Hi: Probably I should be explaining what I am trying to do. Thanks to the discussion on the mailing list in August, many points which need to be resolved are becoming clearer. Unfortunately, I don't have the answers to most of the points, and I currently lack the time / effort to delve into deep investigation.. OTOH I don't want to leave the micro-spec to be uncompleted and for more realistic discussion felt that blue-print ( or template if you like) of the spec would be needed. I am (very slowly) compiling the blue-print (based on the WS-Agreement Spec). In order to handle my limited English vocabulary, I am borrowing quite a bit of WS-Agreement Spec, so would expect the document to be authored by the original authors and any new contributors. Comments on how to proceed as well as improving the content is very much welcome. Also, for the glossary, I've included terms which had been defined in the original WS-Agreement Spec and is referred in the new spec. Is this necessary? or would citing WS-Agreement be enough? Best Regards Toshi ----- Toshiyuki Nakata 中田 登志之 Executive Chief Engineer, Central Research Lab. NEC 1753, Shimonumabe, Nakahara-Ku, Kawasaki,Kanagawa 211-8666,Japan Tel +81-44-431-7653 (NEC Internal 22-60035) Fax +81-44-431-7609 (NEC Internal 22-60509)
-----Original Message----- From: Toshiyuki Nakata [mailto:t-nakata@cw.jp.nec.com] Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2007 4:35 PM To: 'Toshiyuki Nakata' Cc: 'GRAAP-WG' Subject: New Pages/ Usage Scenarios Glossaries.
Hi: I've updated the Wishlist page https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.graap -wg/wiki/ReNeg otiationWishlists to add pointers to Usage Scenarios https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.graap -wg/wiki/Usage Scenarios and Glossary https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.graap -wg/wiki/Gloss aryPage
#I'm afraid I hadn't noticed the naming convention of the wiki. #I probably need to put a prefix on the newer pages so that there won't be name conflicts. #Does anyone know of how to rename already established ones?
Comments very much welcome.
I'm afraid I won't be able to participate in OGF21 due to schedule c[lr]ashes but hope to respond on the wiki / mailing lists.
Best Regards Toshi ----- Toshiyuki Nakata 中田 登志之 Executive Chief Engineer, Central Research Lab. NEC 1753, Shimonumabe, Nakahara-Ku, Kawasaki,Kanagawa 211-8666,Japan Tel +81-44-431-7653 (NEC Internal 22-60035) Fax +81-44-431-7609 (NEC Internal 22-60509)
-----Original Message----- From: Toshiyuki Nakata [mailto:t-nakata@cw.jp.nec.com] Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 9:31 AM To: 'Dominic Battre' Cc: 'GRAAP-WG' Subject: RE: [GRAAP-WG] Modification to the wiki Page on Renegotiating an established Agreement
Hi: Dominic： Thank you very much for your thoughtful comments. I'll just address the first one. For the rest, please give me some time.
ad "New EPR or re-write the current WS-AG document?" during the renegotiation the agreement is in some kind of intermediate change (i.e. it might be in a proposed new status that is not yet accepted by the other party), don't we need a new EPR for that?
The reason that I wanted to re-write the current WS-AG rather than a new EPR was that one could never know who might be using the old EPR. In a complex scenario like the one I mentioned in Business Grid Computing case or some broker case, old EPR might be propagated to other parties who would be using it. So I thought that it would not be realistic to assure that the NEW EPR would be propagated to all the bodies who might be referring to the old EPR.
On the other hand, re-writing the current WS-AG document kept by the Agreement Responder does cause a serious race condition when the AR is the requestor for modifying the Agreement. (ie. it must be re-written only after the AI says he agrees, but when?)
What would the ResourceProperties (e.g. the SDTs or GTs) look like in the intermediate state? (DB, 2007/08/22) I am assuming that the service (under the old SLA) is still being provided even while the renegotiation is going on. (If the service is stopped, then we don't need renegotiation. We just terminate the old agreement and create a new agreement)
As for the rest of your comments, essentially I agree with you. The only problemis that some of them seem to be very difficult to address :-( In any case, please give me some time as I can only do this work sporadically.
Best regards Toshi ----- Toshiyuki Nakata 中田 登志之 Executive Chief Engineer, Central Research Lab. NEC 1753, Shimonumabe, Nakahara-Ku, Kawasaki,Kanagawa 211-8666,Japan Tel +81-44-431-7653 (NEC Internal 22-60035) Fax +81-44-431-7609 (NEC Internal 22-60509)
-----Original Message----- From: Dominic Battre [mailto:mailinglists@battre.de] Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 5:18 AM To: Toshiyuki Nakata Cc: 'GRAAP-WG' Subject: Re: [GRAAP-WG] Modification to the wiki Page on Renegotiating an established Agreement
Hi Toshi,
I did some brainstorming and added some random comments/wishes/ideas. Please have a look whether anything could be useful for the further proceeding. I don't know how much you have discussed and discarded before. Please feel free to ask me, in case my comments are confusing.
Best regards,
Dominic
Toshiyuki Nakata wrote:
Hi: I've put up some more things to ponder on the re-negotiation Wiki Page
https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.graap -wg/wiki/ReNeg
otiationWishlists?_message=1187773027531 esp. No.7 is rather a tough one.
Comments welcome.
Best Regards Toshi ----- Toshiyuki Nakata 中田 登志之 Executive Chief Engineer, Central Research Lab. NEC 1753, Shimonumabe, Nakahara-Ku, Kawasaki,Kanagawa 211-8666,Japan Tel +81-44-431-7653 (NEC Internal 22-60035) Fax +81-44-431-7609 (NEC Internal 22-60509)
-------------------------------------------------------------- ----------
-- graap-wg mailing list graap-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/graap-wg