November 2005 - ogsa-wg - lists.ogf.org

Last call for Application Contents Service Specification 1.0
by Keisuke Fukui 08 Mar '06

08 Mar '06

Folks in ogsa-wg, cddlm-wg and acs-wg, We, acs-wg, has come to completion of the ACS Specification 1.0 after discussions and reviews. This is the last call for comments before submission to the GGF Editor for publication. If you have comments, please get them to me by 9 am Japan time on Monday November 7. If there are no significant comments I plan to submit the document on Monday afternoon. Below is the link for the document: https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/acs-wg/document/draft-ggf-acs-spec-1.0… Regards, Keisuke Fukui ACS-WG co-chair

1 1

Teleconference minutes - 2 November 2005
by Andreas Savva 09 Dec '05

09 Dec '05

Minutes attached. https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/minutes-20051102/en/1 -- Andreas Savva Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd OGSA Teleconference - 2 November 2005 ===================================== * Participants Jay Unger (IBM) Jem Treadwell (HP) Ellen Stokes (IBM) Chris Smith (Platform) Andreas Savva (Fujitsu) Steven Newhouse (OMII) Mark Morgan (UVa) Steve McGough (Imperial) Tom Maguire (EMC) Fred Maciel (Hitachi) Hiro Kishimoto (Fujitsu) Andrew Grimshaw (UVa) Dave Berry (NeSC) Michael Behrens (R2AD, LLC) Minutes: Andreas Savva * October 26 minutes approved with no changes * Information Model discussion - Postponed for next Wednesday - Action: Andrew to identify the attributes needed for BES container * EMS Sequence review - Reviewed sequence diagram and text sent to the list http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/ogsa-wg/2005/11/msg00003.html The diagram has not changed since the last review. There is additional text explaining the steps. - An open issue is the meaning of the 'abstract JSDL document'. - In the simplest case a document that does not specify a particular resource (host) for execution. - A more abstract case is that of specifyin only an application name and data (input, output) and leaving the rest to the system. - Taking the OS as an example, if the OS element is defined then only that specific OS can be used. If left undefined then any OS can be used. There is no in between choice with JSDL 1.0. The expectation is that JSDL should be combined with some other language to provide more flexible descriptions. - (WS-Agreement is one option but the assumption is that it is not used in this sequence. ) - Other existing work on preferences or selection policy? - EGEE uses Condor classads (with EGEE extensions) - Globus (no, since no there is no scheduler) - Can the Policy document may be empty? Then would just get whichever resource the EPS considers good enough. - Job management is out of scope of this scenario - How about job termination? It was discussed last time and is out of scope at this stage. - But it is a good idea to add the simplest case of 'control' returning to JM at the end of the job. - Agreed that this should be a separate sequence diagram. * Naming discussion - There was substantial confusion with the statements made at the last F2F. - Confirmed that the gist of the statement was: "In OGSA pointers are EPRs that may or may not be WS-Names." - The additional question is whether individuals WGs, because of the service specifications they are defining, can choose to require WS-Names (their reasons for doing so may vary). - Why does a service require EPR comparison? Does it fall in the category of "Nice but..." - One example is to distinguish EPRs for identity purposes. - And one common usage may be to enable additional functionality for monitoring, etc. - The expectation is that even if some OGSA services mint WS-Names and other OGSA services deal with them, those other OGSA services may also have to tolerate vanilla EPRs because there may be non-OGSA services in the system. - Does the requirement for WS-Names have to be part of the interface signature or is it more of a compliance statement that should be in a profile instead? - Is it an optimization? Can there be implemenations that functionally work without this feature, even if sub-optimally? So to make this feature mandatory becomes an overstatement. - It is also putting the onus on the client to manage the identities vs requiring the service to provide an operation. - Filesystem traversal as one(another) case where such an optimization (WS-Name) is useful. - The logging use case mentioned earlier is a commonly cited one. But in Jay's experience the identifiers have to be explicitly designed for the specific system and do not generalize. - Also the 'unique-in-space-and-time' statement is another point of disagreement. - To guarantee uniqueness there are two approaches: 1) arbitrator; or 2) agreed upon algorithm (with some unique input) used by everyone. - Agreed that something closer to (2) is expected but it is more of a best-effort. So the space-time guarantee is not expected to hold literally. - Noone on the call doubts the usefulness of WS-Names in helping build quality implementations. The disagreement is whether they must be mandated in the interface signatures of basic specs. - The open issue is what is the statement OGSA should make to the fellow WGs. Is this issue something that can be left to each individual WG or should it be tackled by the Architecture (so within OGSA-WG). - Hiro proposed to write up a document defining the problem, what are the requirements and proposed approach; and circulate to interested parties. Continue discussion on the list and possibly re-review next week with Ian Foster and Frank Siebenlist. - Tom volunteered to start a draft * UML Tool discussion - postponed

5 4

Teleconference minutes - 28 November 2005
by Andreas Savva 04 Dec '05

04 Dec '05

Minutes attached. https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/minutes-20051128/en/1 OGSA Teleconference - 28 November 2005 ====================================== * Participants Mike Behrens (R2AD, LLC) Dave Berry (NeSC) Fred Maciel (Hitachi) Takuya Mori (NEC) Andreas Savva (Fujitsu) Frank Siebenlist (ANL) Jem Treadwell (HP) Jay Unger (IBM) Apologies: Peter Ziu Minutes: Andreas Savva * Minutes Nov 21 approved with no changes * Jan 2006 F2F - To be held at Sunnyvale. Proposed agenda is on gridforge. - The recommended hotel is the Corporate Inn. * OGSA 1.5: Infrastructure section review Reviewed new text in the infrastructure section. Some concerns were raised about the text discussing multiple profiles. There has not been any work on a second basic profile since the last GGF so saying 'defining' is not accurate---'allowing' may be better. Also there is a technical issue with saying that WS-Management is functionally equivalent to WSRF. Action: Jay volunteered to provide revised text for section 3.3.6 for review in a future call. * Basic Security Profile discussion - Agreed with proposal outlined in the email sent by Andreas to the list: separate out portions of the 'Secure channel' in a new Basic secure profile. - Takuya is working on removing those parts out of the Secure Channel and he will prepare a new draft this week. - Takuya will also prepare the new Basic security profile document - These drafts are not ready so their review is postponed for future calls. (The secure channel may be reviewed Wednesday if ready.) * Glossary review - Reviewed the Acronym list proposed by Olegario, using the normal policy---include OGSA related acronyms, consider non-OGSA grid acronyms, and do not include general acronyms. - Decisions recorded by Jem and will be uploaded to gridforge tracker. Only actions relating to the Architecture document are recorded here: - Consider adding footnote for CORBA (Andreas) - Review usage of DBMS and also RDMBS and ODMBS (Andreas) - EMS should probably be consistenly OGSA-EMS (Andreas) - EU: Change citation to VOMS and spell out EU instead (Andreas) - LDAP, RDMBS: have a look at usage of section 3.7.5 (Andreas) - PII: Andreas to check with Frank or Takuya - VLANs: Andreas to check if RM text can be rewritten * MDC presentation review - Postponed review---no quorum. - Andreas will send editable OGSA v1 figures to Ravi - Jem will send the 'refererenced standards' slides to Ravi - Andreas will arrange for a review of the slides for the next meeeting: preferably towards the end of the meeting.

2 1

Proposed agenda for Nov. 30th call
by Hiro Kishimoto 30 Nov '05

30 Nov '05

Hi all, The following is a proposed agenda for OGSA-WG telecon on Nov. 30th Wednesday from 4pm to 6pm (CST). Dial-in numbers for Wednesday: Free: +1-888-452-0308 Intl/Toll: +1-484-644-0505 PIN: 71815 Screen share service will be provided. URL: http://ogsa.glance.net Session key: 1130 See more explanation: http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/ogsa-wg/2004/06/msg00077.html 1) Early discussion (20 min) Note taker assignment Roll call Telecon minutes approval (if available) Common UML tool update Agenda bashing 2) GGF16 and B2B F2F meeting schedule (20 min) How many sessions do we have at GGF16 (default 2)? > - Planning a F2F on Friday after GGF16 > - No confirmation from Athens University for a room yet. > - Confirmed room at IBM. It is a 10 minutes ride from the hotel. > > - No discussion on how many sessions to have yet. Andrew suggested > doing an "OGSA town hall" meeting to get more feedback from the > community. [This would be in addition to or in place of Outreach.] 3) EMS architecture (30 min) (1) review sequence diagrams from composite roadmap 2.4 Job Termination 2.5 Dynamic Job Selection (2) Review Ian's comments on 2.3 Selected Job Execution > I need to see more details on what is being proposed in terms of a > selector interface, but I would be concerned if there was an attempt > to incorporate this as a primitive. As the brief and > far-from-comprehensive list above shows, there are many different > resource selection strategies that may be applied, and these > strategies may be applied in many different ways and in different > places. (3) Deployment and configuration scenarios break down Based on the discussion at the last CDDLM/ACS joint call, I think we need more fine grain scenarios breakdown for chapter 3. EMS Architecture Composition Roadmap (incorporate Nov. 9th CDDLM/ACS joint discussion) https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/proposed-ems-roadmap/… 4) BES information model (30 min) Andrew and Mark help Ellen to draw up an example CIM profile for BES container. We will review their draft. 5) OGSA presentation at MDC review (30 min) Ravi will give OGSA overview presentation at Management Developer Conference on December 6th. - http://mandevcon.com/ He has uploaded his slides presentation; https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/MDC_Preso_-_High_Leve… 6) Wrap up (10 min) AOB <NEXT CALL> Dec. 5 (Mon) Architecture & Glossary 1.5 Basic Security Profile secure channel review Dec. 7 (Wed) Two naming requirement docs review EMS architecture Information model & CIM profile Dec. 12 (Mon) Architecture & Glossary 1.5 Basic Security Profile review Dec. 14 (Wed) EMS architecture Information model & CIM profile Telecon schedule: https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/telecon_schedule/ -- Hiro Kishimoto

2 1

Proposed agenda for Nov. 28th call
by Hiro Kishimoto 29 Nov '05

29 Nov '05

Hi all, The following is a proposed agenda for OGSA-WG telecon on Nov. 28th Monday from 4pm to 6pm (CST). I will be in Seoul for Grid Forum Korea Winter Workshop keynote. In case I cannot make this call, Tom and Andreas will chair it. The dial-in number for Monday; Free: +1-866-639-4741 Toll: +1-574-935-6703 PIN: 8980700 Screen share service will be provided. URL: http://ogsa.glance.net Session key: 1128 See more explanation: http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/ogsa-wg/2004/06/msg00077.html 1) Early discussion (10 min) Note taker assignment Roll call Telecon minutes approval (Nov. 21) https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/minutes-20051121/en/1 Agenda bashing 2) Basic Security Profile discussion (30 min) > Therefore the proposal is to separate these sections in an "OGSA Basic > Security Profile" document. This document would expose the claim > required to satisfy the WSRF BP security profile requirements > (http://www.ggf.org/namespaces/2005/07/OGSABasicSecurity-1.0) but would > have no normative dependency on the WSRF BP. http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/ogsa-wg/2005/11/msg00080.html 3) MDC presentation review (30 min) Ravi will give OGSA overview presentation at Management Developer Conference on December 6th. Ravi will post his draft slides before the call. - http://mandevcon.com/ 4) Architecture & Glossary 1.5 (40 min) Infrastructure section review (minus Naming) Acronyms in Glossary 5) Wrap up (10 min) AOB <NEXT CALL> Nov. 30 (Wed) EMS architecture Information model & CIM profile Dec. 5 (Mon) Architecture & Glossary 1.5 Basic Security Profile review Dec. 7 (Wed) Two naming requirement docs review EMS architecture Information model & CIM profile Telecon schedule: https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/telecon_schedule/ -- Hiro Kishimoto

4 5

RE: latest ws-naming draft (Re: [ogsa-naming-wg] One more thing)
by Maguire_Tom＠emc.com 29 Nov '05

29 Nov '05

<trm>Comments inline</trm> -----Original Message----- From: owner-ogsa-naming-wg(a)ggf.org [mailto:owner-ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org] On Behalf Of Mark McKeown Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2005 9:58 AM To: Frank Siebenlist Cc: ogsa-naming-wg(a)ggf.org; ogsa-wg(a)ggf.org Subject: Re: latest ws-naming draft (Re: [ogsa-naming-wg] One more thing) Hi Frank, I have made some comments inline... First to remove some confusion about IRIs that have appeared in previous mails in this thread. URNs and URLs are URIs[1], IRIs[2] are an extension of URIs to support extra charactors. A URI may or may not map to a real physical address. The WS-Addressing specification[3] defines a number of URIs that do not map to real network locations (eg http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous) WS-Addressing mandates that the wsa:Address element is an absolute IRI. > > * include a profile for the use of the Address and ReferenceParameters > that ensure the proper uniqueness property in time and space of the > reference. Tom Maguire suggested to use the wsdl binding of the > address which sounded very promising. I am not sure I have understood Tom's argument correctly so I will try and repeat it here in order to be corrected... TomM suggested using the wsa::Address as the name, I understand his argument as being that with the WSDL binding for WS-Addressing you can include the service part of the WSDL into the wsa:Metadata of the EPR, the service part may contain a number of network endpoints indicating that the WS-Resource is available at a number of locations. >From 'Web Services Addressing 1.0 - WSDL Binding' [4]: "In particular, embedding a WSDL service component description MAY be used by EPR issuers to indicate the presence of alternative addresses and protocol bindings to access the referenced endpoint." In this case the wsa:Address could be a URN (or URI that is not an actual network location) and the client could look to the wsa:Metadata to find the actual network location of the WS-Resource. Quoting Tom[5]: "Let me be very clear about this an EPR does not have a 1 to 1 correspondence with a protocol and binding address. It MUST be true that an EPR can support multiple protocols and their associated addresses." I am not sure I agree, the WS-Addressing WSDL binding uses "MAY" when discussing including WSDL components in the EPR, there is no obligation. <trm>probably should not have capitalized MUST. The important aspect of that statement is 'can support'</trm> I think most services will only use one transport protocol so I think this feature will not be used often - even if a service does use more than one transport/port there is no requirement to advertise this in the EPR. <trm>yes, that is what the 'MAY' means wrt requirement to advertise. I am puzzled why you think that most services will use only one transport protocol. Certainly there are a few to choose from, SOAP/HTTP, SOAP/JMS, SOAP/BEEP and clearly the separation of protocol handlers from service implementation is a good thing.</trm> Also there is no transport bindings available for WS-Addressing - for example the SOAP bindings tells us to take the wsa:Address element and put it into the wsa:To element in the SOAP header but does not tell us what to do with it with regards to the transport protocol (eg most people use the wsa:Address element to create a RequestURI which they set as the POST HTTP Header when using HTTP - this issue has been raised with the W3C TAG[6]). <trm>I wonder what their solution will be.....</trm> Quoting WS-Addressing: "A Web service endpoint is a (referenceable) entity, processor, or resource to which Web service messages can be addressed. Endpoint references convey the information needed to address a Web service endpoint." To me there is a strong emphasis on singlar. <trm>Do me a favor; Define endpoint. That argument has been raging forever.... </trm> > > * include a recipe for generation of a single IRI from the Address and > ReferenceParameters that can function as an identifier of the resource. > Mark Mc Keown pointed at the W3C Web Architecture description of the > use of URIs which we could borrow from. I am not sure about creating an IRI from the wsa:Address and the wsa:ReferenceParameters. Consider the following EPRs <wsa:EndPointReference> <wsa:Address>http://grid.org/jobs/4654</wsa:Address> <wsa:ReferenceParameters> <DateCreated>Thu Nov 17 16:05:43 UTC 2005</DateCreated> </wsa:ReferenceParameters> </wsa:EndPointReference> and <wsa:EndPointReference> <wsa:Address>http://grid.org/jobs/4654</wsa:Address> <wsa:ReferenceParameters> <DateCreated>Thu Nov 17 13:07:53 UTC 2005</DateCreated> </wsa:ReferenceParameters> </wsa:EndPointReference> If DateCreated is just to inform the service when the EPR was created and is not used by the service for anything else then the two EPRs are for the same WS-Resource. However if I create a name based on a combination of the wsa:Address and wsa:ReferenceParameters I will get two different names, ie I have created URI aliases and divided the network losing some of the goodness of Metcalfes law [7]. cheers Mark [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt [2] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/CR-ws-addr-core-20050817/ [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-ws-addr-wsdl-20050413/ [5] http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/ogsa-naming-wg/2005/11/msg00021.h tml [6] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#endPointRefs-47 [7] http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/

4 4

My Apologies
by Ziu, Peter 28 Nov '05

28 Nov '05

Hiro, I am sorry I am unable to make this day's meeting. Peter D Ziu 703.883.5168 (o) 571.235.0208 (c) peter.ziu(a)ngc.com (o) 5712350208(a)tmomail.net (sms) pete(a)ziu.net (h)

1 0

MDC Preso review for today ...
by Subramaniam, Ravi 28 Nov '05

28 Nov '05

Hi, Tom: I cannot attend from 2-3 Pacific (i.e. the first half of the meeting). I am at a day long internal F2F and can also be only for 30 minutes between 3-4. I would prefer 3:30-4:00 if it will not disrupt the agenda. I have posted the presentation for review at today's meeting: /projects/ogsa-wg/document/MDC_Preso_-_High_Level_OGSA_Intro_-_4Review/e n/1 <https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/MDC_Preso_-_High_ Level_OGSA_Intro_-_4Review/en/1> I would like some help to make this more graphic oriented rather than text if possible (especially for the ogsa technical section). Would it be possible for the design team leads/members to provide one slide that would capture the essence of that area graphically? I could try to grab any diagrams that are in raw mode in the document. If people can send me the Powerpoint versions of these pictures, that would be much more helpful. (Pointers to this on Gridforge are also welcome) Thanks! Ravi

1 0

Re: [ogsa-naming-wg] Next telecon
by Frank Siebenlist 27 Nov '05

27 Nov '05

Andrew, Will there be a ws-naming telcon this week? Thanks, Frank. Frank Siebenlist wrote: > 11/29 works for me - the other dates are out because of UK travel... > > -Frank. > > > > Maguire_Tom(a)emc.com wrote: >> Either 11/29 or 12/2 work for me. >> Tom >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From:* owner-ogsa-naming-wg(a)ggf.org >> [mailto:owner-ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org] *On Behalf Of *Andrew Grimshaw >> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 16, 2005 3:07 PM >> *To:* ogsa-naming-wg(a)ggf.org >> *Subject:* [ogsa-naming-wg] Next telecon >> >> All, >> >> We have not been keeping up with telecon’s – my fault, and much >> discussion about WS-Names has been occurring in the OGSA-WG. >> >> We need to have a WS-Naming telecon soon. >> >> Please send me your preferences of the following – including “can’t >> make it at all and it is important for me to make it” comments. >> >> 11/29 10AM eastern >> >> 11/30 10AM eastern >> >> 12/1 10AM eastern >> >> 12/2 10AM eastern >> >> Issues on the agenda: (please also send me additional items you would >> like discussed) >> >> Inclusion of Abstractname in reference parameters (in addition to >> existing location) for endpoints that need the abstractname for >> dispatch (recall this topic was introduced because one cannot assume >> that extensibility elements are copied into the header. >> >> Suggested ways to do scalable, high-probability distinct name generation >> >> Wsa:to – use this as the abstract name (Tom’s proposal) >> >> Andrew Grimshaw >> >> Professor of Computer Science >> >> University of Virginia >> >> 434-982-2204 >> >> grimshaw(a)cs.virginia.edu >> > -- Frank Siebenlist franks(a)mcs.anl.gov The Globus Alliance - Argonne National Laboratory

1 0

CFP: International Provenance and Annotation Workshop (IPAW'06)
by Hiro Kishimoto 27 Nov '05

27 Nov '05

Forwarding bounced email. -- Hiro Kishimoto Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 21:30:54 +0000 From: Luc Moreau <L.Moreau(a)ecs.soton.ac.uk> Subject: CFP: International Provenance and Annotation Workshop (IPAW'06) Apologies for cross-postings. Please send to interested colleagues. CALL FOR PAPERS International Provenance and Annotation Workshop (IPAW'06) Chicago, Illinois, USA May 3-5, 2006 http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm/IPAW06 Introduction ------------ This workshop is a follow-up to workshops in Chicago in October 2002 (http://www-fp.mcs.anl.gov/~foster/provenance/) and in Edinburgh in December 2003 (http://www.nesc.ac.uk/esi/events/304/) It will further investigate the issues of data provenance, process documentation, data derivation, and data annotation. In scientific and business workflows, typically data is repeatedly copied, corrected, and transformed as it passes through numerous databases or services. Understanding where data has come from and how it arrived in a database or filestore is of crucial importance to the trust a user will put in that data, yet this information is seldom captured properly. The importance of provenance goes well beyond verification; it is closely related to archiving and annotation, also important in the context of scientific and business data. Moreover, it may be used in data discovery. Knowing the provenance of a data item may help a user to make connections with other useful data. Alternatively, a user may want to understand a derivation in order to repeat it with modified parameters, and being able to describe a derivation may help a user to discover whether a particular kind of analysis has already been performed. Annotation is closely related to provenance. End users do more than produce and consume data: they comment on it and refer to it, and to the results of queries upon it. Annotation is therefore an important aspect of communication. One user may want to highlight a point in data space for another to investigate further. They may wish to annotate the result of a query such that similar queries show the annotation. Information for Authors ----------------------- IPAW'06 encourages the submission of theoretical, experimental, methodological, and applications papers related to the issue of provenance and annotation. Papers should be no longer than 8 pages (lncs column format). Submissions will be peer reviewed and selected for presentation at the workshop; papers will be evaluated on the basis of the quality of their technical contribution, originality, soundness, significance, presentation, understanding of the state of the art, and overall quality. There will be proceedings published after the workshop (publisher TBC). Submission instructions ----------------------- To be added here. Topics of interest ------------------ Topics of interest to IPAW'06, include but are not limited to: * models of provenance and annotation * applications requiring provenance, uses cases, methodologies * provenance systems, functionality, protocols, implementation * relationship between provenance, annotation and metadata * provenance-based reasoning and Semantic Web techonologies * relationship between workflows, processes and provenance * security considerations for provenance * scalability issues * granularity of provenance * legal issues relating to provenance * provenance, business processes and compliance Important Dates --------------- Submission deadline: February 10, 2006 Acceptance Notification: March 6, 2006 IPAW'06 date: May 3-5, 2006 Location -------- Chicago, Illinois, downtown Sheraton hotel. Provisional Programme Committee ------------------------------- * Dave Berry, National e-Science Centre, UK * Peter Buneman, University of Edinburgh, UK * Ian Foster (co-chair), Argonne National Lab/University of Chicago, USA * Jim Hendler, University of Maryland, USA * Carole Goble, University of Manchester, UK * Reagan Moore, San Diego Supercomputer Center, USA * Luc Moreau (co-chair), University of Southampton, UK * Jim Myers, National Center for Supercomputing Applications, USA * Mike Wilde, Argonne National Lab/University of Chicago, USA

1 0