Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
I want to understand what people think we need for real interop. The HPC Profile as currently defined seems far from adequate for that purpose. We've mention staging and security as two issues. There are presumably others. Ian. Subramaniam, Ravi wrote:
Hi Andrew,
One question could be "Is the profile as it stands complete from your perspective? At least for the focus/business areas or types of customers that you plan to implement for?"
The motivation is that depending on the verticals (e.g. financial, pharma) there may be some issue that may need to be resolved to be successful. In this way at least some target constituencies that can best benefit from what is currently there can be determined. We can also begin more targeted campaign at the OGF level towards consumers/customers/end-users and providers in that segments. Building traction in one of more specific segments may help build momentum for others.
Ravi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Maguire_Tom@emc.com *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 11:12 AM *To:* grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org *Subject:* Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Is there enough specificity in the profile for your engineers to successfully implement? If not what do you need?
Tom
_______________________________________________ Tom Maguire +1(845) 729-4806
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Grimshaw *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 10:21 AM *To:* 'Ogsa-Wg'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org *Subject:* [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
All,
At the OGSA F2F I was tasked with coming up with a series of questions about the HPC profile experiences to go into a zoomerang, so that an experiences paper could be generated -- either for HPC profile, JSDL, and/or BES.
Here is a start. Note -- comment on/add questions. Do NOT answer them!!! That will come later.
1) Will the HPC-Profile be useful to your organization/company? Explain.
2) Will you engineer your products to be hpc-profile compliant?
3) In your opinion, are there any unresolved ambiguities? Explain?
4) Thoughts on the next profile? Anything in particular from BES or JSDL (or other specification) that you would like to include.
5) Approximately how many person-days did it take you to implement the HPC-profile?
6) What would you change in the HPC-profile? Why?
Remember this is a STRAWMAN ONLY for discussion! Please add, suggest removal, or modify the above.
A
Andrew Grimshaw
Professor of Computer Science
University of Virginia
434-982-2204
grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
-- Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org.
Ian, I'm sorry, but I can't let that "far from adequate" go by without response. For the real business scenarios that we have been pursuing, I do not believe that the HPC Profile is "far from adequate". This has been reinforced by our experience talking with people at SC. Post-thanksgiving, our WG will refine the HPC Profile somewhat, but I don't believe that we will have a significant effort before pushing it to the GGF editor. As you know, its design is one of extensibility and composability. I believe that the HPC "Base Profile" will be sufficient for many real business use cases. I also believe that the planned extensions are important for many situations. - Marty _____ From: ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Ian Foster Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 3:26 PM To: Subramaniam, Ravi Cc: ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org Subject: Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft I want to understand what people think we need for real interop. The HPC Profile as currently defined seems far from adequate for that purpose. We've mention staging and security as two issues. There are presumably others. Ian. Subramaniam, Ravi wrote: Hi Andrew, One question could be "Is the profile as it stands complete from your perspective? At least for the focus/business areas or types of customers that you plan to implement for?" The motivation is that depending on the verticals (e.g. financial, pharma) there may be some issue that may need to be resolved to be successful. In this way at least some target constituencies that can best benefit from what is currently there can be determined. We can also begin more targeted campaign at the OGF level towards consumers/customers/end-users and providers in that segments. Building traction in one of more specific segments may help build momentum for others. Ravi _____ From: ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Maguire_Tom@emc.com Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 11:12 AM To: grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft Is there enough specificity in the profile for your engineers to successfully implement? If not what do you need? Tom _______________________________________________ Tom Maguire +1(845) 729-4806 _____ From: ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Grimshaw Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 10:21 AM To: 'Ogsa-Wg'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft All, At the OGSA F2F I was tasked with coming up with a series of questions about the HPC profile experiences to go into a zoomerang, so that an experiences paper could be generated - either for HPC profile, JSDL, and/or BES. Here is a start. Note - comment on/add questions. Do NOT answer them!!! That will come later. 1) Will the HPC-Profile be useful to your organization/company? Explain. 2) Will you engineer your products to be hpc-profile compliant? 3) In your opinion, are there any unresolved ambiguities? Explain? 4) Thoughts on the next profile? Anything in particular from BES or JSDL (or other specification) that you would like to include. 5) Approximately how many person-days did it take you to implement the HPC-profile? 6) What would you change in the HPC-profile? Why? Remember this is a STRAWMAN ONLY for discussion! Please add, suggest removal, or modify the above. A Andrew Grimshaw Professor of Computer Science University of Virginia 434-982-2204 grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu _____ -- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg -- Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org.
Marty: Please don't apologize: you should never let a comment from me go without response (-: I didn't mean to suggest that the HPC Profile should not be passed to the GGF editor. However, while we should certainly celebrate our success in creating the profile and getting people to implement it, I think it is critically important that we be explicit about how tiny a step we have taken. Otherwise, we risk backlash from the "public" (when they look at this spec we are making such a fuss over) and also, potentially, a loss of focus from the vendors who we need to work towards true interop. For some vendors, having a spec that they can say they are compliant with--and then extend in nonstandard ways to address security, staging, etc., etc.--will be more important than continuing the hard work of specification.We don't want to let that happen. Ian. Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
I'm sorry, but I can't let that "far from adequate" go by without response. For the real business scenarios that we have been pursuing, I do not believe that the HPC Profile is "far from adequate". This has been reinforced by our experience talking with people at SC.
Post-thanksgiving, our WG will refine the HPC Profile somewhat, but I don't believe that we will have a significant effort before pushing it to the GGF editor.
As you know, its design is one of extensibility and composability. I believe that the HPC "Base Profile" will be sufficient for many real business use cases. I also believe that the planned extensions are important for many situations.
- Marty
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Ian Foster *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 3:26 PM *To:* Subramaniam, Ravi *Cc:* ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
I want to understand what people think we need for real interop. The HPC Profile as currently defined seems far from adequate for that purpose. We've mention staging and security as two issues. There are presumably others.
Ian.
Subramaniam, Ravi wrote:
Hi Andrew,
One question could be "Is the profile as it stands complete from your perspective? At least for the focus/business areas or types of customers that you plan to implement for?"
The motivation is that depending on the verticals (e.g. financial, pharma) there may be some issue that may need to be resolved to be successful. In this way at least some target constituencies that can best benefit from what is currently there can be determined. We can also begin more targeted campaign at the OGF level towards consumers/customers/end-users and providers in that segments. Building traction in one of more specific segments may help build momentum for others.
Ravi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Maguire_Tom@emc.com <mailto:Maguire_Tom@emc.com> *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 11:12 AM *To:* grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org>; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Is there enough specificity in the profile for your engineers to successfully implement? If not what do you need?
Tom
_______________________________________________ Tom Maguire +1(845) 729-4806
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Grimshaw *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 10:21 AM *To:* 'Ogsa-Wg'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
All,
At the OGSA F2F I was tasked with coming up with a series of questions about the HPC profile experiences to go into a zoomerang, so that an experiences paper could be generated -- either for HPC profile, JSDL, and/or BES.
Here is a start. Note -- comment on/add questions. Do NOT answer them!!! That will come later.
1) Will the HPC-Profile be useful to your organization/company? Explain.
2) Will you engineer your products to be hpc-profile compliant?
3) In your opinion, are there any unresolved ambiguities? Explain?
4) Thoughts on the next profile? Anything in particular from BES or JSDL (or other specification) that you would like to include.
5) Approximately how many person-days did it take you to implement the HPC-profile?
6) What would you change in the HPC-profile? Why?
Remember this is a STRAWMAN ONLY for discussion! Please add, suggest removal, or modify the above.
A
Andrew Grimshaw
Professor of Computer Science
University of Virginia
434-982-2204
grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@ogf.org> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
-- Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org.
Ian, Your points are very good and absolutely valid. Absolutely. Great points. While you and I might disagree with such words as "far from adequate" and even "tiny" in your subsequent email, we agree that it's very important to scope this properly, for the points you articulated. And to clarify: I don't think it's necessarily those people most closely connected with the effort who might think or claim that the scope is broader than it should be in reality. (Is that sentence parsable?) I have found that the people on the WG calls and those people implementing the spec generally have the proper perspective on this work, in my opinion. Of course, the issue now regards MY perspective :^) Again, I think you make a great point that we have sure that vendors don't just implement this Base HPC Profile and claim they're done. We've always thought that a key to the overall HPC Profile will be the extensions - making sure that EVERYONE understands this point is critical for this effort. -- Marty _____ From: Ian Foster [mailto:foster@mcs.anl.gov] Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 5:49 PM To: Marty Humphrey Cc: 'Subramaniam, Ravi'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org Subject: Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft Marty: Please don't apologize: you should never let a comment from me go without response (-: I didn't mean to suggest that the HPC Profile should not be passed to the GGF editor. However, while we should certainly celebrate our success in creating the profile and getting people to implement it, I think it is critically important that we be explicit about how tiny a step we have taken. Otherwise, we risk backlash from the "public" (when they look at this spec we are making such a fuss over) and also, potentially, a loss of focus from the vendors who we need to work towards true interop. For some vendors, having a spec that they can say they are compliant with--and then extend in nonstandard ways to address security, staging, etc., etc.--will be more important than continuing the hard work of specification.We don't want to let that happen. Ian. Marty Humphrey wrote: Ian, I'm sorry, but I can't let that "far from adequate" go by without response. For the real business scenarios that we have been pursuing, I do not believe that the HPC Profile is "far from adequate". This has been reinforced by our experience talking with people at SC. Post-thanksgiving, our WG will refine the HPC Profile somewhat, but I don't believe that we will have a significant effort before pushing it to the GGF editor. As you know, its design is one of extensibility and composability. I believe that the HPC "Base Profile" will be sufficient for many real business use cases. I also believe that the planned extensions are important for many situations. - Marty _____ From: ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Ian Foster Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 3:26 PM To: Subramaniam, Ravi Cc: ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org Subject: Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft I want to understand what people think we need for real interop. The HPC Profile as currently defined seems far from adequate for that purpose. We've mention staging and security as two issues. There are presumably others. Ian. Subramaniam, Ravi wrote: Hi Andrew, One question could be "Is the profile as it stands complete from your perspective? At least for the focus/business areas or types of customers that you plan to implement for?" The motivation is that depending on the verticals (e.g. financial, pharma) there may be some issue that may need to be resolved to be successful. In this way at least some target constituencies that can best benefit from what is currently there can be determined. We can also begin more targeted campaign at the OGF level towards consumers/customers/end-users and providers in that segments. Building traction in one of more specific segments may help build momentum for others. Ravi _____ From: ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Maguire_Tom@emc.com Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 11:12 AM To: grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft Is there enough specificity in the profile for your engineers to successfully implement? If not what do you need? Tom _______________________________________________ Tom Maguire +1(845) 729-4806 _____ From: ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Grimshaw Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 10:21 AM To: 'Ogsa-Wg'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft All, At the OGSA F2F I was tasked with coming up with a series of questions about the HPC profile experiences to go into a zoomerang, so that an experiences paper could be generated - either for HPC profile, JSDL, and/or BES. Here is a start. Note - comment on/add questions. Do NOT answer them!!! That will come later. 1) Will the HPC-Profile be useful to your organization/company? Explain. 2) Will you engineer your products to be hpc-profile compliant? 3) In your opinion, are there any unresolved ambiguities? Explain? 4) Thoughts on the next profile? Anything in particular from BES or JSDL (or other specification) that you would like to include. 5) Approximately how many person-days did it take you to implement the HPC-profile? 6) What would you change in the HPC-profile? Why? Remember this is a STRAWMAN ONLY for discussion! Please add, suggest removal, or modify the above. A Andrew Grimshaw Professor of Computer Science University of Virginia 434-982-2204 grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu _____ -- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg -- Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org. -- Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org.
Marty: My words "far from adequate" and "tiny" were not fair, I agree. My comments were meant to be constructive, in the manner you expressed them below. Ian. Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
Your points are very good and absolutely valid. Absolutely. Great points.
While you and I might disagree with such words as "far from adequate" and even "tiny" in your subsequent email, we agree that it's very important to scope this properly, for the points you articulated.
And to clarify: I don't think it's necessarily those people most closely connected with the effort who might think or claim that the scope is broader than it should be in reality. (Is that sentence parsable?) I have found that the people on the WG calls and those people implementing the spec generally have the proper perspective on this work, in my opinion. Of course, the issue now regards MY perspective :^)
Again, I think you make a great point that we have sure that vendors don't just implement this Base HPC Profile and claim they're done. We've always thought that a key to the overall HPC Profile will be the extensions -- making sure that EVERYONE understands this point is critical for this effort.
-- Marty
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Ian Foster [mailto:foster@mcs.anl.gov] *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 5:49 PM *To:* Marty Humphrey *Cc:* 'Subramaniam, Ravi'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Marty:
Please don't apologize: you should never let a comment from me go without response (-:
I didn't mean to suggest that the HPC Profile should not be passed to the GGF editor.
However, while we should certainly celebrate our success in creating the profile and getting people to implement it, I think it is critically important that we be explicit about how tiny a step we have taken. Otherwise, we risk backlash from the "public" (when they look at this spec we are making such a fuss over) and also, potentially, a loss of focus from the vendors who we need to work towards true interop. For some vendors, having a spec that they can say they are compliant with--and then extend in nonstandard ways to address security, staging, etc., etc.--will be more important than continuing the hard work of specification.We don't want to let that happen.
Ian.
Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
I'm sorry, but I can't let that "far from adequate" go by without response. For the real business scenarios that we have been pursuing, I do not believe that the HPC Profile is "far from adequate". This has been reinforced by our experience talking with people at SC.
Post-thanksgiving, our WG will refine the HPC Profile somewhat, but I don't believe that we will have a significant effort before pushing it to the GGF editor.
As you know, its design is one of extensibility and composability. I believe that the HPC "Base Profile" will be sufficient for many real business use cases. I also believe that the planned extensions are important for many situations.
- Marty
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Ian Foster *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 3:26 PM *To:* Subramaniam, Ravi *Cc:* ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org> *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
I want to understand what people think we need for real interop. The HPC Profile as currently defined seems far from adequate for that purpose. We've mention staging and security as two issues. There are presumably others.
Ian.
Subramaniam, Ravi wrote:
Hi Andrew,
One question could be "Is the profile as it stands complete from your perspective? At least for the focus/business areas or types of customers that you plan to implement for?"
The motivation is that depending on the verticals (e.g. financial, pharma) there may be some issue that may need to be resolved to be successful. In this way at least some target constituencies that can best benefit from what is currently there can be determined. We can also begin more targeted campaign at the OGF level towards consumers/customers/end-users and providers in that segments. Building traction in one of more specific segments may help build momentum for others.
Ravi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Maguire_Tom@emc.com <mailto:Maguire_Tom@emc.com> *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 11:12 AM *To:* grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org>; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Is there enough specificity in the profile for your engineers to successfully implement? If not what do you need?
Tom
_______________________________________________ Tom Maguire +1(845) 729-4806
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Grimshaw *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 10:21 AM *To:* 'Ogsa-Wg'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
All,
At the OGSA F2F I was tasked with coming up with a series of questions about the HPC profile experiences to go into a zoomerang, so that an experiences paper could be generated -- either for HPC profile, JSDL, and/or BES.
Here is a start. Note -- comment on/add questions. Do NOT answer them!!! That will come later.
1) Will the HPC-Profile be useful to your organization/company? Explain.
2) Will you engineer your products to be hpc-profile compliant?
3) In your opinion, are there any unresolved ambiguities? Explain?
4) Thoughts on the next profile? Anything in particular from BES or JSDL (or other specification) that you would like to include.
5) Approximately how many person-days did it take you to implement the HPC-profile?
6) What would you change in the HPC-profile? Why?
Remember this is a STRAWMAN ONLY for discussion! Please add, suggest removal, or modify the above.
A
Andrew Grimshaw
Professor of Computer Science
University of Virginia
434-982-2204
grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@ogf.org> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
-- Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org.
Hi all, Based on the suggested questions and discussions, I've created survey template for HPC profile SC06 interop. Please have a look and give your feedback by email. This is still STRAWMAN. DO NOT ANSWER. http://www.zoomerang.com/recipient/survey.zgi?p=WEB225VTDXBJCL Thanks, ---- Hiro Kishimoto Ian Foster wrote:
Marty:
My words "far from adequate" and "tiny" were not fair, I agree. My comments were meant to be constructive, in the manner you expressed them below.
Ian.
Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
Your points are very good and absolutely valid. Absolutely. Great points.
While you and I might disagree with such words as "far from adequate" and even "tiny" in your subsequent email, we agree that it's very important to scope this properly, for the points you articulated.
And to clarify: I don't think it's necessarily those people most closely connected with the effort who might think or claim that the scope is broader than it should be in reality. (Is that sentence parsable?) I have found that the people on the WG calls and those people implementing the spec generally have the proper perspective on this work, in my opinion. Of course, the issue now regards MY perspective :^)
Again, I think you make a great point that we have sure that vendors don't just implement this Base HPC Profile and claim they're done. We've always thought that a key to the overall HPC Profile will be the extensions -- making sure that EVERYONE understands this point is critical for this effort.
-- Marty
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Ian Foster [mailto:foster@mcs.anl.gov] *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 5:49 PM *To:* Marty Humphrey *Cc:* 'Subramaniam, Ravi'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Marty:
Please don't apologize: you should never let a comment from me go without response (-:
I didn't mean to suggest that the HPC Profile should not be passed to the GGF editor.
However, while we should certainly celebrate our success in creating the profile and getting people to implement it, I think it is critically important that we be explicit about how tiny a step we have taken. Otherwise, we risk backlash from the "public" (when they look at this spec we are making such a fuss over) and also, potentially, a loss of focus from the vendors who we need to work towards true interop. For some vendors, having a spec that they can say they are compliant with--and then extend in nonstandard ways to address security, staging, etc., etc.--will be more important than continuing the hard work of specification.We don't want to let that happen.
Ian.
Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
I'm sorry, but I can't let that "far from adequate" go by without response. For the real business scenarios that we have been pursuing, I do not believe that the HPC Profile is "far from adequate". This has been reinforced by our experience talking with people at SC.
Post-thanksgiving, our WG will refine the HPC Profile somewhat, but I don't believe that we will have a significant effort before pushing it to the GGF editor.
As you know, its design is one of extensibility and composability. I believe that the HPC "Base Profile" will be sufficient for many real business use cases. I also believe that the planned extensions are important for many situations.
- Marty
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Ian Foster *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 3:26 PM *To:* Subramaniam, Ravi *Cc:* ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org> *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
I want to understand what people think we need for real interop. The HPC Profile as currently defined seems far from adequate for that purpose. We've mention staging and security as two issues. There are presumably others.
Ian.
Subramaniam, Ravi wrote:
Hi Andrew,
One question could be "Is the profile as it stands complete from your perspective? At least for the focus/business areas or types of customers that you plan to implement for?"
The motivation is that depending on the verticals (e.g. financial, pharma) there may be some issue that may need to be resolved to be successful. In this way at least some target constituencies that can best benefit from what is currently there can be determined. We can also begin more targeted campaign at the OGF level towards consumers/customers/end-users and providers in that segments. Building traction in one of more specific segments may help build momentum for others.
Ravi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Maguire_Tom@emc.com <mailto:Maguire_Tom@emc.com> *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 11:12 AM *To:* grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org>; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Is there enough specificity in the profile for your engineers to successfully implement? If not what do you need?
Tom
_______________________________________________ Tom Maguire +1(845) 729-4806
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Grimshaw *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 10:21 AM *To:* 'Ogsa-Wg'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
All,
At the OGSA F2F I was tasked with coming up with a series of questions about the HPC profile experiences to go into a zoomerang, so that an experiences paper could be generated -- either for HPC profile, JSDL, and/or BES.
Here is a start. Note -- comment on/add questions. Do NOT answer them!!! That will come later.
1) Will the HPC-Profile be useful to your organization/company? Explain.
2) Will you engineer your products to be hpc-profile compliant?
3) In your opinion, are there any unresolved ambiguities? Explain?
4) Thoughts on the next profile? Anything in particular from BES or JSDL (or other specification) that you would like to include.
5) Approximately how many person-days did it take you to implement the HPC-profile?
6) What would you change in the HPC-profile? Why?
Remember this is a STRAWMAN ONLY for discussion! Please add, suggest removal, or modify the above.
A
Andrew Grimshaw
Professor of Computer Science
University of Virginia
434-982-2204
grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@ogf.org> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- ogsa-hpcp-wg mailing list ogsa-hpcp-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-hpcp-wg
Hiro et. Al., As the chair of the HPC Profile WG, I'm a little confused and concerned about this survey. Requirements gathering, user-community engagement, and a desire to continue momentum are all excellent goals. I see this survey as attempting to satisfy these goals, which is great. But you're asking people to comment on something that isn't finished. The analogy is that the car is halfway through the assembly line and you're asking people how the car company should improve the car's handling around turns. As I tried to explain in my dialogue with Ian, the initial "finished product" was never intended to be just the HPC Base Profile by itself. Rather, the very first "usable" product is the Base Profile with a small set of extensions that the working group will (shortly) define. There's no way that someone who fills out this survey could know what these extensions are, because there's been no public discussion of them to date. We're not hiding anything -- rather, a lot of people worked very hard to get the SC2006 interop demo working, and we just haven't had time to tell each other our very specific thoughts on what works, what is ambiguous, and what extensions should be pursued. I personally have participated in a number of these conversations at SC, and we're planning for a WG call the week of Nov 27 to discuss everyone's experiences (we haven't picked the date/time yet). Many of the questions on the survey imply that the HPC Profile WG thinks that the HPC Base Profile is "complete", and that's a misrepresentation. So I think this survey, at this time, could be counterproductive. -- Marty -----Original Message----- From: ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Hiro Kishimoto Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 9:17 AM To: ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft Hi all, Based on the suggested questions and discussions, I've created survey template for HPC profile SC06 interop. Please have a look and give your feedback by email. This is still STRAWMAN. DO NOT ANSWER. http://www.zoomerang.com/recipient/survey.zgi?p=WEB225VTDXBJCL Thanks, ---- Hiro Kishimoto Ian Foster wrote:
Marty:
My words "far from adequate" and "tiny" were not fair, I agree. My comments were meant to be constructive, in the manner you expressed them below.
Ian.
Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
Your points are very good and absolutely valid. Absolutely. Great points.
While you and I might disagree with such words as "far from adequate" and even "tiny" in your subsequent email, we agree that it's very important to scope this properly, for the points you articulated.
And to clarify: I don't think it's necessarily those people most closely connected with the effort who might think or claim that the scope is broader than it should be in reality. (Is that sentence parsable?) I have found that the people on the WG calls and those people implementing the spec generally have the proper perspective on this work, in my opinion. Of course, the issue now regards MY perspective :^)
Again, I think you make a great point that we have sure that vendors don't just implement this Base HPC Profile and claim they're done. We've always thought that a key to the overall HPC Profile will be the extensions -- making sure that EVERYONE understands this point is critical for this effort.
-- Marty
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Ian Foster [mailto:foster@mcs.anl.gov] *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 5:49 PM *To:* Marty Humphrey *Cc:* 'Subramaniam, Ravi'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Marty:
Please don't apologize: you should never let a comment from me go without response (-:
I didn't mean to suggest that the HPC Profile should not be passed to the GGF editor.
However, while we should certainly celebrate our success in creating the profile and getting people to implement it, I think it is critically important that we be explicit about how tiny a step we have taken. Otherwise, we risk backlash from the "public" (when they look at this spec we are making such a fuss over) and also, potentially, a loss of focus from the vendors who we need to work towards true interop. For some vendors, having a spec that they can say they are compliant with--and then extend in nonstandard ways to address security, staging, etc., etc.--will be more important than continuing the hard work of specification.We don't want to let that happen.
Ian.
Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
I'm sorry, but I can't let that "far from adequate" go by without response. For the real business scenarios that we have been pursuing, I do not believe that the HPC Profile is "far from adequate". This has been reinforced by our experience talking with people at SC.
Post-thanksgiving, our WG will refine the HPC Profile somewhat, but I don't believe that we will have a significant effort before pushing it to the GGF editor.
As you know, its design is one of extensibility and composability. I believe that the HPC "Base Profile" will be sufficient for many real business use cases. I also believe that the planned extensions are important for many situations.
- Marty
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Ian Foster *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 3:26 PM *To:* Subramaniam, Ravi *Cc:* ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org> *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
I want to understand what people think we need for real interop. The HPC Profile as currently defined seems far from adequate for that purpose. We've mention staging and security as two issues. There are presumably others.
Ian.
Subramaniam, Ravi wrote:
Hi Andrew,
One question could be "Is the profile as it stands complete from your perspective? At least for the focus/business areas or types of customers that you plan to implement for?"
The motivation is that depending on the verticals (e.g. financial, pharma) there may be some issue that may need to be resolved to be successful. In this way at least some target constituencies that can best benefit from what is currently there can be determined. We can also begin more targeted campaign at the OGF level towards consumers/customers/end-users and providers in that segments. Building traction in one of more specific segments may help build momentum for others.
Ravi
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Maguire_Tom@emc.com <mailto:Maguire_Tom@emc.com> *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 11:12 AM *To:* grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org>; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Is there enough specificity in the profile for your engineers to successfully implement? If not what do you need?
Tom
_______________________________________________ Tom Maguire +1(845) 729-4806
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Grimshaw *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 10:21 AM *To:* 'Ogsa-Wg'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
All,
At the OGSA F2F I was tasked with coming up with a series of questions about the HPC profile experiences to go into a zoomerang, so that an experiences paper could be generated -- either for HPC profile, JSDL, and/or BES.
Here is a start. Note -- comment on/add questions. Do NOT answer them!!! That will come later.
1) Will the HPC-Profile be useful to your organization/company? Explain.
2) Will you engineer your products to be hpc-profile compliant?
3) In your opinion, are there any unresolved ambiguities? Explain?
4) Thoughts on the next profile? Anything in particular from BES or JSDL (or other specification) that you would like to include.
5) Approximately how many person-days did it take you to implement the HPC-profile?
6) What would you change in the HPC-profile? Why?
Remember this is a STRAWMAN ONLY for discussion! Please add, suggest removal, or modify the above.
A
Andrew Grimshaw
Professor of Computer Science
University of Virginia
434-982-2204
grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@ogf.org> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- ogsa-hpcp-wg mailing list ogsa-hpcp-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-hpcp-wg
-- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
Marty, This sort of thing is best discussed in person to avoid mis-understandings. That said, our intent was not to get in the way of what you all are doing - rather during the F2F there was a realization that we needed experiences documents - for BES, JSDL, and HPC Profile, at some point. One idea was to have somebody go around, interview everybody, and write it up. Another was to ask each person to write-up their experiences. A third idea was to essentially help people write them up by asking a series of questions, the answers to which could be stitched together. This IS NOT AN ATTEMPT TO TAKE OVER THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS IN THE HPC-PROFILE GROUP. It is an attempt (perhaps clumsily handled) to accelerate the process so that we can have as much done as possible before the next OGF - including by the way some sort of consensus on HPC-Profile 2. A
-----Original Message----- From: ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Marty Humphrey Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 9:41 AM To: ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Hiro et. Al.,
As the chair of the HPC Profile WG, I'm a little confused and concerned about this survey.
Requirements gathering, user-community engagement, and a desire to continue momentum are all excellent goals. I see this survey as attempting to satisfy these goals, which is great.
But you're asking people to comment on something that isn't finished. The analogy is that the car is halfway through the assembly line and you're asking people how the car company should improve the car's handling around turns.
As I tried to explain in my dialogue with Ian, the initial "finished product" was never intended to be just the HPC Base Profile by itself. Rather, the very first "usable" product is the Base Profile with a small set of extensions that the working group will (shortly) define. There's no way that someone who fills out this survey could know what these extensions are, because there's been no public discussion of them to date. We're not hiding anything -- rather, a lot of people worked very hard to get the SC2006 interop demo working, and we just haven't had time to tell each other our very specific thoughts on what works, what is ambiguous, and what extensions should be pursued. I personally have participated in a number of these conversations at SC, and we're planning for a WG call the week of Nov 27 to discuss everyone's experiences (we haven't picked the date/time yet).
Many of the questions on the survey imply that the HPC Profile WG thinks that the HPC Base Profile is "complete", and that's a misrepresentation. So I think this survey, at this time, could be counterproductive.
-- Marty
-----Original Message----- From: ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Hiro Kishimoto Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 9:17 AM To: ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Hi all,
Based on the suggested questions and discussions, I've created survey template for HPC profile SC06 interop.
Please have a look and give your feedback by email. This is still STRAWMAN. DO NOT ANSWER.
http://www.zoomerang.com/recipient/survey.zgi?p=WEB225VTDXBJCL
Thanks, ---- Hiro Kishimoto
Marty:
My words "far from adequate" and "tiny" were not fair, I agree. My comments were meant to be constructive, in the manner you expressed
below.
Ian.
Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
Your points are very good and absolutely valid. Absolutely. Great
While you and I might disagree with such words as "far from adequate" and even "tiny" in your subsequent email, we agree that it's very important to scope this properly, for the points you articulated.
And to clarify: I don't think it's necessarily those people most closely connected with the effort who might think or claim that the scope is broader than it should be in reality. (Is that sentence parsable?) I have found that the people on the WG calls and those people implementing the spec generally have the proper perspective on this work, in my opinion. Of course, the issue now regards MY perspective :^)
Again, I think you make a great point that we have sure that vendors don't just implement this Base HPC Profile and claim they're done. We've always thought that a key to the overall HPC Profile will be
Ian Foster wrote: them points. the
extensions -- making sure that EVERYONE understands this point is critical for this effort.
-- Marty
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Ian Foster [mailto:foster@mcs.anl.gov] *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 5:49 PM *To:* Marty Humphrey *Cc:* 'Subramaniam, Ravi'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Marty:
Please don't apologize: you should never let a comment from me go without response (-:
I didn't mean to suggest that the HPC Profile should not be passed to the GGF editor.
However, while we should certainly celebrate our success in creating the profile and getting people to implement it, I think it is critically important that we be explicit about how tiny a step we
have
taken. Otherwise, we risk backlash from the "public" (when they look at this spec we are making such a fuss over) and also, potentially, a loss of focus from the vendors who we need to work towards true interop. For some vendors, having a spec that they can say they are compliant with--and then extend in nonstandard ways to address security, staging, etc., etc.--will be more important than continuing the hard work of specification.We don't want to let that happen.
Ian.
Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
I'm sorry, but I can't let that "far from adequate" go by without response. For the real business scenarios that we have been pursuing, I do not believe that the HPC Profile is "far from adequate". This has been reinforced by our experience talking with people at SC.
Post-thanksgiving, our WG will refine the HPC Profile somewhat, but I don't believe that we will have a significant effort before pushing it to the GGF editor.
As you know, its design is one of extensibility and composability. I believe that the HPC "Base Profile" will be sufficient for many real business use cases. I also believe that the planned extensions are important for many situations.
- Marty
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Ian Foster *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 3:26 PM *To:* Subramaniam, Ravi *Cc:* ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org> *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
I want to understand what people think we need for real interop. The HPC Profile as currently defined seems far from adequate for that purpose. We've mention staging and security as two issues. There are presumably others.
Ian.
Subramaniam, Ravi wrote:
Hi Andrew,
One question could be "Is the profile as it stands complete from your perspective? At least for the focus/business areas or types of customers that you plan to implement for?"
The motivation is that depending on the verticals (e.g. financial, pharma) there may be some issue that may need to be resolved to be successful. In this way at least some target constituencies that can best benefit from what is currently there can be determined. We can also begin more targeted campaign at the OGF level towards consumers/customers/end-users and providers in that segments.
Building
traction in one of more specific segments may help build momentum for others.
Ravi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Maguire_Tom@emc.com <mailto:Maguire_Tom@emc.com> *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 11:12 AM *To:* grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org>; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Is there enough specificity in the profile for your engineers to successfully implement? If not what do you need?
Tom
_______________________________________________ Tom Maguire +1(845) 729-4806
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Grimshaw *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 10:21 AM *To:* 'Ogsa-Wg'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
All,
At the OGSA F2F I was tasked with coming up with a series of
questions
about the HPC profile experiences to go into a zoomerang, so that an experiences paper could be generated -- either for HPC profile, JSDL, and/or BES.
Here is a start. Note -- comment on/add questions. Do NOT answer them!!! That will come later.
1) Will the HPC-Profile be useful to your organization/company? Explain.
2) Will you engineer your products to be hpc-profile compliant?
3) In your opinion, are there any unresolved ambiguities? Explain?
4) Thoughts on the next profile? Anything in particular from BES or JSDL (or other specification) that you would like to include.
5) Approximately how many person-days did it take you to implement the HPC-profile?
6) What would you change in the HPC-profile? Why?
Remember this is a STRAWMAN ONLY for discussion! Please add, suggest removal, or modify the above.
A
Andrew Grimshaw
Professor of Computer Science
University of Virginia
434-982-2204
grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@ogf.org> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- --
-- ogsa-hpcp-wg mailing list ogsa-hpcp-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-hpcp-wg
-- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
-- ogsa-bes-wg mailing list ogsa-bes-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-bes-wg
Andrew, Oh, I believe that the motivation behind this survey is GREAT! I'm just not sure who might answer this survey and when they might do it. -- Marty -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Grimshaw [mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu] Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 10:27 AM To: 'Marty Humphrey'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: RE: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft Marty, This sort of thing is best discussed in person to avoid mis-understandings. That said, our intent was not to get in the way of what you all are doing - rather during the F2F there was a realization that we needed experiences documents - for BES, JSDL, and HPC Profile, at some point. One idea was to have somebody go around, interview everybody, and write it up. Another was to ask each person to write-up their experiences. A third idea was to essentially help people write them up by asking a series of questions, the answers to which could be stitched together. This IS NOT AN ATTEMPT TO TAKE OVER THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS IN THE HPC-PROFILE GROUP. It is an attempt (perhaps clumsily handled) to accelerate the process so that we can have as much done as possible before the next OGF - including by the way some sort of consensus on HPC-Profile 2. A
-----Original Message----- From: ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Marty Humphrey Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 9:41 AM To: ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Hiro et. Al.,
As the chair of the HPC Profile WG, I'm a little confused and concerned about this survey.
Requirements gathering, user-community engagement, and a desire to continue momentum are all excellent goals. I see this survey as attempting to satisfy these goals, which is great.
But you're asking people to comment on something that isn't finished. The analogy is that the car is halfway through the assembly line and you're asking people how the car company should improve the car's handling around turns.
As I tried to explain in my dialogue with Ian, the initial "finished product" was never intended to be just the HPC Base Profile by itself. Rather, the very first "usable" product is the Base Profile with a small set of extensions that the working group will (shortly) define. There's no way that someone who fills out this survey could know what these extensions are, because there's been no public discussion of them to date. We're not hiding anything -- rather, a lot of people worked very hard to get the SC2006 interop demo working, and we just haven't had time to tell each other our very specific thoughts on what works, what is ambiguous, and what extensions should be pursued. I personally have participated in a number of these conversations at SC, and we're planning for a WG call the week of Nov 27 to discuss everyone's experiences (we haven't picked the date/time yet).
Many of the questions on the survey imply that the HPC Profile WG thinks that the HPC Base Profile is "complete", and that's a misrepresentation. So I think this survey, at this time, could be counterproductive.
-- Marty
-----Original Message----- From: ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Hiro Kishimoto Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 9:17 AM To: ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Hi all,
Based on the suggested questions and discussions, I've created survey template for HPC profile SC06 interop.
Please have a look and give your feedback by email. This is still STRAWMAN. DO NOT ANSWER.
http://www.zoomerang.com/recipient/survey.zgi?p=WEB225VTDXBJCL
Thanks, ---- Hiro Kishimoto
Marty:
My words "far from adequate" and "tiny" were not fair, I agree. My comments were meant to be constructive, in the manner you expressed
below.
Ian.
Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
Your points are very good and absolutely valid. Absolutely. Great
While you and I might disagree with such words as "far from adequate" and even "tiny" in your subsequent email, we agree that it's very important to scope this properly, for the points you articulated.
And to clarify: I don't think it's necessarily those people most closely connected with the effort who might think or claim that the scope is broader than it should be in reality. (Is that sentence parsable?) I have found that the people on the WG calls and those people implementing the spec generally have the proper perspective on this work, in my opinion. Of course, the issue now regards MY perspective :^)
Again, I think you make a great point that we have sure that vendors don't just implement this Base HPC Profile and claim they're done. We've always thought that a key to the overall HPC Profile will be
Ian Foster wrote: them points. the
extensions -- making sure that EVERYONE understands this point is critical for this effort.
-- Marty
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Ian Foster [mailto:foster@mcs.anl.gov] *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 5:49 PM *To:* Marty Humphrey *Cc:* 'Subramaniam, Ravi'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Marty:
Please don't apologize: you should never let a comment from me go without response (-:
I didn't mean to suggest that the HPC Profile should not be passed to the GGF editor.
However, while we should certainly celebrate our success in creating the profile and getting people to implement it, I think it is critically important that we be explicit about how tiny a step we
have
taken. Otherwise, we risk backlash from the "public" (when they look at this spec we are making such a fuss over) and also, potentially, a loss of focus from the vendors who we need to work towards true interop. For some vendors, having a spec that they can say they are compliant with--and then extend in nonstandard ways to address security, staging, etc., etc.--will be more important than continuing the hard work of specification.We don't want to let that happen.
Ian.
Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
I'm sorry, but I can't let that "far from adequate" go by without response. For the real business scenarios that we have been pursuing, I do not believe that the HPC Profile is "far from adequate". This has been reinforced by our experience talking with people at SC.
Post-thanksgiving, our WG will refine the HPC Profile somewhat, but I don't believe that we will have a significant effort before pushing it to the GGF editor.
As you know, its design is one of extensibility and composability. I believe that the HPC "Base Profile" will be sufficient for many real business use cases. I also believe that the planned extensions are important for many situations.
- Marty
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Ian Foster *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 3:26 PM *To:* Subramaniam, Ravi *Cc:* ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org> *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
I want to understand what people think we need for real interop. The HPC Profile as currently defined seems far from adequate for that purpose. We've mention staging and security as two issues. There are presumably others.
Ian.
Subramaniam, Ravi wrote:
Hi Andrew,
One question could be "Is the profile as it stands complete from your perspective? At least for the focus/business areas or types of customers that you plan to implement for?"
The motivation is that depending on the verticals (e.g. financial, pharma) there may be some issue that may need to be resolved to be successful. In this way at least some target constituencies that can best benefit from what is currently there can be determined. We can also begin more targeted campaign at the OGF level towards consumers/customers/end-users and providers in that segments.
Building
traction in one of more specific segments may help build momentum for others.
Ravi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Maguire_Tom@emc.com <mailto:Maguire_Tom@emc.com> *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 11:12 AM *To:* grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org>; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Is there enough specificity in the profile for your engineers to successfully implement? If not what do you need?
Tom
_______________________________________________ Tom Maguire +1(845) 729-4806
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Grimshaw *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 10:21 AM *To:* 'Ogsa-Wg'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
All,
At the OGSA F2F I was tasked with coming up with a series of
questions
about the HPC profile experiences to go into a zoomerang, so that an experiences paper could be generated -- either for HPC profile, JSDL, and/or BES.
Here is a start. Note -- comment on/add questions. Do NOT answer them!!! That will come later.
1) Will the HPC-Profile be useful to your organization/company? Explain.
2) Will you engineer your products to be hpc-profile compliant?
3) In your opinion, are there any unresolved ambiguities? Explain?
4) Thoughts on the next profile? Anything in particular from BES or JSDL (or other specification) that you would like to include.
5) Approximately how many person-days did it take you to implement the HPC-profile?
6) What would you change in the HPC-profile? Why?
Remember this is a STRAWMAN ONLY for discussion! Please add, suggest removal, or modify the above.
A
Andrew Grimshaw
Professor of Computer Science
University of Virginia
434-982-2204
grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@ogf.org> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- --
-- ogsa-hpcp-wg mailing list ogsa-hpcp-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-hpcp-wg
-- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
-- ogsa-bes-wg mailing list ogsa-bes-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-bes-wg
Hi Marty, I believe we would ask all 12 interop participating parties to answer these simple questions by end of next week. Does it sound reasonable to you? ---- Hiro Kishimoto Marty Humphrey wrote:
Andrew,
Oh, I believe that the motivation behind this survey is GREAT! I'm just not sure who might answer this survey and when they might do it.
-- Marty
-----Original Message----- From: Andrew Grimshaw [mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu] Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 10:27 AM To: 'Marty Humphrey'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: RE: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Marty, This sort of thing is best discussed in person to avoid mis-understandings. That said, our intent was not to get in the way of what you all are doing - rather during the F2F there was a realization that we needed experiences documents - for BES, JSDL, and HPC Profile, at some point. One idea was to have somebody go around, interview everybody, and write it up. Another was to ask each person to write-up their experiences. A third idea was to essentially help people write them up by asking a series of questions, the answers to which could be stitched together.
This IS NOT AN ATTEMPT TO TAKE OVER THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS IN THE HPC-PROFILE GROUP. It is an attempt (perhaps clumsily handled) to accelerate the process so that we can have as much done as possible before the next OGF - including by the way some sort of consensus on HPC-Profile 2.
A
-----Original Message----- From: ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Marty Humphrey Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 9:41 AM To: ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Hiro et. Al.,
As the chair of the HPC Profile WG, I'm a little confused and concerned about this survey.
Requirements gathering, user-community engagement, and a desire to continue momentum are all excellent goals. I see this survey as attempting to satisfy these goals, which is great.
But you're asking people to comment on something that isn't finished. The analogy is that the car is halfway through the assembly line and you're asking people how the car company should improve the car's handling around turns.
As I tried to explain in my dialogue with Ian, the initial "finished product" was never intended to be just the HPC Base Profile by itself. Rather, the very first "usable" product is the Base Profile with a small set of extensions that the working group will (shortly) define. There's no way that someone who fills out this survey could know what these extensions are, because there's been no public discussion of them to date. We're not hiding anything -- rather, a lot of people worked very hard to get the SC2006 interop demo working, and we just haven't had time to tell each other our very specific thoughts on what works, what is ambiguous, and what extensions should be pursued. I personally have participated in a number of these conversations at SC, and we're planning for a WG call the week of Nov 27 to discuss everyone's experiences (we haven't picked the date/time yet).
Many of the questions on the survey imply that the HPC Profile WG thinks that the HPC Base Profile is "complete", and that's a misrepresentation. So I think this survey, at this time, could be counterproductive.
-- Marty
-----Original Message----- From: ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Hiro Kishimoto Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 9:17 AM To: ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Hi all,
Based on the suggested questions and discussions, I've created survey template for HPC profile SC06 interop.
Please have a look and give your feedback by email. This is still STRAWMAN. DO NOT ANSWER.
http://www.zoomerang.com/recipient/survey.zgi?p=WEB225VTDXBJCL
Thanks, ---- Hiro Kishimoto
Marty:
My words "far from adequate" and "tiny" were not fair, I agree. My comments were meant to be constructive, in the manner you expressed
below.
Ian.
Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
Your points are very good and absolutely valid. Absolutely. Great
While you and I might disagree with such words as "far from adequate" and even "tiny" in your subsequent email, we agree that it's very important to scope this properly, for the points you articulated.
And to clarify: I don't think it's necessarily those people most closely connected with the effort who might think or claim that the scope is broader than it should be in reality. (Is that sentence parsable?) I have found that the people on the WG calls and those people implementing the spec generally have the proper perspective on this work, in my opinion. Of course, the issue now regards MY perspective :^)
Again, I think you make a great point that we have sure that vendors don't just implement this Base HPC Profile and claim they're done. We've always thought that a key to the overall HPC Profile will be
Ian Foster wrote: them points. the
extensions -- making sure that EVERYONE understands this point is critical for this effort.
-- Marty
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Ian Foster [mailto:foster@mcs.anl.gov] *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 5:49 PM *To:* Marty Humphrey *Cc:* 'Subramaniam, Ravi'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Marty:
Please don't apologize: you should never let a comment from me go without response (-:
I didn't mean to suggest that the HPC Profile should not be passed to the GGF editor.
However, while we should certainly celebrate our success in creating the profile and getting people to implement it, I think it is critically important that we be explicit about how tiny a step we have taken. Otherwise, we risk backlash from the "public" (when they look at this spec we are making such a fuss over) and also, potentially, a loss of focus from the vendors who we need to work towards true interop. For some vendors, having a spec that they can say they are compliant with--and then extend in nonstandard ways to address security, staging, etc., etc.--will be more important than continuing the hard work of specification.We don't want to let that happen.
Ian.
Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
I'm sorry, but I can't let that "far from adequate" go by without response. For the real business scenarios that we have been pursuing, I do not believe that the HPC Profile is "far from adequate". This has been reinforced by our experience talking with people at SC.
Post-thanksgiving, our WG will refine the HPC Profile somewhat, but I don't believe that we will have a significant effort before pushing it to the GGF editor.
As you know, its design is one of extensibility and composability. I believe that the HPC "Base Profile" will be sufficient for many real business use cases. I also believe that the planned extensions are important for many situations.
- Marty
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Ian Foster *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 3:26 PM *To:* Subramaniam, Ravi *Cc:* ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org> *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
I want to understand what people think we need for real interop. The HPC Profile as currently defined seems far from adequate for that purpose. We've mention staging and security as two issues. There are presumably others.
Ian.
Subramaniam, Ravi wrote:
Hi Andrew,
One question could be "Is the profile as it stands complete from your perspective? At least for the focus/business areas or types of customers that you plan to implement for?"
The motivation is that depending on the verticals (e.g. financial, pharma) there may be some issue that may need to be resolved to be successful. In this way at least some target constituencies that can best benefit from what is currently there can be determined. We can also begin more targeted campaign at the OGF level towards consumers/customers/end-users and providers in that segments. Building traction in one of more specific segments may help build momentum for others.
Ravi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Maguire_Tom@emc.com <mailto:Maguire_Tom@emc.com> *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 11:12 AM *To:* grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org>; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Is there enough specificity in the profile for your engineers to successfully implement? If not what do you need?
Tom
_______________________________________________ Tom Maguire +1(845) 729-4806
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Grimshaw *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 10:21 AM *To:* 'Ogsa-Wg'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
All,
At the OGSA F2F I was tasked with coming up with a series of questions about the HPC profile experiences to go into a zoomerang, so that an experiences paper could be generated -- either for HPC profile, JSDL, and/or BES.
Here is a start. Note -- comment on/add questions. Do NOT answer them!!! That will come later.
1) Will the HPC-Profile be useful to your organization/company? Explain.
2) Will you engineer your products to be hpc-profile compliant?
3) In your opinion, are there any unresolved ambiguities? Explain?
4) Thoughts on the next profile? Anything in particular from BES or JSDL (or other specification) that you would like to include.
5) Approximately how many person-days did it take you to implement the HPC-profile?
6) What would you change in the HPC-profile? Why?
Remember this is a STRAWMAN ONLY for discussion! Please add, suggest removal, or modify the above.
A
Andrew Grimshaw
Professor of Computer Science
University of Virginia
434-982-2204
grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@ogf.org> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- -- ogsa-hpcp-wg mailing list ogsa-hpcp-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-hpcp-wg -- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
-- ogsa-bes-wg mailing list ogsa-bes-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-bes-wg
-- ogsa-hpcp-wg mailing list ogsa-hpcp-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-hpcp-wg
Can we perhaps hold off on this so that the interop participants can do a bit of a post-mortem on the SC06 demo, and perhaps go over some issues that might have been raised during the interop? I'm still suffering from my SC06 interop hangover, as it were. :-) I think that this survey idea is fine, but I'm not sure how, at this stage, it helps things that are already moving along, to move along. I think that what is needed at this stage is an HPCP conference call to go over the interop demo. -- Chris On 19/11/06 07:27, "Andrew Grimshaw" <grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu> wrote:
Marty, This sort of thing is best discussed in person to avoid mis-understandings. That said, our intent was not to get in the way of what you all are doing - rather during the F2F there was a realization that we needed experiences documents - for BES, JSDL, and HPC Profile, at some point. One idea was to have somebody go around, interview everybody, and write it up. Another was to ask each person to write-up their experiences. A third idea was to essentially help people write them up by asking a series of questions, the answers to which could be stitched together.
This IS NOT AN ATTEMPT TO TAKE OVER THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS IN THE HPC-PROFILE GROUP. It is an attempt (perhaps clumsily handled) to accelerate the process so that we can have as much done as possible before the next OGF - including by the way some sort of consensus on HPC-Profile 2.
A
-----Original Message----- From: ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Marty Humphrey Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 9:41 AM To: ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Hiro et. Al.,
As the chair of the HPC Profile WG, I'm a little confused and concerned about this survey.
Requirements gathering, user-community engagement, and a desire to continue momentum are all excellent goals. I see this survey as attempting to satisfy these goals, which is great.
But you're asking people to comment on something that isn't finished. The analogy is that the car is halfway through the assembly line and you're asking people how the car company should improve the car's handling around turns.
As I tried to explain in my dialogue with Ian, the initial "finished product" was never intended to be just the HPC Base Profile by itself. Rather, the very first "usable" product is the Base Profile with a small set of extensions that the working group will (shortly) define. There's no way that someone who fills out this survey could know what these extensions are, because there's been no public discussion of them to date. We're not hiding anything -- rather, a lot of people worked very hard to get the SC2006 interop demo working, and we just haven't had time to tell each other our very specific thoughts on what works, what is ambiguous, and what extensions should be pursued. I personally have participated in a number of these conversations at SC, and we're planning for a WG call the week of Nov 27 to discuss everyone's experiences (we haven't picked the date/time yet).
Many of the questions on the survey imply that the HPC Profile WG thinks that the HPC Base Profile is "complete", and that's a misrepresentation. So I think this survey, at this time, could be counterproductive.
-- Marty
-----Original Message----- From: ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] On Behalf Of Hiro Kishimoto Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2006 9:17 AM To: ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Hi all,
Based on the suggested questions and discussions, I've created survey template for HPC profile SC06 interop.
Please have a look and give your feedback by email. This is still STRAWMAN. DO NOT ANSWER.
http://www.zoomerang.com/recipient/survey.zgi?p=WEB225VTDXBJCL
Thanks, ---- Hiro Kishimoto
Marty:
My words "far from adequate" and "tiny" were not fair, I agree. My comments were meant to be constructive, in the manner you expressed
below.
Ian.
Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
Your points are very good and absolutely valid. Absolutely. Great
While you and I might disagree with such words as "far from adequate" and even "tiny" in your subsequent email, we agree that it's very important to scope this properly, for the points you articulated.
And to clarify: I don't think it's necessarily those people most closely connected with the effort who might think or claim that the scope is broader than it should be in reality. (Is that sentence parsable?) I have found that the people on the WG calls and those people implementing the spec generally have the proper perspective on this work, in my opinion. Of course, the issue now regards MY perspective :^)
Again, I think you make a great point that we have sure that vendors don't just implement this Base HPC Profile and claim they're done. We've always thought that a key to the overall HPC Profile will be
Ian Foster wrote: them points. the
extensions -- making sure that EVERYONE understands this point is critical for this effort.
-- Marty
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* Ian Foster [mailto:foster@mcs.anl.gov] *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 5:49 PM *To:* Marty Humphrey *Cc:* 'Subramaniam, Ravi'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Marty:
Please don't apologize: you should never let a comment from me go without response (-:
I didn't mean to suggest that the HPC Profile should not be passed to the GGF editor.
However, while we should certainly celebrate our success in creating the profile and getting people to implement it, I think it is critically important that we be explicit about how tiny a step we
have
taken. Otherwise, we risk backlash from the "public" (when they look at this spec we are making such a fuss over) and also, potentially, a loss of focus from the vendors who we need to work towards true interop. For some vendors, having a spec that they can say they are compliant with--and then extend in nonstandard ways to address security, staging, etc., etc.--will be more important than continuing the hard work of specification.We don't want to let that happen.
Ian.
Marty Humphrey wrote:
Ian,
I'm sorry, but I can't let that "far from adequate" go by without response. For the real business scenarios that we have been pursuing, I do not believe that the HPC Profile is "far from adequate". This has been reinforced by our experience talking with people at SC.
Post-thanksgiving, our WG will refine the HPC Profile somewhat, but I don't believe that we will have a significant effort before pushing it to the GGF editor.
As you know, its design is one of extensibility and composability. I believe that the HPC "Base Profile" will be sufficient for many real business use cases. I also believe that the planned extensions are important for many situations.
- Marty
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-bes-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Ian Foster *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 3:26 PM *To:* Subramaniam, Ravi *Cc:* ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org> *Subject:* Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
I want to understand what people think we need for real interop. The HPC Profile as currently defined seems far from adequate for that purpose. We've mention staging and security as two issues. There are presumably others.
Ian.
Subramaniam, Ravi wrote:
Hi Andrew,
One question could be "Is the profile as it stands complete from your perspective? At least for the focus/business areas or types of customers that you plan to implement for?"
The motivation is that depending on the verticals (e.g. financial, pharma) there may be some issue that may need to be resolved to be successful. In this way at least some target constituencies that can best benefit from what is currently there can be determined. We can also begin more targeted campaign at the OGF level towards consumers/customers/end-users and providers in that segments.
Building
traction in one of more specific segments may help build momentum for others.
Ravi
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Maguire_Tom@emc.com <mailto:Maguire_Tom@emc.com> *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 11:12 AM *To:* grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>; ogsa-wg@gridforum.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@gridforum.org>; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* Re: [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
Is there enough specificity in the profile for your engineers to successfully implement? If not what do you need?
Tom
_______________________________________________ Tom Maguire +1(845) 729-4806
---------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org> [mailto:ogsa-wg-bounces@ogf.org] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Grimshaw *Sent:* Friday, November 17, 2006 10:21 AM *To:* 'Ogsa-Wg'; ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org>; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org <mailto:ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org> *Subject:* [ogsa-wg] HPC profile questionaire draft
All,
At the OGSA F2F I was tasked with coming up with a series of
questions
about the HPC profile experiences to go into a zoomerang, so that an experiences paper could be generated -- either for HPC profile, JSDL, and/or BES.
Here is a start. Note -- comment on/add questions. Do NOT answer them!!! That will come later.
1) Will the HPC-Profile be useful to your organization/company? Explain.
2) Will you engineer your products to be hpc-profile compliant?
3) In your opinion, are there any unresolved ambiguities? Explain?
4) Thoughts on the next profile? Anything in particular from BES or JSDL (or other specification) that you would like to include.
5) Approximately how many person-days did it take you to implement the HPC-profile?
6) What would you change in the HPC-profile? Why?
Remember this is a STRAWMAN ONLY for discussion! Please add, suggest removal, or modify the above.
A
Andrew Grimshaw
Professor of Computer Science
University of Virginia
434-982-2204
grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu <mailto:grimshaw@cs.virginia.edu>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org <mailto:ogsa-wg@ogf.org> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
--
Ian Foster, Director, Computation Institute Argonne National Laboratory & University of Chicago Argonne: MCS/221, 9700 S. Cass Ave, Argonne, IL 60439 Chicago: Rm 405, 5640 S. Ellis Ave, Chicago, IL 60637 Tel: +1 630 252 4619. Web: www.ci.uchicago.edu <http://www.ci.uchicago.edu>. Globus Alliance: www.globus.org <http://www.globus.org>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------- --
-- ogsa-hpcp-wg mailing list ogsa-hpcp-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-hpcp-wg
-- ogsa-wg mailing list ogsa-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-wg
-- ogsa-bes-wg mailing list ogsa-bes-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-bes-wg
-- ogsa-hpcp-wg mailing list ogsa-hpcp-wg@ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-hpcp-wg
participants (5)
-
Andrew Grimshaw -
Christopher Smith -
Hiro Kishimoto -
Ian Foster -
Marty Humphrey