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

Re: [saga-rg] Re: OGSA EMC BoF on Simple job submission
by Hiro Kishimoto 08 Feb '05

08 Feb '05

John's email bounced. ---- Hiro Kishimoto From: John Shalf <jshalf(a)lbl.gov> Subject: Re: [saga-rg] Re: OGSA EMC BoF on Simple job submission Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 09:37:14 -0800 To: Bill Nitzberg <bill(a)computer.org>, ogsa-wg(a)ggf.org, Hrabri Rajic <hrabri.rajic(a)intel.com>, Simple API for Grid Applications WG <saga-rg(a)ggf.org>, Stephen Pickles <stephen.pickles(a)man.ac.uk>, Tom Goodale <goodale(a)cct.lsu.edu> On Feb 8, 2005, at 8:46 AM, Tom Goodale wrote: >> Would >> SAGA-RG people like to engage OGSA EMC and possibly co-sponsor a >> Simple >> job submission WG? This could be a nice opportunity to tie in the >> classic API and the WSDL approach. > > I'm not sure how relevent this would be, unless you are thinking of a > direct mapping of the SAGA API into WSDL, which may not make sense, > and would probably constrain the new group too much, however we should > certainly make sure we have some people at the BoF. Well, this should be cause for further discussion. The application programmer point of view on this will be "I don't really care what's underneath as long as it does what I ask of it when I call the right subroutine". So the WSDL mapping is more on the implementation side of things. That being said, having a working implementation is quite important. So it may be very interesting to pursue as a path to implementation (albeit not the only path). I think the concern on the SAGA side is that the WSDL interface will be adjusted to accommodate the semantics defined by the application use cases rather than the other way around. But this sounds pretty reasonable to me. >> One thing to consider: Do we really need APIs in SRM, APME, and now >> in >> ARCH areas? > > I'm not sure I understand this question ? We have APIs for the > functional areas we identified from our use cases. Just to echo this part of Tom's note, the API's are driven by the use cases. The use cases thus far didn't describe any good SRM applications (or at least SRM-like requirements were not described in enough detail for us to act upon). It could just be that the apps people are so bogged down in remote file access issues that they don't realize they need good Storage Resource Management systems yet. If we get some well described SRM, APME, or ARCH use cases, that will motivate development of APIs in those areas. (its not that those areas are not important) -john

1 0

Re: OGSA EMC BoF on Simple job submission
by Hiro Kishimoto 08 Feb '05

08 Feb '05

Tom's email bounced. ---- Hiro Kishimoto Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2005 11:46:59 -0500 (EST) From: Tom Goodale <goodale(a)cct.lsu.edu> To: "Rajic, Hrabri" <hrabri.rajic(a)intel.com> Cc: saga-rg(a)ggf.org, ogsa-wg(a)ggf.org, Bill Nitzberg <bill(a)computer.org>, Stephen Pickles <stephen.pickles(a)man.ac.uk> Subject: Re: OGSA EMC BoF on Simple job submission Hi Hrabri, > Are OGSA EMC people aware of the most recent SAGA-RG work? Chris Smith from Platform, who's been putting together the job stuff for the Strawman is also involved in the OGSA EMS. > Would > SAGA-RG people like to engage OGSA EMC and possibly co-sponsor a > Simple job submission WG? This could be a nice opportunity to tie in > the classic API and the WSDL approach. I'm not sure how relevent this would be, unless you are thinking of a direct mapping of the SAGA API into WSDL, which may not make sense, and would probably constrain the new group too much, however we should certainly make sure we have some people at the BoF. > One thing to consider: Do we really need APIs in SRM, APME, and now > in ARCH areas? I'm not sure I understand this question ? We have APIs for the functional areas we identified from our use cases. Tom > Hrabri > > > ---- from "[ogsa-wg] Proposed agenda for Feb. 7th call" mail by Hiro > ------- > > 4) Simple job submission BoF preparation (30 min) > From the minutes of Jan. 19 call. >> - There is a plan to do an EM-related BoF. Stacey should know about >> it but it is not the job of the OGSA-WG to tell her---the >> proposed-chairs should do it. Preparation has not progressed to >> that point yet so Andrew as Area Director will take care of it. > >> Action: Andrew as Area director to send an email to the directors of >> the relevant Area (SRM: Bill, Stephen) to let them know of >> the proposed BoF; also to Stacey to reserve a slot. > >> - Andrew mentioned that on the Data call there was a discussion for >> a similar BoF for Data. > > -Hrabri > >

1 0

Teleconference minutes - February 7, 2005
by Andreas Savva 08 Feb '05

08 Feb '05

Minutes attached. Gridforge: https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/minutes-20050207/en/1 or http://tinyurl.com/5fxfd/minutes-20050207/en/1 [Note that there is no call planned for Wednesday and next week is the face to face.] -- Andreas Savva Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd OGSA teleconference - 7 February 2005 ====================================== * Participants Jay Unger (IBM) Andreas Savva (Fujitsu) Dave Snelling (Fujitsu) Hrabri Rajic (Intel) Mark Morgan (UVa) Tom Maguire (IBM) Hiro Kishimoto (Fujitsu) Andrew Grimshaw (UVa) Dave Berry (NeSC) Minutes: Andreas Savva * Minutes for January 31 approved with no changes ** BoF preparation ** Simple Job Submission BoF - Driven by the need to define normatively a minimal subset of EM so that an EM pofile might go ahead. - Andrew is pulling things together - He has talked to Bill Nitzberg (area director) - He has told Stacey that a BoF application will be sent by Friday, the deadline for BoF scheduling requests. - Working on the draft application - Simple Job Submission may not be the right title. (It is more along the lines of 'sub-EM' or 'minimal EM.') - The proposed schedule is likely to be quite aggresive in order to meet various dependencies (and GGF expectations). For example, - First draft by June; and end of year as target delivery date - Clarified that there are 3 relevant documents: 1. BoF request (required to schedule a BoF) 2. Draft charter (good to have but not essential to schedule a BoF) 3. Starting point draft (as (2)) - For Friday's submission (1) and possibly part of (2) is good enough. - There is a minimal EM draft. (Based on the refactoring/renaming that Andrew, Mark, Chris did last year to address OGSA version 1.0 terminology problems.) - Starting with the EMS draft, ignore all services except container. Require a description of what to start and where (which container to use); and start it up. Return an EPR (or perhaps a Name). - Andrew and Mark worked with other UK participants in the mini-EMS F2F on this draft last week while in the UK. The result is a further simplification: http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/ogsa-wg/2005/02/msg00009.html - It looks like there is a lot of interest. Many names were mentioned as possible chairs for the group. (No decisions yet.) - Agreed that when sending out the announcement all relevant people should also be cc-ed. - Need to also try to get Globus, SUN, and other parties involved. ** ByteIO BoF - Similar approach to the one described above. BoF request by Friday, tell the relevant area directors and so on. - Dave (B) will do the BoF application. - Again the BoF proposal was discussed during last week's UK meeting and many names came up as likely chairs. (Nothing fixed yet.) * UK meeting updates [The minutes of these meetings are being prepared by Mark and will be distributed once the participants review them. Very brief notes here.] ** OGSA Data mini-F2F - Dave (B) and Andrew Grimshaw gave an update. - Things seem to be coming together for a general data architecture - Data transport as an issue left for discussion at GGF13 ** OGSA EMS mini-F2F - Two day meeting with a number of local participants - Worked on simplifying the EMS draft. Produced the draft sent to the list (see url above). Some UML included. (Note that people listed have not necessarily endorsed the content yet.) ** Monday meeting (e-Science) - Geoffrey Fox presentation on 2 core model - People will not converge on one model any time soon. - UK e-Science should be prepared to cover both WSRF & WS-I++ - Still not sure what the objections are to WSRF; WS-I++ ends up trying to do same things in slightly different way. - Proposal to discuss at a later time, perhaps during the F2F, the issue of OGSA dependence on WSRF as well as the opposition to WSRF. (Meanwhile Andrew is following up by talking with some people known to object to WSRF in order to get a better idea of the issues.) - There seem to be both political and technical issues. OGSA-WG should try to understand and work through the technical issues and try to reduce the division, at least within the grid community. - OGSA Profiles: 'conformance' and 'compliance' - Some issues were raised about what is in the BP - Andrew emphasized that the BP is not finished so people who have comments should (and are welcome to) contribute. * Update from WSRF/WSN F2F ** WSRF - Good progress. Many issues resolved. (Issue of which version of WS-Addressing to reference is still open). - A committee draft should be out soon (perhaps within the next couple of months). - There are still some questions with the Service Group definition. ** Base Notification/Eventing There are some places where Base Notification is more complex than WS-Eventing. It is possible to refactor Base Notification but there is no point doing so until the WS-Eventing co-authors respond to the offer sent to them. * F2F logistics - Phone line cost (for bridge) will be covered by Fujitsu. - Meeting room cost will be covered by Andrew. - Network access: - It is too expensive to get a network connection in the meeting room. - There is free wireless in lobby - And high speed network access in the rooms (not free) - Agreed that this is a reasonable compromise. - Projector will be provided by Takuya Mori - Deal is dependent on enough people staying at the hotel. Hiro got a $125/day room rate which is better than the online one. - Hiro has to finalize the deal before people can make room reservations at this rate. And the cutoff date is likely to be very soon. People attending should make sure to reserve soon after Hiro announces it on the list. [In case of questions email Hiro or Andreas.] * Next call: Agreed to cancel Wednesday's call since many people cannot make it due to GlobusWorld. Hiro will send F2F updates to the list.

1 0

draft ems basic services
by Andreas Savva 07 Feb '05

07 Feb '05

This is a draft covering ems basic services. This is intended to be input to the proposed EM BoF. (Sending on behalf of Mark Morgan.) -- Andreas Savva

1 0

Re: [ogsa-wg] OGSA EMC BoF on Simple job submission
by Ian Foster 07 Feb '05

07 Feb '05

Hrabri: I would think that the job submission thing we need is almost completely trivial, as noted in earlier emails on ogsa-wg(a)ggf.org: it is basically a "create" call, with a JSDL string; the (also very simple) WSRF mechanisms then address the few other functions needed. The complexities all live in the JSDL, not the WSDL. On the API side, I'd strongly encourage the SAGA guys to look at the GT4 GRAM API, as it is makes it easy to do simple things, while also addressing many other things like staging, delegation, etc. See http://www-unix.globus.org/toolkit/docs/development/4.0-drafts/execution/ws…. Ian. At 09:15 AM 2/7/2005 -0800, Rajic, Hrabri wrote: >Tom, > >Are OGSA EMC people aware of the most recent SAGA-RG work? Would >SAGA-RG people like to engage OGSA EMC and possibly co-sponsor a Simple >job submission WG? This could be a nice opportunity to tie in the >classic API and the WSDL approach. > >One thing to consider: Do we really need APIs in SRM, APME, and now in >ARCH areas? > >Hrabri > > >---- from "[ogsa-wg] Proposed agenda for Feb. 7th call" mail by Hiro >------- > >4) Simple job submission BoF preparation (30 min) > From the minutes of Jan. 19 call. > > - There is a plan to do an EM-related BoF. Stacey should know about > > it but it is not the job of the OGSA-WG to tell her---the > > proposed-chairs should do it. Preparation has not progressed to > > that point yet so Andrew as Area Director will take care of it. > > > Action: Andrew as Area director to send an email to the directors of > > the relevant Area (SRM: Bill, Stephen) to let them know of > > the proposed BoF; also to Stacey to reserve a slot. > > > - Andrew mentioned that on the Data call there was a discussion for > > a similar BoF for Data. > > -Hrabri > _______________________________________________________________ Ian Foster www.mcs.anl.gov/~foster Math & Computer Science Div. Dept of Computer Science Argonne National Laboratory The University of Chicago Argonne, IL 60439, U.S.A. Chicago, IL 60637, U.S.A. Tel: 630 252 4619 Fax: 630 252 1997 Globus Alliance, www.globus.org

1 0

OGSA EMC BoF on Simple job submission
by Rajic, Hrabri 07 Feb '05

07 Feb '05

Tom, Are OGSA EMC people aware of the most recent SAGA-RG work? Would SAGA-RG people like to engage OGSA EMC and possibly co-sponsor a Simple job submission WG? This could be a nice opportunity to tie in the classic API and the WSDL approach. One thing to consider: Do we really need APIs in SRM, APME, and now in ARCH areas? Hrabri ---- from "[ogsa-wg] Proposed agenda for Feb. 7th call" mail by Hiro ------- 4) Simple job submission BoF preparation (30 min) From the minutes of Jan. 19 call. > - There is a plan to do an EM-related BoF. Stacey should know about > it but it is not the job of the OGSA-WG to tell her---the > proposed-chairs should do it. Preparation has not progressed to > that point yet so Andrew as Area Director will take care of it. > Action: Andrew as Area director to send an email to the directors of > the relevant Area (SRM: Bill, Stephen) to let them know of > the proposed BoF; also to Stacey to reserve a slot. > - Andrew mentioned that on the Data call there was a discussion for > a similar BoF for Data. -Hrabri

1 0

Data: BOF proposal; also no telcon this week or next?
by Dave Berry 06 Feb '05

06 Feb '05

Dear all, There is a plan afoot to propose a BOF at GGF13 for a WG to fully specify the BasicFiles interface. The purpose of this interface is to provide simple read/write operations on streams of bytes (indeed, it might be renamed "ByteIO"). The catch is that BOF requests must be submitted by Feb 11th, so we have to sort out the details now. This will be discussed on the Monday (Feb 7th) main OGSA call. I believe that it is not an action that we can undertake purely as a design team. I attach Hiro's message with the agenda for tomorrow's call, for those few of you who aren't on the ogsa-wg list. I'm not planning to have a data telcon this week, unless people request it. Our informal F2F will be reported on tomorrow's main OGSA telcon. Next week there is an OGSA F2F in Chicago, and I will be on holiday in England, so I will not be organising a telcon then either. This will make the next data telcon be on February 23rd. Best wishes, Dave Berry Research Manager, National e-Science Centre 15 South College St., Edinburgh Tel: +44 131 6514039

1 0

Proposed agenda for Feb. 7th call
by Hiro Kishimoto 06 Feb '05

06 Feb '05

Hi all, The following is a proposed agenda for OGSA-WG telecon on February 7th Monday from 5pm to 7pm (CST). 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: 0207 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 https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/minutes-20050131/en/1 Agenda bashing 2) Feb F2F meeting update (20 min) Andrew and I are finalizing F2F logistics at Westin O'Hare. We will fill you in at the call. The latest meeting agenda. https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/agenda_for_2005_Feb_m… g/en/4 3) UK informal OGSA data and EMS meeting debriefing (30 min) Andrew, Steven, Dave and others had very good meetings in London. They will give us outcomes of the discussions. 4) Simple job submission BoF preparation (30 min) From the minutes of Jan. 19 call. > - There is a plan to do an EM-related BoF. Stacey should know about > it but it is not the job of the OGSA-WG to tell her---the > proposed-chairs should do it. Preparation has not progressed to > that point yet so Andrew as Area Director will take care of it. > Action: Andrew as Area director to send an email to the directors of > the relevant Area (SRM: Bill, Stephen) to let them know of > the proposed BoF; also to Stacey to reserve a slot. > - Andrew mentioned that on the Data call there was a discussion for > a similar BoF for Data. 5) Wrap up (10 min) AOB Feb. 9 (5pm-7pm CDT) <TBD> Feb. 14-16 F2F meeting in Chicago ---- Hiro Kishimoto

1 1

Fwd: [members] OASIS TC Call for Participation: OASIS SOA-RM TC
by Ian Foster 06 Feb '05

06 Feb '05

Does anyone know anything about this? I note that Fujitsu is a founding member. Ian. >To: members(a)lists.oasis-open.org, tc-announce(a)lists.oasis-open.org, > xml-dev(a)lists.xml.org, soa-rm(a)lists.oasis-open.org >From: James Bryce Clark <jamie.clark(a)oasis-open.org> >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed >Subject: [members] OASIS TC Call for Participation: OASIS SOA-RM TC >X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at mailgw.mcs.anl.gov > > A new OASIS technical committee is being formed. The OASIS Service > Oriented Architecture Reference Model (SOA-RM) TC has been proposed by > the members of OASIS listed below. > > The proposal (below) meets the requirements of the OASIS TC Process > [1]. The TC name, statement of purpose, scope, list of deliverables, > audience, and language specified in the proposal will constitute the TC's > official charter. Submissions of technology for consideration by the TC, > and the beginning of technical discussions, may occur no sooner than the > TC's first meeting. > > As specified by the OASIS TC Process, the eligibility requirements > for becoming a participant in the TC at the first meeting are that you > must (a) be an employee of an OASIS member organization or an > individual member of OASIS; (b) notify the TC chair of your intent to > participate at least 15 days prior to the first meeting; and (c) attend > the first meeting of the TC, at the time and date fixed below. OASIS > members may register and add themeslves to the roster (as a prospective > member or observer) using the OASIS web-based interface, using the "Join > this TC" button on the TC's public page at [2]. Doing so will inform > the TC chair, fulfilling requirement (b) above, and subscribe you to the > TC's e-mail list, where further organizational details will be > posted. OASIS members also may join the TC after the first meeting. > > Standards always are made better by broad participation. Non-OASIS > members who wish to participate may contact us about joining [3] and > review the web-based membership information at [4]. Our rules and > structure are designed to promote inclusiveness, so we look forward to > assisting parties interested in joining the community of implementers, > technologists, academic and end-users working on OASIS > standards. Non-members also may take advantage of the public resources > maintained for each TC: a mail list archive, document repository and > public comments facility, all available on the TC's home page at > [2]. Archives of the TC's mail list and public comment lists, as with > all OASIS TCs, will be visible at [5]. > > Further information related to the topic of this TC may be found on > the Cover Pages under the title "Service Oriented Architectures" at > http://xml.coverpages.org/soa.html. > > Please feel free to forward this announcement to any other applicable > lists. OASIS is an open standards organization and we encourage your > feedback. JBC > >~ James Bryce Clark >~ Director, Standards Development, OASIS >~ jamie.clark(a)oasis-open.org > >[1] http://oasis-open.org/committees/process.shtml >[2] http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/soa-rm >[3] join(a)oasis-open.org >[4] http://www.oasis-open.org/join/ >[5] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ > >==== >Charter data: > >Name of the TC > >OASIS Service Oriented Architecture Reference Model Technical Committee >(abbreviated as OASIS SOA-RM TC). > >Statement of Purpose > >Problem to be solved: "Service Oriented Architecture" (SOA) as a term is >being used in an increasing number of contexts and specific technology >implementations, sometimes with differing - or worse, conflicting - >understandings of implicit terminology and components. The proposal to >establish a Reference Model is intended to encourage the continued growth >of specific and different SOA implementations whilst preserving a common >layer that can be shared and understood between those or future >implementations. > >Purpose: The SOA-RM TC will deliver a Service Oriented Architecture >Reference Model (SOA-RM). Once the SOA-RM has been delivered, the TC may >consider appropriate follow-up, including the creation of sub-committees, >promotional material, liaisons or other promulgation of the TC's work, in >order to promote the use of the SOA Reference Model in specific SOA >implementations, in particular for vertical industries. > >Definitions used in this section: > Reference Model - A reference model is an abstract framework for > understanding significant relationships among the entities of some > environment, and for the development of consistent standards or > specifications supporting that environment. A reference model is based on > a small number of unifying concepts and may be used as a basis for > education and explaining standards to a non-specialist. [1] A reference > model is not directly tied to any standards, technologies or other > concrete implementation details, but it does seek to provide a common > semantics that can be used unambiguously across and between different > implementations. > Architecture - Software architecture for a system is the structure or > structures of the system, which consist of elements and their externally > visible properties, and the relationships among them.[2] > >[1] ssdoo.gsfc.nasa.gov/nost/isoas/us04/defn.html >[2] "Documenting Software Architectures", Addison Wesley, Clements et al, >pp xxv, ISBN 0201703726 > >Scope of the TC's work > >The TC will: > -- deliver a Service Oriented Architecture Reference Model (SOA-RM) > and, if it elects, ancillary materials as described under "purpose" above. > -- allow the commission of sub-committees to create specialized SOA > models for vertical industries or technology families. > -- propose usage and implementation guidelines for creating > specializations of the reference model, whether as a formal methodology > or as best practice guidelines. > >In no event shall this Technical Committee finalize or approve any >technical specification if it believes that the use, distribution, or >implementation of such specification would necessarily require the >unauthorized infringement of any third party rights known to the Technical >Committee, and such third party has not agreed to provide necessary >license rights on perpetual, royalty-free, non-discriminatory terms. > >Deliverables > >1. Service Oriented Architecture Reference Model: completion date in >twelve months from formation of this TC. >2. Specializations of the SOA Reference Model, possibly including >reference architectures, for vertical industries, technology families or >other special interest groups: optional. > >Anticipated audience > >Anyone involved in the design, documentation or implementation of Service >Oriented Architectures (SOA's) or components thereof, regardless of the >standards body under which the work is sanctioned. > >Language > >The TC will conduct its business in English. The TC may elect to form >subcommittees that produce localized documentation of the TC's work in >additional languages. > >The following is additional information relevant to the launch of the TC. > >Related work > >Since there are no other reference models currently being worked on in >OASIS, there are no similar deliverables at the time of this submission. >However, a wide variety of specifications, both within and outside of >OASIS, may be of relevance as instances of or components of a specific >service-oriented function or architecture. The objective of the Reference >Model is precisely to provide standardized integration points between >these. The work product of over half of the current OASIS TCs (each of >which may offer a service, service description, advertising mechanism, >service data model or service contract), as well as a large number of >standards from other organizations, may serve as relevant data to inform >the reference model. However, the SOA RM will not seek to choose among >specifications nor populate functions. Similarly, some of the existing >standards-based efforts that claim to describe an architecture or stack of >service-oriented specifications (including the OASIS FWSI and ebSOA TCs, >the W3C Web Services Architecture Technical Note, and other work) may >serve as instances or examples that are relevant data for the creation of >the reference model, but are not comparable, because the reference model >will address a higher level of abstraction. > >Anticipated contributions > >1. SOA Reference Model Q & A , written by conveners of this TC. >2. Elements of an SOA Reference Model, written by conveners of this TC. > >First meeting > >The first meeting of the TC will be held on March 22, 2005, at 8:00 am >Pacific (US) time, by conference call sponsored by Adobe Systems, Inc. > >On-going meeting plans. > >Meeting schedule will be monthly conference calls as well as quarterly >face-to-face meetings, pending approval and adoption by the TC. Adobe >Systems has agreed to serve as a meeting sponsor > >Proposers of the TC > >Kathryn Breininger, kathryn.r.breininger(a)boeing.com, The Boeing Company >Peter Brown, peter(a)justbrown.net, individual member >Ed Chase, chase(a)adobe.com, Adobe Systems, Inc. >Joseph Chiusano, chiusano_joseph(a)bah.com, Booz Allen Hamilton >John Hardin, john(a)sanghainteractive.com, individual member >C. Matthew Mackenzie, mattm(a)adobe.com, Adobe Systems >Hamid Ben Malek, HMalek(a)us.fujitsu.com, Fujitsu >Christopher Mather, mather_christopher(a)bah.com, Booz Allen Hamilton >Tim Mathews, tmathews(a)lmi.org, LMI >Katsuhiro Morita, Km040481(a)moj.go.jp, ECOM >Duane Nickull, dnickull(a)adobe.com, Adobe Systems >Michael E. Ruiz, michael.ruiz(a)baesystems.com, BAE Systems NA, Inc. >Sally St. Amand, sallystamand(a)yahoo.com, individual member >Ron Schuldt, ron.l.schuldt(a)lmco.com, Lockheed Martin, Inc. >Rajal Shah, rajalsha(a)cisco.com, Cisco Systems, Inc. > >TC Convener > >Duane Nickull, dnickull(a)adobe.com > >Proposed TC chair or co-chairs > >Duane Nickull, dnickull(a)adobe.com > >==== > > >_______________________________________________________________ >This email list is used solely by OASIS for official consortium >communications. Opt-out requests may be sent to >member_services(a)oasis-open.org, however, all members are strongly >encouraged to maintain a subscription to this list. > _______________________________________________________________ Ian Foster www.mcs.anl.gov/~foster Math & Computer Science Div. Dept of Computer Science Argonne National Laboratory The University of Chicago Argonne, IL 60439, U.S.A. Chicago, IL 60637, U.S.A. Tel: 630 252 4619 Fax: 630 252 1997 Globus Alliance, www.globus.org

2 1

Newer version of Basic Profile doc?
by Srinivasan, Latha 04 Feb '05

04 Feb '05

Has a newer version of the Basic Profile doc. been posted to gridforge? I looked in the Working Drafts folder and I still can only see the version that Hiro uploaded on Jan 18. If there is a newer version, could provide a link? Thanks, Latha

1 0