November 2006 - jsdl-wg - lists.ogf.org

Re: [jsdl-wg] [ogsa-wg] Nov 30 call minutes
by Donal K. Fellows 30 Nov '06

30 Nov '06

Ian Foster wrote: > Like Steven Newhouse, I'd like to urge caution on the workflow issue. > There are so many research projects, standards activities, and industry > initiatives in this area, and workflow is such a broad area, that we > could easily spend a lot of time to little purpose. I think the one thing that would really make a big difference is a special version of the general workflow problem: co-scheduled activities. This is an important area because it affects how you discover and book resources for jobs, and many of the most interesting computational applications that I've seen have been coupled jobs (e.g. where you hook an oceanographic model to a climate model to make better predictions about the global climate, or a local weather model to a hydrographic model to a series of engineering models to work out which bridges over a river are likely to be washed out by a predicted flash flood). The distinguishing thing about these applications is that they are made up out of components that need to be run together (I suppose we could come up with other examples too, such as coordinating scheduling with other resources for things like computer-aided surgery) and yet this is an area which is not as widely tackled as other parts of the overall workflow space. So if we concentrate on how to do this specific part, we get a big gain without treading on too many people's toes; they'll all still be able to use their favourite orchestration and coordination services to run things. The other key thing here is that very often you want to have co-scheduling, but you (the user) don't actually want to pick a specific time; so long as the timeslices of the apps are coordinated, the times themselves are far less important. (I can remember trying to do demos of coupled applications without such a coupled reservation system; it all failed completely, which was supremely embarrassing!) I also think it also fits well with JSDL's step-by-step bottom-up mission. Donal.

2 1

AI-11.29c: WS-Addressing "optionnal tag on extension"
by Michel Drescher 30 Nov '06

30 Nov '06

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Folks, here's the relevant information how WS-Addressing solved a similar issue regarding the WS-Addressing binding: The main WS-Addressing page can be found at http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/ The latest published recommendations for WS-Addressing are: - WS-Addressing 1.0 - core http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-ws-addr-core-20060509/ - WS-Addressing 1.0 - SOAP Biding http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-ws-addr-soap-20060509/ The third document that completes the WS-Addressing 1.0 specification family of documents specifies the WSDL Binding. This document, however, is still a Candidate Recommendation: - WS-Addressing 1.0 - WSDL Binding http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-ws-addr-wsdl-20060529/ The relevant information can be found in the WSDL Binding document, and in the accompanying XML Schema definition, which can be found at http://www.w3.org/2006/02/addressing/wsdl/ws-addr-wsdl.xsd Chapter 3.1 of the WSDL Binding document describes the indication of the use of WS-Addressing in a WSDL document. It defines an empty element "wsaw:UsingAdddressing" element that allows for composition with any attribute from other namespaces. In particular, the WS-Addressing 1.0 WSDL Bining document uses the "wsdl:required" attribute to mix-in the level of WS-Adddressing enfoorcement. The "wsaw:UsingAddressing" element SHOULD appear in the wsdl:binding section, but MAY instead appear in wsdl:port (WSDL 1.1) or wsdl20:endpoint if WS-Addressing compliance shall be indicated for a specific endpoint. Cheers, Michel - -- Michel <dot> Drescher <at> uk <dot> fujitsu <dot> com Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe +44 20 8606 4834 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFbxEMk0lMZTNKw4QRAiIfAJ9i7mURuiYmumoHpKes8kx6hnSL5ACgwIXK JwEE8K+90nalDZyTfOunSjo= =DPUC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

ws-policy specification
by Fabio Benedetti 30 Nov '06

30 Nov '06

Following up today discussion on the call about the specification of optional or mandatory extension to JSDL, following is the link to the WS-Policy specification http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-ws-policy-20061117/ In section 4.3.1 is described how domain specific policy assertions can specify if they are optional or mandatory Ciao, Fabio Fabio Benedetti STSM SWG/Tivoli Job Scheduling Development Via Sciangai, 53 00144 Rome Phone: +39 06596 62433 Fax: +39 06596 62077 eMail: fabio.benedetti(a)it.ibm.com

3 3

FYI: workflow discussion (was [Fwd: [ogsa-wg] Materials for tomorrows call])
by Andreas Savva 30 Nov '06

30 Nov '06

I think the material to the attached email should be of interest to at least a few people on this list. Note that the call referred to is today at 1pm UTC, if you would like to attend. > The following is a proposed agenda for OGSA-WG telecon on Nov. 30th. > Thursday from 7am - 9am (CST). > > ** attention: new international number ** > > Dial-in numbers for Thursday: > Free: +1-888-452-0308 > Intl/Toll: +(210) 234-7446 > PIN: 71815 > See more information: > - https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/wiki1477 > > Screen share service will be provided. > URL: http://ogsa.glance.net > Session key: 1130 > See more explanation: > https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/wiki1584 The link to the full agenda: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/ogsa-wg/2006-November/002312.html -- Andreas Savva Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd

2 3

HPC Profile Call Minutes - 11/29
by Richard Ciapala 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

Attendees * Luigi * Andrew * Mark * Duane * Marty * Glenn * Chris * Joel * Vivian * Stephen * Peter * Rich Notes * We decided to work through the BES issues in Marty's email over the next couple of weeks with the goal of submitting BES to public comment before Christmas * Andrew will send Chris v27 of the BES specification which will include the changes from the last face-to-face. This is the version we will work from. * We will work from the Axis 1.4 BES WSDL from wiki * We discussed having FactoryResourceAttributesDocumentType encapsulate BasicFactoryResourceAttributesDocumentType instead of derive from it. No one had any issues with this. * We discussed having GetFactoryAttributesDocument take any type of filter to limit the amount of data returned. Rich will write up more detail on this and send it out to mailing list. If we go down this route, there should also be a way for the service to publish the filters it supports. * Chris start writing up solutions to the other BES issues mentioned and send them out to the mailing list * Discussed use of WS-BaseFaults. Need to research what the previous issues were. Thanks

1 0

29 Nov call minutes
by Michel Drescher 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Folks, the minutes of today's call are on Gridforge: http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc14040?nav=1 Cheers, Michel - -- Michel <dot> Drescher <at> uk <dot> fujitsu <dot> com Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe +44 20 8606 4834 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFFbabCk0lMZTNKw4QRArkZAJ42KEm++e092U//y2pZJUn59p7U6QCdFvYc LmnHYT6493NpRIC2XMolk9A= =TvKM -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

JSDL Teleconference - 29 November 2006 (2pm UTC)
by Andreas Savva 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

As promised our next call is Wednesday, Nov. 29, at *2:00pm UTC*. Call-in details are at the bottom. As a proposed agenda: 1. Agenda bashing 2. Update on JSDL-related discussions from Nov. OGSA F2F / SC06 3. JSDL 1.1 - Review new issues and kick off work - Any volunteers to review email archive for issues from summer JSDL/HPCP discussions [Recall the plan is to have a completed draft by OGF19.] 4. New extension drafts - A new draft for Parallel Application (SPMDApplication) should be ready. 5. AOB - Initial OGF19 planning/discussion(?) Date: ** 29 November 2006 ** Time: 14:00 UTC / 9:00 EST / 6:00 PST / 23:00 JST Duration: 1 hour Dial-in numbers (toll): US: +1 718 3541071 (New York) or +1 408 9616509 (San Jose) UK: +44 207 3655269 (London) Japan: +81 3 3570 8225 (Tokyo) Other countries: http://tinyurl.com/eg48j User guide: http://tinyurl.com/qknrf Teleconference participant PIN: 4371991 Screen share: http://jsdl.glance.net [Glance code: 1129] -- Andreas Savva Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd

1 1

Reminder: HPC Profile conf call Wed Nov 29 8am Pacific time: post-SC2006 discussion
by Marty Humphrey 29 Nov '06

29 Nov '06

Folks, A reminder: we'll have a call tomorrow at 8am Pacific to discuss what we learned from the implementations of the HPC Profile for SC2006. We'll shortly send out telephone call info... -- Marty Quoting Marty Humphrey <humphrey(a)cs.virginia.edu>: > Folks, > > First, I want to THANK EVERYBODY for their hard work leading up to and > including the SC2006 interop demofest! I think we made tremendous progress > and I want to continue the momentum inside the BES, JSDL, and HPC Profile > working groups!!!! > > I propose that we have a conference call on Wed Nov 29 at 8am US Pacific > time to discuss what we each learned while we implemented the HPC Profile, > and where we as a group go from here. Please let me know if you can make > this call (a few people said that Fridays were not good, so we're trying a > different day -- but note: this is not necessarily proposed as a weekly > call, this is just a "special" call to discuss things while SC is still in > our minds). > > Rich Ciapala, Chris Smith and I tried to identify the unresolved issues that > we either directly encountered or someone raised on the mailing list. We > have certainly tried to capture everything but we probably missed a few > things. > > > Audience > > Topic > > > HPCP WG > > Finalize security additions to profile > > > BES WG > > Finalize faults for all operations > > > BES WG > > Limit amount of data that can be returned from GetAttributesDocument > > > HPCP WG > > Tools for which the schemas should work cleanly with > > > JSDL WG > > RangeValue_Type element clarifications > > * If a single min value and a single max value are to be specified, > should it be done with Boundary_Type's or a single Range_Type? > > * I assume Exact takes precedence over any specified Boundary_Type > or Range_Type's since Exact is a MUST and the others are optional. > > > BES WG > > Finalize Fault element's type for multiple response operations. We changed > this from soap:Fault to xsd:anyType for the demo. > > > HPCP WG > > Finalize list of dependent WS-I specs > > > BES WG > > Use of QNAMEs in GetAttributesDocument response > > > HPCP WG > > Data staging support > > > BES WG > > Clarify operations semantics (i.e. TerminateActivity) > > So, please let me know if you can make this call on Wed Nov 29. Also, let's > start email discussions on the appropriate mailing lists to attempt to > resolve some of these (or at least prioritize these and identify new ones) > before the call next Wednesday. > > Thanks again -- I think everything's coming together really well!!! > > -- Marty > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

2 1

Re: [jsdl-wg] [ogsa-wg] BES Comments
by Donal K. Fellows 24 Nov '06

24 Nov '06

Strong, Paul wrote: > vii) Do you expect to extend the BES model to activities > that are not binaries running on operating systems? Such activity extensions do fit some of the ideas that have been floating around in the JSDL group for a few years now. In particular, activities might include things like database queries, webservice invokations, and data transfers. None of those three have had any serious effort into design of a real JSDL extension though, and there are some complexities in the understanding of the meaning of the concept of a resource in some of the cases. Given that, and the fact that BES is a JSDL enactment engine spec, I'd say that extending in the way you suggest is distinctly possible. The priority of what gets done when depends on who turns up to do the work, as always... :-) Donal.

1 0

HPC Profile conf call Wed Nov 29 8am Pacific time: post-SC2006 discussion
by Marty Humphrey 22 Nov '06

22 Nov '06

Folks, First, I want to THANK EVERYBODY for their hard work leading up to and including the SC2006 interop demofest! I think we made tremendous progress and I want to continue the momentum inside the BES, JSDL, and HPC Profile working groups!!!! I propose that we have a conference call on Wed Nov 29 at 8am US Pacific time to discuss what we each learned while we implemented the HPC Profile, and where we as a group go from here. Please let me know if you can make this call (a few people said that Fridays were not good, so we're trying a different day -- but note: this is not necessarily proposed as a weekly call, this is just a "special" call to discuss things while SC is still in our minds). Rich Ciapala, Chris Smith and I tried to identify the unresolved issues that we either directly encountered or someone raised on the mailing list. We have certainly tried to capture everything but we probably missed a few things. Audience Topic HPCP WG Finalize security additions to profile BES WG Finalize faults for all operations BES WG Limit amount of data that can be returned from GetAttributesDocument HPCP WG Tools for which the schemas should work cleanly with JSDL WG RangeValue_Type element clarifications . If a single min value and a single max value are to be specified, should it be done with Boundary_Type's or a single Range_Type? . I assume Exact takes precedence over any specified Boundary_Type or Range_Type's since Exact is a MUST and the others are optional. BES WG Finalize Fault element's type for multiple response operations. We changed this from soap:Fault to xsd:anyType for the demo. HPCP WG Finalize list of dependent WS-I specs BES WG Use of QNAMEs in GetAttributesDocument response HPCP WG Data staging support BES WG Clarify operations semantics (i.e. TerminateActivity) So, please let me know if you can make this call on Wed Nov 29. Also, let's start email discussions on the appropriate mailing lists to attempt to resolve some of these (or at least prioritize these and identify new ones) before the call next Wednesday. Thanks again -- I think everything's coming together really well!!! -- Marty

4 3