Hi all, Sorry, this is a bit of rant. I'm in the process overhauling how dCache information is published into GLUE: a complete rewrite of how information is propagated. So I'm looking for definitive information about how to publish Glue through GIP. ... and there's the rub. I can't find any good references for how to provide this information. I've started a dCache wiki page[1] that holds various nuggets of information, but none of them seem complete or authoritative. [1] http://trac.dcache.org/trac.cgi/wiki/GLUE I understand that the current dCache system, is functional through Owen's sterling effort, with various trial-and-error attempts and information conveyed through emails. I'm looking to avoid this process as much as possible; having accurate information would be a good start! First off, the only GLUE v1.3 documentation I could find is from CNAF CVS [2]. The most recent version is "Draft 3---16 Jan 2007". I think Sergio was going to make this the final version, but could this process be clarified? BTW, there's a typo in the StorageArea, UsedNearlineSize description; there are other sections that look somewhat incomplete (e.g., grep for "TO BE ADDED") [2] https://forge.cnaf.infn.it/plugins/scmsvn/viewcvs.php/*checkout*/v_1_3/spec/pdf/GLUESchema.pdf?rev=32&root=glueschema Second, I could also find no authoritative source of information on Glue/LDAP binding for v1.3. There are some CNAF notes[3], but these mention, in bold, that "[t]his version is for early evaluation and is not meant to be deployed yet". Can someone say what is incorrect on this page? More importantly, can someone update it so the page is correct? [3] http://glueschema.forge.cnaf.infn.it/SpecV13/LDAP The CNAF notes also mention that certain attributes are "deprecated and their use should be removed from any software". Does this mean info-provides "must" (or "should", or "may", see RFC 2119) refrain from publishing deprecated attributes? For example, should no info-provider be publishing GlueChunkKey anymore? For publishing SRM spaces, I found a *proposal* for how this should be done[4]. Confusingly, this contradicts the GLUE/LDAP notes[3] as it stipulates that "mds-vo-name = local" must be used, whereas the notes state that mds-vo-name has been removed from the DIT; in practise "mds-vo-name = resource" (as a primary document, for feeding into GIP) is what seems to work. [4] https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/LCG/GSSDGLUEProposal Finally, (prodding Laurence) I could not find *any* statement about what format GIP supports as primary input (although I might have missed this). I'd assume this is roughly GLUE v1.3/LDAP, but apparently there's some magic happens with DNs with RDF of "mds-vo-name=resource". Is this (still) true? Is it required? What other mappings and translations are possible? Sorry, I'm sure this info is well known by others, but it doesn't appear to be documented. Can some knowledgable person take on responsibility for ensuring this is all properly documented? Cheers, Paul.