=6569 3) Enumerations (Florido) Review enumeration process Recent recent enumerations discussions Next steps Regards, JP and Shiraz

3 6

NO GLUE WG teleconference, Tuesday, April 22, 2014
by Navarro, John-Paul F. 22 Apr '14

22 Apr '14

Our next GLUE WG teleconference is tentatively May 6, 2014. Regards, JP and Shiraz

1 0

New Endpoint and Service types
by stephen.burke＠stfc.ac.uk 08 Apr '14

08 Apr '14

Hi, The QCG project (http://www.qoscosgrid.org/trac/qcg) is implementing GLUE 2 publication and would like to use the following EndpointInterfaceName values: org.qcg.broker - QCG-Broker web service interface org.oasis.notification - OASIS WS-Notification standard and ServiceTypes: org.qcg.computing - QosCosGrid computing element org.qcg.notification - QosCosGrid notification broker org.qcg.broker - QosCosGrid metacheduling service Can we add them to the relevant lists? The people in CC should be able to provide more information if necessary. Stephen -- Scanned by iCritical.

7 57

Problems in using CSV for enumerations, some solutions
by Florido Paganelli 04 Apr '14

04 Apr '14

Hi all, Today, while fixing the enumerations as decided last time, I found myself facing two problems: Problem 1) how to communicate what-obsoletes-what or what-is-recommended-instead. In short, how does a consumer find out what to use if a string she's using is deprecated. I'll give you an example with these records: IntefaceName_t | Description | Status | ============================================================================= org.globus.gram | job submission service for Globus | Recommended | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- GRAM5 | job submission service for Globus version | Deprecated | | 5.x (GRAM5) | | Problem: I search for GRAM5, i see is deprecated, how do I find out what to use instead? Solution: My solution will be to enrich the CSV this way: IntefaceName_t | Description | Status | Recommended | Deprecates | ============================================================================================================ org.globus.gram | job submission service for Globus | Recommended | | GRAM5 | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ GRAM5 | job submission service for Globus version | Deprecated | org.globus.gram | | | 5.x (GRAM5) | | | | that is, adding two fields (that can be multilined) This will also allow me to speedup the process of reviewing existing InterfaceName_t overlaps, as I will send to the list a list of services with multiple names with a proposed deprecated/recommended set. Problem 2) Warren once requested me to provide a single file containing all the enumerations. The problem with the current CSV is that, if I just merge them, one will loose the reference to what Enumeration Type the merged document refers to. Thus, I need to add an additional field with the enumeration type name for that. Two ways: Solution a) Keep the single files as they are, and generate a merged file. If you consider InterfaceName in Problem 1 above, an example of merged file including ServiceType_t would be: EnumerationType | EnumerationName | Status | Recommended | Deprecates | ================================================================================ InterfaceName_t | GRAM5 | Deprecated | org.globus.gram | | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ServiceType_t | egi.GRIDVIEW | Recommended | | | Solution b) Change all existing files to the above format. I would prefer solution b), as it makes consistent to use either the big file or a sigle file with the same parser. There is no strictural difference between the partial files and the big file. This will require also a change in the document I wrote on enumerations. Your opinions are very welcome. If no objections I will follow the solutions shown up here and document all of them in the changelog file. Cheers, Florido -- ================================================== Florido Paganelli ARC Middleware Developer - NorduGrid Collaboration System Administrator Lund University Department of Physics Division of Particle Physics BOX118 221 00 Lund Office Location: Fysikum, Hus B, Rum B313 Office Tel: 046-2220272 Email: florido.paganelli(a)REMOVE_THIShep.lu.se Homepage: http://www.hep.lu.se/staff/paganelli ==================================================

3 3

GLUE WG teleconference, Tuesday, March 25, 2014
by Navarro, John-Paul F. 04 Apr '14

04 Apr '14

Greetings GLUE WG, Based on a preferences expressed by some, our next GLUE WG teleconference will be: : Tuesday, March 25, 2014 : 15:30-17:00 Central Europe, 8:30-10:00 AM US Central Teleconference and screen sharing: : https://webconf.vc.dfn.de/ogf-glue-wg/ (Adobe Connect) : Login as Guest using your real name Proposed agenda: 1) Cloud extensions (Salvatore: 10 minute status update) OGF 40 ACTION: The group agreed to request that the GLUE Specification v 2.1 submitted with Cloud extensions be RE-SUBMITTED by the authors with change tracking enabled so that all the changes with respect to the current Specification v2.0 are clearly visible. All other editing by anyone in the group should be change tracked until the group approves, submits, and officially releases v 2.1. 2) LDAP rendering (JP/Shiraz: 10 minute status update) OGF 40 ACTION: The group agreed that the final editing for comprehensibility should be done by JP and Shiraz: 1. Make sure the purpose of the DIT Appendix is clear and who the target audience (people writing implementation and/or users) 2. Make it clear that the main purpose of the document is to define the LDAP rendering of the schema. Reference to the schema should be included, perhaps in an Appendix. 3. JP and Shiraz should report back to working group with a change tracked version for final review 3) Enumerations (All: 1 hour) Enumerations process, policies, and guidelines. Specific proposed new enumerations. BES/JSDL related enumerations and attributes needs (Andrew) Regards, JP and Shiraz

4 9

Notes: GLUE WG session at OGF 40
by Navarro, John-Paul F. 25 Mar '14

25 Mar '14

Notes from the Wednesday January 15, 2014, OGF 40 GLUE WG session. Describing Clouds ----------------- We revisited the debate on whether Cloud infrastructure should be described using the existing HPC/Grid Compute entities, using new custom Cloud entities that follow the conceptual model as closely as possible, of with a hybrid. Although we recognize there are many similarities, the consensus was that Clouds will benefit from the freedom to describe what they need independently of HPC/Grid at least for the next few years as cloud continue to rapidly evolve. If at some future point it became clear that HPC/Grid and Cloud were very similar and could be merged, that could happen in the context of GLUE 3, whenever that happens. We recognized that naming in the HPC/Grid data models would have to be further generalized if merging happens. Some differences noted between HPC/Grid and Cloud are that: HPC/Grid ApplicationHandle and ApplicationEnvironment have no equivalent in Cloud, and CloudComputeImage has no equivalent hp HPC/Grid. ACTION: The group agreed to request that the GLUE Specification v 2.1 submitted with Cloud extensions be RE-SUBMITTED by the authors with change tracking enabled so that all the changes with respect to the current Specification v2.0 are clearly visible. All other editing by anyone in the group should be change tracked until the group approves, submits, and officially releases v 2.1. Enumerations ------------ We discussed our current enumerations, ServiceType and InterfaceName, and the proposed change process circulated just prior to the meeting. We anticipate the need to use the same process to maintain all other Enumerations relevant to GLUE. We noted that the group has agreed to publish approved Enumerations lists is CSV format so that they are software consumable. We agreed to discuss and possibly approve enumerations and the enumeration process at our next call currently scheduled for January 28. LDAP rendering -------------- Difference between Stephen and Florido have now been resolved. The group agreed that the final editing for comprehensibility should be done by JP and Shiraz: 1. Make sure the purpose of the DIT Appendix is clear and who the target audience (people writing implementation and/or users) 2. Make it clear that the main purpose of the document is to define the LDAP rendering of the schema. Reference to the schema should be included, perhaps in an Appendix 3. JP and Shiraz should report back to working group with a change tracked version for final review BES/JSDL update --------------- Andrew shared a preview of the aspects of GLUE that are being adopted by BES/JSDL. Andrew was going to present that material in separate BES/JSDL OGF 40 sessions. ACTION: Andrew will submit 5 Enumeration requests to the GLUE list. Finally, if anyone else that was present remembers other significant discussions please reply and share them with the group. Regards, JP

5 8