Steven, I agree. At the F2F we reached a consensus on a proposal I am to take back to the BES working group - that we essentially adopt BES v26 (the one implemented by the profile) epsilon: (1) modifications made by the profile team as they worked towards interop, (2) typographical and language fixes. We then take that document, last call on it, and send it to the area directors. W.R.T. the HPC profile document - am not a co-chair so I can't comment on that, though the OGSA WG did discuss both collecting experiences information for inclusion in an experiences document (see my other email) and next steps that we would like to bring to the table. I was tasked with both, which is why the flurry of email yesterday. Further, Steve McGough and I volunteered to head up a WorkFlow design team for OGSA to flesh out the issues, see what else is being done, etc. We will present at a telecom on November 30. A
-----Original Message----- From: Steven Newhouse [mailto:s.newhouse@omii.ac.uk] Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 2:41 PM To: Andrew Grimshaw Cc: ogsa-hpcp-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org; ogsa-bes-wg@ggf.org Subject: Re: [OGSA-BES-WG] SC2006 was great! What Next?
See attached.
While I agree we need to think about next steps... I would like to see BES and the HPCP be submitted to the editor and go into public comment - if they are ready for that.
Is there any work that needs to be done NOW as opposed to things we might want to do as further development?
Steven -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Steven Newhouse Mob:+44(0)7920489420 Tel:+44(0)23 80598789 Director, Open Middleware Infrastructure Institute-UK (OMII-UK) c/o Suite 6005, Faraday Building (B21), Highfield Campus, University of Southampton, Highfield, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK