- ogsa-wg - lists.ogf.org

Final proposed schedule for OGSA F2F meeting
by Hiro Kishimoto 16 Jan '06

16 Jan '06

Please accept my apologies for cross posting. Attached is the (hopefully) final proposed schedule for upcoming OGSA-WG and fellow WGs F2F meeting in Sunnyvale. The last minutes changes include; - Swap GRAAP and OGSA 1.5 on Tuesday. - Move WS-Management profile to Wed 1:30-2:30pm - Move Information to Monday afternoon, swapping with the EMS roadmap. It is also uploaded to GridForge; https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/2006Jan-OGSA-F2F-agen… See you in Sunnyvale! -- Hiro Kishimoto

2 3

BES container model files for Jan 16 F2F
by Ellen Stokes 16 Jan '06

16 Jan '06

Here's the files for the info model discussion on BES Container / profile. I'll post to the web site later. Ellen

1 0

Modeling guidelines doc uploaded
by Fred Maciel 14 Jan '06

14 Jan '06

Hi, I uploaded the first version of the modeling guidelines document to GridForge. It's still very preliminary. Sorry for the short notice. http://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/Modeling_Guidelines /en/ We will review it in the face-to-face, however the objective is to have a high-level discussion if the contents (including tone, section structure, etc.) are progressing in the right direction, and what are the main pieces missing. BTW, most of the contents have already been presented and/or discussed in GGFs or OGSA face-to-face meetings and teleconferences. In the face-to-face we will also review the newer version of the information model for the container and activities, based on what was presented in a recent teleconference. See you soon, Fred Maciel

1 0

RE: [ogsa-wg] Final proposed schedule for OGSA F2F meeting
by Maguire, Tom 13 Jan '06

13 Jan '06

I have had my travel plans changed for me :-(. I will now be attending M-W. I would prefer WS-Man discussion be on Wednesday but I understand if that cannot be.... Tom > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ogsa-wg(a)ggf.org [mailto:owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org] On > Behalf Of Hiro Kishimoto > Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 10:44 AM > To: ogsa-wg(a)ggf.org; ogsa-authz(a)ggf.org; Marty Humphrey; > Glenn S. Wasson > Subject: Re: [ogsa-wg] Final proposed schedule for OGSA F2F meeting > > Hi all, > > Ellen Stokes wants to participate WS-management discussion > and asks me to move it from Wed 1:30-2:30pm to Thursday or Friday. > Since Friday does not work for Marty, Thursday is our only option. > > Marty and Glenn: Does Thur 4-5pm still work for both of you? > Alan, Frank, and Takuya: Could you start security session 30 min > earlier on Thur (from 1pm)? > Andrew: You can start naming session from 1:30pm Wed, right? > All: Does anyone object to move WS-management session from > Wed 1:30-2:30pm to Thur 4-5pm? > > If this change is ok for everyone, Thurs schedule will be the > following: > > 8-9am: Byte-IO > 9am-noon: OGSA-data > 1-2pm: OGSA-AuthZ joint > 2-4pm: security > 4-5pm: WS-management > 5-6pm: security (if overflow) > > Please let me know your availability ASAP, thanks, > ---- > Hiro Kishimoto > > Hiro Kishimoto wrote: > > Please accept my apologies for cross posting. > > > > Attached is the (hopefully) final proposed schedule for upcoming > > OGSA-WG and fellow WGs F2F meeting in Sunnyvale. > > > > The last minutes changes include; > > - Swap GRAAP and OGSA 1.5 on Tuesday. > > - Move WS-Management profile to Wed 1:30-2:30pm > > - Move Information to Monday afternoon, swapping with the EMS > > roadmap. > > > > It is also uploaded to GridForge; > > > https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/2006Jan-OGSA-F2F > > -agenda > > > > > > See you in Sunnyvale! >

3 2

Re: [ogsa-wg] Final proposed schedule for OGSA F2F meeting
by Hiro Kishimoto 13 Jan '06

13 Jan '06

Hi Tom and Ellen, I made a horrible mistake, my bad. Marty can make Tuesday, not Thursday. Let's me try one more time. Is it possible to move WS-management discussion into Tuesday afternoon 1:30-2:30pm? Marty and Glenn: Does Tues 1:30-2:30pm still work for both of you? Andreas and Jem: You can start Arch 1.5 session 1 hour later on Tuesday (from 2:30pm), right? Jim: You can make GRAAP joint session from 3:30pm Tues, right? All: Does anyone object to move WS-management session from Wed 1:30-2:30pm to Tues 1:30-2:30pm? If this change is ok for everyone, Tuesday schedule will be the following: 9am-12:30pm: CDDLM-WG joint call 1:30-2:30pm: WS-management 2:30-3:30pm: Arch & glossary 1.5 3:30-5:30pm: GRAAP-WG joint call Please let me know your availability ASAP, thanks, ---- Hiro Kishimoto Maguire, Tom wrote: > I have had my travel plans changed for me :-( . I will now be attending > M-W. I would prefer WS-Man discussion be on Wednesday but I understand > if that cannot be.... > > Tom > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-ogsa-wg(a)ggf.org [mailto:owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org] On Behalf Of Hiro Kishimoto >> Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 10:44 AM >> To: ogsa-wg(a)ggf.org; ogsa-authz(a)ggf.org; Marty Humphrey; Glenn S. Wasson >> Subject: Re: [ogsa-wg] Final proposed schedule for OGSA F2F meeting >> >> Hi all, >> >> Ellen Stokes wants to participate WS-management discussion and asks me to move it from Wed 1:30-2:30pm to Thursday or Friday. >> Since Friday does not work for Marty, Thursday is our only option. >> >> Marty and Glenn: Does Thur 4-5pm still work for both of you? >> Alan, Frank, and Takuya: Could you start security session 30 min >> earlier on Thur (from 1pm)? >> Andrew: You can start naming session from 1:30pm Wed, right? >> All: Does anyone object to move WS-management session from >> Wed 1:30-2:30pm to Thur 4-5pm? >> >> If this change is ok for everyone, Thurs schedule will be the following: >> >> 8-9am: Byte-IO >> 9am-noon: OGSA-data >> 1-2pm: OGSA-AuthZ joint >> 2-4pm: security >> 4-5pm: WS-management >> 5-6pm: security (if overflow) >> >> Please let me know your availability ASAP, thanks, >> ---- >> Hiro Kishimoto >> >> Hiro Kishimoto wrote: >> >>> Please accept my apologies for cross posting. >>> >>> Attached is the (hopefully) final proposed schedule for upcoming OGSA-WG and fellow WGs F2F meeting in Sunnyvale. >>> >>> The last minutes changes include; >>> - Swap GRAAP and OGSA 1.5 on Tuesday. >>> - Move WS-Management profile to Wed 1:30-2:30pm >>> - Move Information to Monday afternoon, swapping with the EMS >>> roadmap. >>> >>> It is also uploaded to GridForge; >>> >> >> https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/2006Jan-OGSA-F2F >> >>> -agenda >>> >>> >>> See you in Sunnyvale! >> >> > >

1 0

Last CFP (Submission deadline: 15-01-2006): International Workshop "Dependability Aspects on Data WArehousing and Mining applications" DAWAM 2006 - Vienna, Austria
by Nguyen Manh Tho 13 Jan '06

13 Jan '06

(Apologies for multiple copies due to cross postings. Please send to interested colleagues and students) CALL FOR PAPERS: International Workshop Dependability Aspects on Data WArehousing and Mining applications DAWAM 2006 <http://www.ares-conf.org/?q=dawam> in conjunction with The First International Conference on Availability, Reliability and Security (ARES 2006 <http://www.ifs.tuwien.ac.at/ares2006> ) Overview Nowadays, the rapid growth of information technologies has brought tremendous opportunities for data sharing, integration, and analysis across multiple distributed, heterogeneous data sources. In the past decade, data warehousing and mining are the well-known technologies used for data analysis and knowledge discovery in vast domain of applications. Data mining technology has emerged as a means of identifying patterns and trends from large quantities of data. Data mining has used a data warehousing model of gathering all data into a central site, then running an algorithm against that data. A growing attention has been paid to the study, development and application of data warehousing and mining. Nevertheless, dependability aspects in these applications such as availability, reliability, integrity, privacy, and security issues are still being investigated. For example, in data warehousing applications, privacy considerations may prevent the approach of collecting data into the centralized warehouse because each data source has different privacy policy. Furthermore, the complexity of security increases as different sources of information are combined. Reliable, consistent and trustworthy of information are also significant requirements in data warehousing applications. Data mining has been shown to be beneficial in confronting various types of attacks to computer systems such as fraud detection, intrusion prevention. In some applications, e.g. clinic information system, government management, business competitive information, it is required to apply the mining algorithms without observing the confidential data values thus demands the privacy preservation. There are also many challenging issues that need further investigation in the context of data mining from both privacy and security perspectives such as mining of imbalanced data, bioinformatics data, streaming data, ubiquitous computing data, grid computing data etc. The goals of this workshop are to bring together users, engineers and researchers (from industry and academy) alike to present their recent work, discuss and identify problems, synergize different views of techniques and policies, and brainstorm future research directions on various dependability aspects of data warehousing and data mining applications. We strongly encourage researchers and practitioners with interest in the areas of reliability, availability, privacy and security, databases, data warehousing, data mining, and statistics to submit their experience, and/or research results. Topics related to any of dependability aspects in data warehousing and mining, theory, systems and applications are of interest. These include, but are not limited to the following areas: * Dependability and fault tolerance * High Availability and Disaster Recovery * Survivability of evaluative systems * Reliability and Robustness Issues * Accuracy and reliability of responses * Reliable and Failure Tolerant Business Process Integration * Reliable Event Management and Data Stream Processing * Failure Tolerant and trustworthy Sensor Networks * Highly available data warehouses for business processes integration * Handling different or incompatible formats, and erroneous data * Privacy and security policies and social impact of data mining * Privacy preserving data integration * Access control techniques and secure data models * Encryption & Authentication * Pseudonymization and Encryption * Anonymization and pseudonymization * Trust management, and security * Security in Aggregation and Generalization * User Profile Based Security * Secure multi-party computation * Secondary use of personal data, clinic data, credit record * Fraud and misuse detection * Intrusion detection and tolerance * Data mining applications for terrorist detection * Private queries by a (semi-trusted) third party * Query authentication, logging, auditing, access control and authorization policies The program of the workshop will be a combination of invited talks, paper/poster presentations and discussions. 1. Important Dates Submission Deadline: January, 15th 2006 (Extension !!!) Author Notification: January, 23th 2006 Author Registration: February, 1st 2006 Proceedings Version: February, 1st 2006 2. Submission Guidelines Authors are invited to submit research and application papers in IEEE Computer Society Proceedings Manuscripts style (two columns, single-spaced, including figures and references, using 10 fonts, and number each page). You can confirm the IEEE Computer Society Proceedings Author Guidelines at the following web page: URL: <http://computer.org/cspress/instruct.htm> http://computer.org/cspress/instruct.htm or <http://www.tinmith.net/tabletop2006/IEEE/Format/instruct.htm> http://www.tinmith.net/tabletop2006/IEEE/Format/instruct.htm Submission are classified into 3 categories (1) full paper (8 pages), (2) short paper (5 pages), and (3) poster (2 pages) representing original, previously unpublished work. Submitted papers will be carefully evaluated based on originality, significance, technical soundness, and clarity of exposition. Contact author must provide the following information: paper title, authors' names, affiliations, postal address, phone, fax, and e-mail address of the author(s), about 200-250 word abstract, and about five keywords and register at our ARES website: <http://www.ares-conf.org/?q=submission> http://www.ares-conf.org/?q=submission. Prepare your paper in PDF or MS Word file and submit it to our site or send it to the workshop co-chair: Dr. Nguyen Manh Tho, Institute of Software Technology, Vienna University of Technology, via email: tho(a)ifs.tuwien.ac.at Submission of a paper implies that should the paper be accepted, at least one of the authors will register and present the paper in the conference. Accepted papers will be given guidelines in preparing and submitting the final manuscript(s) together with the notification of acceptance. 3. Publication All accepted papers (full and short papers) will be published as ISBN proceedings published by IEEE Computer Society. Based on quality and referee reviews, some papers not suitable for acceptance as full paper will be accepted for presentation at DAWAM 2006 in Poster category and will be also included in the IEEE Proceedings. A selected number of papers will be nominated to be published as special issues in appropriate journals such as Journal of automatic and trusted computing (JoATC). 4. Workshop Organizer Co-chairs Jimmy Huang, Prof. School of Information Technology, York University, Toronto, Ontario Canada M3J 1P3 jhuang(a)yorku.ca Josef Schiefer, Ph.D. Senactive IT-Dienstleistungs GmbH , Phorusgasse 8 A1040 Vienna, Austria josef.schiefer(a)senactive.com Nguyen Manh Tho, Ph.D. (main contact) Institute of Software Technique and Interactive System, Vienna University of Technology , Favoriten strasse 9-11/188 A1040 Vienna, Austria tho(a)ifs.tuwien.ac.at 5. Program Committee Aijun An, York University, Canada Pawan Chowdhary, IBM T J Watson Research Center, USA LiWu Chang, Naval Research Laboratory, USA Josep Domingo-Ferrer, Rovira i Virgili University of Tarragona, Spain Elena Ferrari, University of Insubria at Como, Italy Ulrich Flegel, University of Dortmund, Germany Tyrone Grandison, IBM Almaden Research, USA Jun-Jang (JJ) Jeng, IBM T.J. Watson Research Center, USA Hillol Kargupta, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, USA and Agnik, LLC Zongwei Luo, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Taneli Mielikäinen, University of Helsinki, Finland Daniel E. O'Leary, University of Southern California, USA Stanley Oliveira, Embrapa Information Technology, Brazil Arnon Rosenthal, MITRE Corporation, USA Ben Soh, La Trobe University, Australia David Taniar, Monash University, Australia Juan Trujillo, University of Alicante, Spain Vassilios S. Verykios, University of Thessaly, Greece Justin Zhan, University of Ottawa, Canada Sheng Zhong, State University of New York at Buffalo, USA

1 0

Teleconference minutes - 12 January 2006 (ad hoc)
by Andreas Savva 13 Jan '06

13 Jan '06

Minutes of Jan 12 attached. https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/minutes-20060112/en/1 -- Andreas Savva Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd OGSA Teleconference - 12 January 2006 ===================================== * Participants Steven Newhouse Jay Unger Hiro Kishimoto Fred Maciel Dejan Milojicic Takuya Mori Andrew Grimshaw (Andreas Savva) 1. Agenda Bashing for F2F * CCDLM & ACS Review deploy and related scenarios (use cases) from the draft EMS Composition Roadmap document. Dejan will only be there for the CCDLM session. Stuart may also be attending. Dejan to confirm. Current work (an informational document) will be based on current specification documents. This will form a basis for a profile document later on in the year. * Provisioning vs. deployment Is there input we should consider from the EGA Reference Model work? Probably. Past discussion raised the requirement of calculating the deployment cost ('walking' the CDL tree). The current CDDLM specs do not support this functionality directly but it is certainly a conceptual possibility. For example, the needed information could be added as 'decorations'. Is it necessary to try and formulate how to calculate the deployment cost? ( E.g., a framework on how to describe costs, etc.) No, it should be sufficient to define interfaces and the format of the returned estimate, possibly including other information such as the confidence in the estimate. Aiming for something simple initially is good to aid adoption. What is the relation between CDL and JSDL? There is some overlap in the functionality of the two specifications (e.g., both can do data staging, JSDL includes some functionality that may look like configuration values, etc) but the motivation and purpose of the two specifications is different. For example, CDL could be used for staging input and output data but that is not the primary intention. Also CDL does not aim to describe the resource constraints of the job; rather specific resource information would be filled in as a result of scheduler/broker/... decisions. (It was restated that CDDLM does *not decide where* to deploy; it is given that information.) So a useful interaction between these specs would be to think of a JSDL description being used, possibly by CSG or EPS, to fill in a CDL description that would then drive the deployment and configuration of the selected resources to prepare the environment for the job to execute. Agreed that more work is needed at the F2F and that there should be a summary presented and the understanding confirmed with the group. In particular it may be worth discussing the CDL and JSDL topic first since it sets the overall nature of the interactions between the various components. Dejan proposed to think of relations between pairs of actors first before trying to generalize and include multiple actors. 2. Adjust F2F schedule Accepted Hiro's proposed agenda changes: - Swap GRAAP and OGSA 1.5 on Tuesday. - Move WS-Management profile to Wed - Move Information to Monday afternoon, swapping with the EMS roadmap.

1 0

[Fwd: [cddlm] meeting schedule update (Re: [ogsa-wg] Ad hoc calls on Jan. 12th)]
by Andreas Savva 12 Jan '06

12 Jan '06

Forwarding since I think Hiro missed sending this to the ogsa-wg ml. Also I think 'Thursday afternoon' should read 'Tuesday afternoon'. -- Andreas Savva Fujitsu Laboratories Ltd

1 0

Ad hoc calls on Jan. 12th
by Hiro Kishimoto 11 Jan '06

11 Jan '06

Hi all, We will have an ad hoc call for F2F meeting preparation on Thursday. The following is a proposed agenda. ATTENTION: day of week, time, dial-in number are all different. Date: Jan. 12th Thursday Time: 8-10pm (CST) = 6-8pm (PST) = 11am-1pm JST = 2-4am UK The dial-in number: US Toll number: +1 408-961-6509 (San Jose) and +1 718-354-1071 (New York) UK Toll number: +44 (0)207 365-5269 JP Toll number: +81 (0)3 3570 8183 The pass code: 4371991 Screen share service will be provided. URL: http://ogsa.glance.net Session key: 0112 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 (Dec. 19) https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/minutes20051219/en/1 Agenda bashing 2) CDDLM-WG joint call (60 min) Jem has uploaded the revised version to the GridForge. - http://tinyurl.com/aez86 Look forward to proofread and tracker verification. (1) Deployment and configuration section break-down > == Proposed list of sections == > > 3.1 Provision (Deploy) an application on an existing BES container > (The application can then be used to instantiate a BES activity. > Mostly what is now 3.2 in EMS Architecture composition.) > > 3.2 Provision a BES container > (What is now 3.1 in EMS Architecture composition) > > [Both 3.1 and 3.2 assume that the 'level' of the BES container is > pre-determined and fixed. See below.] > > 3.3 Using ACS do 3.1 > > 3.4 Using ACS do 3.2 > > [Both 3.3 and 3.4 assume that the 'level' of the BES container is > pre-determined and fixed. See below.] > > 3.5 Add time predictions to provision 3.1 and 3.2 by a deadline > Using a deployment estimation service (perhaps based on > historical data, etc, but how the estimation is done is > out-of-scope.) Possibly requiring reservations. > > [3.5 assumes that the 'level' of the BES container is pre-determined > and fixed. See below.] > > 3.x Determine dynamically the optimal level of 'BES container' in the > system and provision containers appropriately depending on > workload etc > may depend on analysis of the entire application CDL (down to > hardware) for the entire workload of the system; use > deployment time predictions; etc > > <<Version 1 of the document could just cover scenarios 3.1-3.5 and > discuss 3.x as future work. Otherwise need to breakdown 3.x further.>> > == (2) - Deployment versus provisioning requirements > (Or, where to 'cut' the CDL tree. Above the 'cut' point is > deployment---assumed to be a relatively 'light' operation---and > below is provisioning---assumed to be more heavy-weight.) > - Deciding the cut point is orthogonal to CDDLM---it is policy or > best practices and is therefore a system choice > - Information (metadata) to help in making the choice could be > added to the CDL as mark up > - CDDLM implementations have walked the tree fairly far down (to > the hardware) for deployment > - CDL may be sufficient to express both deployment and > provisioning. But it is an open issue if these two activities > can, or should be unified in this way in OGSA. In particular CDL > may not be going to the full extent of supporting costing, etc., > that maybe needed to address all requirements > - Resources beneath the cut point can be considered as > pre-provisioned: they either exist or they don't. They are not > going to be deployed themselves; but they can be used to > deploy on. > - Which resource to choose for deployment? It is the choice of > the EMS architecture (EPS, CSG) and not of CDDLM. > - Discussion on how CDL may be viewed as a hierarchy of scripts; > and that one could have a history of costs associated with > each node. In other words the tree could be decorated with > other information (cost, etc, as metadata) (3) - JSDL and CDL relation and can one cover the requirements for the > other > - A JSDL submission may be associated with a deployment > description or request, and the deployment portion could be > described in CDL. [I.e., CDL could be a more specific > application > sub-type in a JSDL document.] > - JSDL is not intended to describe the configuration of the > software that will be used by the job. The aim is to describe > things at a higher level. There may be similarities between the > languages (perhaps around resource description) but it does not > mean that one language can, or should, replace the other because > they serve different purposes. > - Jay wants to pursue the issue further among a smaller group of > people. 3) OGSA F2F meeting update (30 min) Session leaders: Please provide your goals and detailed agenda. https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/2005Winter_F2F_survay https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/2006Jan-OGSA-F2F-agen… 4) Wrap up (10 min) AOB <NEXT CALL> OGSA-WG F2F Jan. 16-20. -- Hiro Kishimoto

1 0

OGSA WSRF Basic Profile 1.0 is returned to us
by Hiro Kishimoto 11 Jan '06

11 Jan '06

Hi all, Public comments period for OGSA WSRF BP 1.0 has end and the document is returned to our position with comment. Let's review and discuss how to solve this during upcoming F2F meeting next week. See you soon, ---- Hiro Kishimoto > Summary: OGSA WSRF Basic Profile 1.0 > Project: EDITOR > Category: Recommendations Track > Group: Architecture > Status: Returned to Author(s) > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Comment By: Greg Newby (2006-01-09 13:30:26) > Authors, please review public comments here: > https://forge.gridforum.org/forum/forum.php?forum_id=575 > > Respond in that tracker, or this one. If needed, upload a new > revision of the document to this tracker. > > When the document is ready for the next step (GFSG review), > please indicate it in this tracker, or via email.

1 0