On 07/04/2012 02:37 PM, stephen.burke@stfc.ac.uk wrote:
glue-wg-bounces@ogf.org
[mailto:glue-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Florido Paganelli said: Which of those have a single endpoint? all of them but Argus and VOMS?
Also
org.glite.ce.Monitor org.glite.ce.ApplicationPublisher
are normally part of CREAM, which I think publishes a ServiceType of org.glite.ce.CREAM (the Service publisher in that case is part of the CREAM distribution).
ok so during the last ServiceType_t review we decided that org.glite.voms was a ServiceType_t, is that an error?
VOMS is what's in the code at the moment. It can be changed if that's the decision; as usual that will mean we have some period where both forms will be in use, but since nothing is likely to be relying on it yet that shouldn't be a problem.
GOCDB people will not be happy, but I would like it to be changed the same as the InterfaceName.
Any remark on this org.glite.standard?
It's the format we've been using in glite for GLUE 1 AccessControlBaseRules. I think the only formal description is here:
https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/LCG/WLCGCommonComputingReadinessChallenges/W...
page 33. For GLUE 2 we should not allow the deprecated form b), i.e. a bare VO name. The wildcard format has so far not been implemented. In addition to that, for myproxy we publish rules with a prefix MYPROXY:, e.g.
GLUE2PolicyRule: MYPROXY:authorized_renewers=/C=DE/O=GermanGrid/OU=DESY/CN=host/grid-lb2.desy.de
(actually I just spotted a bug, at the moment there's a trailing " which shouldn't be there).
For GLUE 2 we also have the reserved word ALL meaning no authorsiation, and for Argus I added a new reserved word NONE meaning no access (for users, Argus is used only by other services).
I think we should decide a way to define these policies, I mean instances of them, or a canonical way of representing them... I think the description in GFD147 is vague, and on the other hand it would be nice to have some kind of "library" for these policies to be reused by coders. Can you sketch a definition that is consistent with GFD147 for GLUE2? maybe we can use that as an example for future policy definitions. The problem is also related on how to store those, as they should be coupled to a grammar and an evaluation algorithm in the most generic case, if I am not wrong. Thanks for your quick answers, anyway! cheers -- Florido Paganelli Lund University - Particle Physics ARC Middleware EMI Project