March 2011 - occi-wg - lists.ogf.org

Reminder: concall in 3h
by Thijs Metsch 30 Mar '11

30 Mar '11

Hi, with all countries being back to summer time we can continue our weekly concalls. Please join here: http://forge.ogf.org/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.occi-wg/wiki/Teleconferen… We'll have some demos today of OCCI implementations - going to be interesting :-) Cheers, -Thijs

1 0

OCCI Security Considerations
by alexander.papaspyrou＠tu-dortmund.de 30 Mar '11

30 Mar '11

Folks, during the week (and in the general discussion before), concerns have been raised regarding the overly simple security considerations in the OCCI family of specifications. This aspect also came up as part of the group discussion in this week's sessions. Andre Merzky and I tried to sum up those concerns and create a more elaborate text for the "Security Considerations" sections of the three documents. Please find the current draft of these sections attached to this email. We additionally have them online in a Google Docs document for easier collaborative editing. Please let me know if you want access to it. Feedback would be very welcome; please reply ASAP so that we can close the tracker items and finally get a P-REC! Best, Alexander

3 2

Cloud Standards Plug Fest - April 19th-21st, Planning meeting next Tuesday 1/11
by Mark Carlson 29 Mar '11

29 Mar '11

The CSI is sponsoring a CDMI plug fest at the SNIA Technology Center April 19-21st. This meeting is the kick off of planning for that event. Please plan to attend to find out more information and help us plan, even if you don't think you will be ready with your implementation by then. -- mark *Event Title*: CDMI Plug Fest Kickoff Meeting ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Date*: Tuesday, 11 January 2011, 10:00am - 11:00am PT *Description* Kick off meeting to start planning the April CDMI Plugfest 800-482-3251 719-457-5113 Participant Passcode: 195238 Webex Info: http://snia.webex.com Meeting Password: cloud2011 Meeting Name: CDMI Plug Fest ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Agenda* Logistics Budget Test Matrix Recruiting participation Draft participation agreement

8 10

Reminder: Cloud Plug Fest Call now
by Mark Carlson 29 Mar '11

29 Mar '11

*Event Title*: Cloud Plug Fest Planning Meeting Agenda <https://www.snia.org/apps/org/workgroup/cloudtwg/event.php?event_id=44415> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Date*: Tuesday, 29 March 2011, 10:00am - 11:00am PT *Description* ------------------------------------------------------- Meeting information ------------------------------------------------------- Topic: Cloud Plug Fest Planning Meeting Date: Tuesdays Time: 11:00 am, Mountain Standard Time (Denver, GMT-07:00) Meeting Password: cloud2011 ------------------------------------------------------- To start or join the online meeting ------------------------------------------------------- Go to snia.webex.com and select Join on Cloud Storage TWG - F2F ------------------------------------------------------- Teleconference information ------------------------------------------------------- Call-in toll-free number: 1-(866) 682-4770 (US) Call-in number: 1-(408) 774-4073 (US) Show global numbers: https://www2.audiocontrols.net/WebExAdaptor/globalnumber?participantcode=12… <https://www2.audiocontrols.net/WebExAdaptor/globalnumber?participantcode=12…> Conference Code: 1212488# Security Code: 1212# ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Agenda* Discuss matrix for testing features CDMI Matrix OCCI Matrix OCCI/CDMI integration

1 0

A two-word suggestion to the OCCI group
by Alan Sill 29 Mar '11

29 Mar '11

Here it is: Write books. (I personally would like to see something like "OCCI in Practice" in the O'Reilly series, for example.) OK, a few more words: Linux Journal articles, blogs, etc. would also be good. OCCI is poised to be a major contribution to the cloud standards and tools landscape -- it's time to document it. Let me know if you want OGF to help promote contact between OCCI WG members and a publisher. Alan Alan Sill, Ph.D Senior Scientist, High Performance Computing Center Adjunct Professor of Physics TTU ==================================================================== : Alan Sill, Texas Tech University Office: Drane 162, MS 4-1167 : : e-mail: Alan.Sill(a)ttu.edu ph. 806-742-4350 fax 806-742-4358 : ====================================================================

1 0

Content type and Accept
by Gary Mazz 28 Mar '11

28 Mar '11

Hi, I just realized that Content Type of a HTTP request and the response may be in different formats.. Is this permissible, or should I rephrase, should we make this permissible or force them to be the same ? gary

2 3

Tracker Item on XHTML5 in the editor pipeline
by alexander.papaspyrou＠tu-dortmund.de 25 Mar '11

25 Mar '11

Folks, it seems that there is an obsolete entry in the tracker for the submission process: http://forge.ogf.org/sf/go/artf6421?nav=1 I had the impression that we do not do an explicit XHTML5 rendering, but rather than that, the RDFa one. Andy, can you comment of this? If I got it correct, we could just close the item, and we'd be "one down"! Best, Alexander

3 2

Fwd: OCCI and DMTF
by Sill, Alan 24 Mar '11

24 Mar '11

On behalf of OGF, per our discussions in Taiwan and the resulting Board meeting feedback, I have sent the following letter to Mark Carlson, VP of Alliances for DMTF and we are now awaiting their response. Thanks everyone for their feedback. Alan Begin forwarded message: From: "Sill, Alan" <alan.sill(a)ttu.edu<mailto:alan.sill@ttu.edu>> Date: March 23, 2011 10:51:33 PM GMT+08:00 To: Mark Carlson <mark.carlson(a)oracle.com<mailto:mark.carlson@oracle.com>> Cc: "Sill, Alan" <alan.sill(a)ttu.edu<mailto:alan.sill@ttu.edu>>, Thijs Metsch <tmetsch(a)platform.com<mailto:tmetsch@platform.com>>, Winston Bumpus <wbumpus(a)vmware.com<mailto:wbumpus@vmware.com>>, "vp-alliances(a)dmtf.org<mailto:vp-alliances@dmtf.org>" <vp-alliances(a)dmtf.org<mailto:vp-alliances@dmtf.org>>, Steven Newhouse <steven.newhouse(a)egi.eu<mailto:steven.newhouse@egi.eu>>, David Snelling <David.Snelling(a)uk.fujitsu.com<mailto:David.Snelling@uk.fujitsu.com>>, David Wallom <david.wallom(a)oerc.ox.ac.uk<mailto:david.wallom@oerc.ox.ac.uk>>, Joel Replogle <replogle(a)ogf.org<mailto:replogle@ogf.org>> Subject: Re: OCCI and DMTF Mark, Thijs has offered the following summary of his suggested steps. These meet approval from other active leading members in the OCCI-WG, and an informal poll of our OGF formal leadership also indicates that these are acceptable steps. I include Thijs's message along with yours, as I think we are very close to being able to agree to a plan that could get the OGF Board's blessing and approval. In my mind, the immediate steps boil down to this: - Before submitting any OGF documents to DMTF through DMTF's formal submission process, we get your (DMTF's) approval to attach a rider to that process acknowledging that OGF's copyright and IP statements will remain in place and not be removed, even after such a submission. - The above submission can proceed independently and immediately upon such an agreement, since it is essentially completely compatible with OGF's existing terms of use for its formally published documents. It does not have to wait for further steps to be followed, although we would like to follow with others since we are interested in moving on with other related cooperative steps as described below. - We agree to pursue an update to our existing work register with the intent to pursue substantial cooperative work. The details can be worked out, but an outline is given by Thijs's message below, which has the right elements for joint work from our point of view. The work register and any associated agreement documents can be brought to the OGF Board for approval when all the participants are happy. - We are in the final stages of work on the three first OGF documents on OCCI, namely the Core, Infrastructure and HTTP Rendering documents. All will be released as Recommendation-track documents (P-RECs) when complete. The first two are in the final stages of internal Standards Council review after completion of editing following public comment, and should be out by the first few days of April at the latest. The HTTP Rendering document is in public comment until March 28, and its release timescale will be set by the public comments received and any resulting work that needs to be done. An ideal situation from my point of view, assuming that all of the above works, is for OGF to announce its upcoming partnership with DMTF (and possibly SNIA, since the cooperative agreement on CDMI with SNIA is much more current and could be brought up to date on the same or a similar timescale) on future versions of the relevant standards at or near the time that we announce the release of the OCCI Core and Infrastructure specifications, with a comment about the upcoming release of the HTTP Rendering document included. We can work the rest of the details in your and Thijs's messages below later if we can come to agreement on the basic points above. I have talked these points over with some members of the Board, including David Wallom as VP of Community and our Board chair Steven Newhouse, and believe that these are basically the points that we want. I can add as footnotes: - Full observer status for all OGF members in the Cloud Management Working Group in DMTF for the purpose of work on the OCCI-related steps, regardless of academic or industrial status, would be helpful. Voting status in DMTF for the CMWG for joint steps wold also be desirable (it is not essential, since joint steps by definition would need agreement from all parties, but it would be helpful to find a way for this to happen.) - Some sort of cooperative language in the work register regarding decisions on steps like the ones Thijs describes below would be helpful, although the exact steps can be subject to negotiation. One example method might be for all voting steps on OCCI to be taken in public session and subject to the usual OGF IP agreements, even if discussions leading to such votes have taken place previously in closed DMTF sessions. We need, in essence, to find methods to work together that respect the processes of each organization while leaving room for the internal work to take place that allows both organizations to move forward in full engagement with their communities. If we agree on the above in principle and have a process in place to describe work to be done crisply and quickly, then I think we have the essence of an agreement. The exact ownership of the specs in the future, and which organization will approach the ISO or other de jure standards organization, can be left for future discussion. As the OGF copyright explicitly allows for derivative works, i don't see this as a problem. Alan On Mar 23, 2011, at 6:11 PM, Thijs Metsch wrote: I would simply add the following bullet points to our existing work register under the OCCI paragraph: 1. OGF is willing to submit the OCCI documents to DMTF. OGF will keep and hold the Trademark and Copyright over OCCI. 2. DMTF allows participants from the OCCI working group to take part in the DMTF cloud related meetings. 3. DMTF will contribute any changes made to OCCI specification back to the OCCI working group for consideration. The OCCI working group will threat those changes as if they would come from an individual person inside of the group. 4. In case that just parts of the OCCI specification are taken or altered: 1-3 still apply These points have been discussed with DMTF and they are basically fine with it. On Mar 15, 2011, at 8:51 PM, Mark Carlson wrote: I think it is important that the industry see a continuous stream of innovation from the joint OGF/DMTF cloud standards effort. It should be possible to publish future versions using both copyright notices and a copyright license that works for all parties. I'd like to explore something like the following: 1) OGF (continues to) publish 1.x of OCCI on OGF site under OGF copyright 2) OGF submits OCCI 1.x to DMTF to coordinate with all the other submissions 3) DMTF publishes OCCI 2.0 with joint OGF/DMTF copyright (DMTF has not yet named their spec, so this is still possible) 4) OGF works on compatible extensions to OCCI 2.0 for the eScience/Grid community 5) OGF publishes extensions, then submits them into DMTF for work on OCCI 2.x 6) continue to work in this manner on future versions DMTF would also take OCCI 2.0 and above to ISO for de jure standardization Thoughts? -- mark On 3/15/11 3:16 AM, Sill, Alan wrote: Winston, Nice to talk with you again! I believe that the OGF board would agree to a proposal for submission of the soon-to-be-published OCCI specs if DMTF can guarantee the retention of the OGF copyright in future publications dependent on these documents. There may be other issues, but I believe they are minor. If this is a problem, OGF is prepared to revise its work register with DMTF with the goal to work towards a future revision of the OCCI specs as a joint product with DMTF, with terms to be worked out in the near future. I think there is great value in working together, and clear interest from many members of our community in doing so. I hope we will be able to talk about this in more detail in the near future. Alan On Mar 15, 2011, at 10:05 AM, "Thijs Metsch" < tmetsch(a)platform.com<mailto:tmetsch@platform.com><mailto:tmetsch@platform.com> wrote: Dear Winston, I would like to push the OCCI/DMTF collaboration to the next level. To speed up discussions I want to introduce you to Alan Sill. He is the VP of Standards for OGF and does in great job in driving adoption for OGF's standards. There are currently some minor copyright questions so I think best and fastest would be to get you guys connected. All the best, -Thijs -----Original Message----- From: Winston Bumpus [ <mailto:wbumpus@vmware.com>mailto:wbumpus@vmware.com ] Sent: Mon 07.03.2011 16:03 To: Thijs Metsch; andy(a)edmonds.be<mailto:andy@edmonds.be><mailto:andy@edmonds.be>; <mailto:alexis@rabbitmq.com> alexis(a)rabbitmq.com<mailto:alexis@rabbitmq.com><mailto:alexis@rabbitmq.com> Cc: <mailto:vp-alliances@dmtf.org> vp-alliances(a)dmtf.org<mailto:vp-alliances@dmtf.org><mailto:vp-alliances@dmtf.org> Subject: RE: OCCI and DMTF Thijs, Thanks. CMWG face-to-face this week in Portland, OR. Mark Carlson, should have reached out to you to see if you could call-in tomorrow am PST. Keep us posted on contact me if you or the board has any questions. Best wishes, Winston Bumpus President, DMTF <http://www.dmtf.org>www.dmtf.org<http://www.dmtf.org> Director of Standards Architecture VMware, Inc. 650.427.2787 | Voice 650.644.7968 | Mobile <http://www.VMware.com/standards>www.VMware.com/standards<http://www.VMware.com/standards> -----Original Message----- From: Thijs Metsch [ <mailto:tmetsch@platform.com>mailto:tmetsch@platform.com ] Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 12:49 AM To: Winston Bumpus; andy(a)edmonds.be<mailto:andy@edmonds.be><mailto:andy@edmonds.be>; <mailto:alexis@rabbitmq.com> alexis(a)rabbitmq.com<mailto:alexis@rabbitmq.com><mailto:alexis@rabbitmq.com> Cc: <mailto:vp-alliances@dmtf.org> vp-alliances(a)dmtf.org<mailto:vp-alliances@dmtf.org><mailto:vp-alliances@dmtf.org> Subject: RE: OCCI and DMTF I have updated the OGF board and I guess we'll discuss these matters during todays OGF board meeting. Hope to give positiv feedback soon. Is that the latest OGF-DMTF work register? We might want to start updating in while the boards are still meeting. Cheers, -Thijs -----Original Message----- From: Winston Bumpus [ <mailto:wbumpus@vmware.com>mailto:wbumpus@vmware.com ] Sent: Mittwoch, 16. Februar 2011 17:28 To: Thijs Metsch; andy(a)edmonds.be<mailto:andy@edmonds.be><mailto:andy@edmonds.be>; 'alexis(a)rabbitmq.com<mailto:alexis@rabbitmq.com><mailto:alexis@rabbitmq.com> ' Cc: <mailto:vp-alliances@dmtf.org> vp-alliances(a)dmtf.org<mailto:vp-alliances@dmtf.org><mailto:vp-alliances@dmtf.org> Subject: OCCI and DMTF All, Thanks again for your time yesterday. I wanted to give you an update after further socialization within the DMTF CMWG. Today we discussed the possibility to collaborate with OGF on OCCI as a way forward. (there were about 30 representatives on the call) No one was opposed to this, but no one was willing to commit to this at this time. A new sub group (to be lead by Mark Carlson ) was formed and will go off an analyze how we move forward and folks agreed that OCCI should be part of that analysis. As Mark is also the DMTF VP of Alliances and also very familiar with OCCI it should be a good way to help this move forward. I have copied him on this email. I think a first step of submitting OCCI to the DMTF would help with this work. <http://dmtf.org/sites/default/files/standards/documents/DSP4011_1.1.0.p><http://dmtf.org/sites/default/files/standards/documents/DSP4011_1.1.0.p>http://dmtf.org/sites/default/files/standards/documents/DSP4011_1.1.0.p df The second step is to up date our current OGF work register. <http://dmtf.org/sites/default/files/OGF-DMTFWorkRegister1_2.pdf> <http://dmtf.org/sites/default/files/OGF-DMTFWorkRegister1_2.pdf> http://dmtf.org/sites/default/files/OGF-DMTFWorkRegister1_2.pdf Regards, Winston Bumpus President, DMTF www.dmtf.org<http://www.dmtf.org><http://www.dmtf.org> <<http://www.dmtf.org/><http://www.dmtf.org/>http://www.dmtf.org/ Director of Standards Architecture VMware, Inc. 650.427.2787 | Voice 650.644.7968 | Mobile www.VMware.com/standards<http://www.VMware.com/standards><http://www.VMware.com/standards> <<http://www.VMware.com/standards><http://www.VMware.com/standards>http://www.VMware.com/standards

1 0

Reminder: concall in 2h
by Thijs Metsch 23 Mar '11

23 Mar '11

Hi, We'll give an status update on ongoing activities and are able to discuss open questions. The bridge info can be found here: http://forge.ogf.org/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.occi-wg/wiki/Teleconferen… Cheers, -Thijs

2 2

Fwd: DMTF - OGF cooperation on OCCI?
by Alan Sill 23 Mar '11

23 Mar '11

The approach below sounds good to me. Any comments? If acceptable to all, I would like to say something extremely cautious along these lines tomorrow, without the details -- e.g., "the OCCi-WG and OGF plan to publish version 1 of the OCCI Core, Infrastructure and HTTP Rendering documents shortly, and are in conversations with DMTF with respect to extending their collaboration to allow joint work on refinements of these and related specifications shortly." Comments? Thanks, Alan Begin forwarded message: > From: David Snelling <david.snelling(a)uk.fujitsu.com> > Date: March 14, 2011 5:24:53 PM GMT+01:00 > To: "Sill, Alan" <alan.sill(a)ttu.edu> > Cc: David Snelling <David.Snelling(a)UK.Fujitsu.com> > Subject: Re: DMTF - OGF cooperation on OCCI? > > Alan, > > The board did not have a lot of time to discuss it, and as we hadn't made a specific decision I didn't force the topic. > > In general discussions, Winston in particular, seemed happy with the idea of a work register deal to accompany the formal submission. I also got back room indications that there would be other submissions along the line of complete solutions, so we would not be alone in this. I think that a strategy like this might work best: > > 1) Publish OCCi V1 ASAP. > > 2) Draft a work register with the DMTF (I have the AI on this). It should include an evaluation of OCCi as a way forward for the DMTF, but cannot bind the WG in any other way. It could outline an evaluation schedule and a target decision date for "go" or "no go" on further joint work. The also include "rules of engagement" for formal on going work, should the EG agree to head that way. This work register should name the outcome of such an engagement as OCCi V2 (aka V1-of-whatever-the-DMTF-might-name-an-initial-spec). [I like the sound of OCCi V1 better. > > 3) In parallel with (2), I believe we should work on an outline of OCCi V1.5, which recommends a path to modify/extend OCCi to meet the use cases outlined by the DMTF. It is this V1.5 of OCCi that we submit to DMTF. That way, we will always exclusively own V1 and can do our own V2 (and 1.5 is a submission version only). If we wanted to publish it as an OGF doc, I would make it an Informational Document - light weight process and easy to manage. > > THoughts? > > > On 14 Mar 2011, at 10:45, Sill, Alan wrote: > >> Dave, >> >> What news from DMTF? >> >> Thanks, >> Alan >> >> >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> From: "Sill, Alan" <alan.sill(a)ttu.edu<mailto:alan.sill@ttu.edu>> >> Date: March 14, 2011 10:43:23 AM GMT >> To: Thijs Metsch <tmetsch(a)platform.com<mailto:tmetsch@platform.com>> >> Cc: Steven Newhouse <steven.newhouse(a)egi.eu<mailto:steven.newhouse@egi.eu>>, Joel Replogle <replogle(a)ogf.org<mailto:replogle@ogf.org>> >> Subject: Re: DMTF - OGF cooperation on OCCI? >> >> Hi Thijs, >> >> I'll let Joel and Steven fill you in on all of the details. I connected for most of the call, but had to leave for the airport shortly after the item was discussed and might have missed any final terminating discussion. >> >> Briefly, the Board was warm to the idea of working together with DMTF on future developments based on OCCI, but feels as I do that the first step is publication of the current version to get the discussion on the table. >> >> Our copyright and license terms are very generous, allowing any type of derivative work to be pursued as London as the copyright statement us preserved. It is not clear to me that submission according to the current procedures of DMTF would preserve that copyright, which is an explicit promise and commitment that we make to our community. Thus further discussion and (as you already suggested) a revision to the work register to produce an "OCCI 2" in cooperation and collaboration with DMTF might be in order and the best way to proceed towards a collaborative work product in the future. >> >> We would need to have close discussions on an equal basis with the DMTF board or management to proceed, and my sense of the commitment in the OGF Board is that we are willing to have these discussions. >> >> As I said, I had to leave the call shortly after the above discussion took place, so I will ask Steven and Joel to make and corrections or additions, and fill us in on any further items that I may gave missed. >> >> Basically, I don't think we can sign away our copyright wholesale to another SDO for what Is essentially entirely a product of the open OGF community. But we are willing to work with DMTF on refining the products to encourage further adoption, improve the products and to create a suite that will be of high value to all components of the community. >> >> Dave Snelling was at the DMTF meeting and appeared to be looking for opportunities to collaborate. >> >> I will be at the Siena Cloudscape meeting, as will Steven, and suggest that we get together there to go over the details as well as to ask you to vet my Siena talk. I think I recall you saying that you will be there also - is that correct? If not, we should coordinate by Skype or email. >> >> Talk with you soon, >> Alan >> >> On Mar 14, 2011, at 8:23 AM, "Thijs Metsch" <<mailto:tmetsch@platform.com>tmetsch(a)platform.com<mailto:tmetsch@platform.com>> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi Alan, >> >> What was the outcome of the board meeting? Can we submit to DMTF? The docs will pop up in the tracker very soon (definitely today!) >> >> Just wondering, because DMTF started it's own group to create a RESTful protocol :-( >> >> Cheers, >> >> -Thijs >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Alan Sill [<mailto:alan.sill@ttu.edu><mailto:alan.sill@ttu.edu>mailto:alan.sill@ttu.edu] >> Sent: Wed 09.03.2011 14:00 >> To: Thijs Metsch >> Cc: Alan Sill >> Subject: Re: DMTF - OGF cooperation on OCCI? >> >> HI, >> >> Close -- are you available for A chat now via Skype? >> >> The Board will be informed, and will have a chance to comment, but the documents are in your hands as the OCCI-WG now and you can alter them as needed before sending in to the Standards Council (GFSG) for final review. that process takes a minimum of two weeks once you put in the documents. >> >> The Board normally does not get involved in the track for standards documents approval, but may want to comment on the request of external submission. We don't really know how to respond to the request for formal submission to DMTF but may be willing to do it as a politeness and to encourage communication. >> >> If extensive changes are anticipated to be needed to get compatibility between OGF and DMTF, we should probably publish now and incorporate any DMTF input you cannot get into this series without altering them substantially into a version 2 in the future. For various reasons, publishing now as the first step is probably what the Board would see as the best way forward. >> >> Alan >> >> On Mar 9, 2011, at 7:49 AM, Thijs Metsch wrote: >> >>> Just to let you know - Andy and I are finalizing the core and infrastructure documents and will submit them to the document track soon. >>> >>> Currently for me all is clear - I hope we can submit the OCCI docs to DMTF as soon as the board is happy (Hopefully tomorrow). We should send out a note to Mark Carlson, Winston and Bob Marcus as soon as we know and let them know we submit it and when (hopefully this Thursday). >>> >>> If there are any questions regarding the DMTF stuff feel free to ping me. I'm in concalls all tomorrow afternoon, but will be able to chat over skype, or dial-in quickly if needed. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> -Thijs >> >> >> >> ______________________________________________________________________ >> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. >> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email >> ______________________________________________________________________ > > Take care: > > Dr. David Snelling < David . Snelling . UK . Fujitsu . com > > Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Limited > Hayes Park Central > Hayes End Road > Hayes, Middlesex UB4 8FE > Reg. No. 4153469 > > +44-7590-293439 (Mobile) > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe Limited > Hayes Park Central, Hayes End Road, Hayes, Middlesex, UB4 8FE > Registered No. 4153469 > > This e-mail and any attachments are for the sole use of addressee(s) and > may contain information which is privileged and confidential. Unauthorised > use or copying for disclosure is strictly prohibited. The fact that this > e-mail has been scanned by Trendmicro Interscan does not guarantee that > it has not been intercepted or amended nor that it is virus-free. >

4 3