September 2006 - graap-wg

minutes from Sep 27 telecon
by Jim Pruyne 11 Oct '06

11 Oct '06

Are attached. The next call will be in two weeks, on Oct. 11. --- Jim Minutes from the September 27, 2006 GRAAP Telecon Attendees --------- Jim Pruyne Asit Dan Toshi Nakata Tianchao Li(?) Discussion ---------- - GFSG is recommending a new 30-day public comment period on WS-Agreement due to the large number of comments we received previously. - Part of the suggestion is to solicit comments from outside of GGF (e.g. from OASIS). - Toshi can work on a change summary by extracting from the slides he did at previous GGFs. - Jim will apply the new header stuff to the document and will communicate with Greg Newby. - At GGF17: - Workshop for implementers at GGF was on intro. day and we heard from various approaches, including as a basis for higher-level operations such as negotiation. They were looking for the spec. to get stabilized. - Approach to getting a primer done is to annotate the slides from the tutorial given by Toshi and Heiko and make those more widely distributed. - Telecons will be every other week with a focus on the implementations. - Next GGF will be done more workshop style during the regular GGF session days to help the attendance and support. - The approach to interoperability is to try to use a subset of JSDL as the domain shared across implementations. We'll see what interoperability processes have been used in other WGs. - Negotiation was also discussed in a session. There's quite a bit of interest, but getting a spec. done in this area may be difficult. - Asit recommends that we get alignment with outside groups as a focus for the WG going forward as it is needed to see adoption of the spec.

4 5

telecon on 9/27
by Jim Pruyne 30 Sep '06

30 Sep '06

Folks, As discussed at GGF two weeks ago, we're moving to an every other week telecon schedule. We'll start that tomorrow, 9/27 at the regular times, and we'll continue to meet on Wednesdays. Details are below. 9:00AM Central Daylight Time US (UTC-5) which should be: 10:00AM Eastern Daylight Time US 1500 UK 1600 Germany 2300 Japan 2100 Thailand Phone Number: 866-673-8466 in the US. 702-477-6031 for those outside the US. Conference code #8578310. For this call, we'll discuss the outcomes of the most recent GGF, and share the recommendation from the GFSG on the most recent submission of WS-Agreement to them. --- Jim

3 5

Re: [GRAAP-WG] minutes from Sep 27 telecon
by Karl Czajkowski 27 Sep '06

27 Sep '06

On Sep 27, Mark McKeown modulated: > > Hi Karl, > I am not sure I understand your issue but I have > recently read the WS-Agreement spec and have some questions > regarding the use of WS-Addressing with WS-Agreement. > The basic issue is that the factory output message includes the EPR of the newly created Agreement resource. Currently, I believe the WSDL has used a specific wsa:EndpointReference_Type for this. Making it xsd:any would prevent us from having to reissue the WSDL, e.g. with a new namespace, each time someone wants to support a different endpoint reference type. The question is whether we want WS-Agreement to be generic in the face of multiple WS-Addressing versions, for whatever EPRs we must encode in the WS-Agreement message bodies. This is an issue today, with people trying to implement the specification in different tooling environments which use different drafts etc. I am not sure whether this issue will ever disappear, e.g. is there a "final" WS-Addressing specification which will never be revised and require more updates of WS-Agreement implementations in practice... ... > To me this means that the wsag:initiatorAgreementEPR > and wsag:agreementAcceptanceEPR elements in Section 9.1.1.1 > and 9.2.1.1 are not required: WS-Addressing provides the > required functionality. Also there is no requirement for the > Accept/Reject operation on the AgreementAcceptance resource; > WS-Addressing wsa:MessageId and wsa:RelatesTo can be used to > map agreement requests to responses. > The initiatorAgreement is not just for a "reply". It is making the service aware of an (optional) peer resource representing the same agreement, but from the "offering party's point of view". It would potentially be the target for multiple operations, resource propery queries, notification subscriptions etc. Many aspects of the WS-Agreement WSDL is geared to being implementable with "yesterday's and today's" WS tooling, where abstract in/out patterns are naively mapped to synchronous "RPC over SOAP over HTTP" implementations. The reason behind the PendingAgreement and AgreementAcceptance mechanism is to support a long delay in the agreement decision process, while not making WS-Agreement too difficult to use with older or simplistic tooling. For example, we can have unbounded delays in a resource manager, and we cannot depend on the SOAP tooling being capable of correlating the in/out message pair of the synchronous agreement creation across such a delay. With the naive SOAP over HTTP bindings, we would have a very fragile system if the "out" messages would be dropped frequently due to HTTP and TCP timeouts. Also, the forced ordering of in/out message pairs over HTTP would be a problem for making multiple agreement offers and needing to hear the responses in a different natural order than the offers were sent. Similarly, the Accept/Reject is known to be redundant in the face of notification. It provides an optional callback for environments where general subscription to monitor the agreement state is not possible. karl -- Karl Czajkowski karlcz(a)univa.com

2 2

agreement state diagram
by Stephen M Pickles 26 Sep '06

26 Sep '06

While reading the latest WS-Agreement specification (2006/09), I was puzzled by the existence of the transitions from "PendingAndTerminating" to "ObservedAndTerminating", and "ObservedAndTerminating" to "Observed" in the agreement state diagram in section 7.1. Is this because the responder is allowed to choose to observe an agreement even after it has received a Terminate message from the initiator? Stephen

1 0

hi
by Maryann Jeffers 25 Sep '06

25 Sep '06

1 0

Promote your business
by Cruz Culver 22 Sep '06

22 Sep '06

1 0

[Fwd: [graap-wg] Template for dynamic SLA use case document]
by Wolfgang Ziegler 12 Sep '06

12 Sep '06

Dear all, here is the link to the template for the use-cases we just discussed during the third GRAAP session. Best regards Wolfgang -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Betreff: [graap-wg] Template for dynamic SLA use case document Datum: Wed, 10 May 2006 11:57:35 +0200 Von: Philipp Wieder <ph.wieder(a)fz-juelich.de> An: graap-wg(a)gridforum.org Dear All, please find a template for the use case document which we dicussed at GGF 17 at https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/graap-wg/document/Dynamic-SLA-use-case…. It is just the GSA-RG use case document (http://www.ggf.org/documents/GFD.64.pdf) without content and has to be adopted to the GRAAP needs. Best regards, Philipp. -- Wolfgang Ziegler www.scai.fraunhofer.de/ziegler.html Fraunhofer-Institute for Algorithms and Scientific Computing (SCAI) Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany Tel: +49 2241 14 2258; Fax: +49 2241 14 42258 CoreGRID Network of Excellence www.coregrid.net Collaboration Gateway www.coregrid.net/cg Institute on Resource Management and Scheduling www.coregrid.net/irms

3 2

telecon on 12/6
by Jim Pruyne 06 Sep '06

06 Sep '06

All, GGF is next week! Let's finalize plans at our telecon at the usual times and number. 9:00AM Central Daylight Time US (UTC-5) which should be: 10:00AM Eastern Daylight Time US 1500 UK 1600 Germany 2300 Japan 2100 Thailand Phone Number: 866-673-8466 in the US. 702-477-6031 for those outside the US. Conference code #8578310. Thanks. --- Jim

1 0

[wg-all] Mailing List Changes
by Andre Merzky 03 Sep '06

03 Sep '06

Sorry for duplicates ------------------------------------------------------------ As of yesterday, all GGF/OGF mailing lists are migrated to the ogf domain. They are now managed by mailman, the web interface is available at http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo With that migration, all list can be now reached via <list>@ogf.org The old @ggf.org addresses will be available for some time, but are bound to disappear eventually - please start using the ogf addresses! A number of lists have changed their names: ggf-it --> ogf-it ggf-office --> ogf-office ggf-proc-wg --> ogf-proc-wg ggf-sponsors --> ogf-sponsors ggf-tutorials --> ogf-tutorials ggf-compute --> ogf-compute ggflistowners --> ogflistowners ggfstudentmembers --> ogfstudentmembers Postings to the old list names get forwarded to the new ones. With the migration we have also been able to fix the archives - you may have noticed that list archiving stopped sometime in mid June. Well, now its working again, and all mails from June to now have been added to the archive. The list archives can be found at: http://www.ogf.org/archives/<list> If you are an list administrator, and would like to receive the list admin password, please contact postmaster(a)ogf.org. In general, however, we tried to map the old majordomo settings to the mailman settings, in terms of privacy etc, so no or little changes should be required from your side. The spam avoidance policy has been changed to some extent, and is somewhat stricter than before. Please let us know if you experience any trouble with that. On all questions in respect to mailing lists, or mails in general, please contact postmaster(a)ogf.org. Best regards, Andre. -- "So much time, so little to do..." -- Garfield -- wg-all mailing list wg-all(a)ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-all

1 0