I can't call in...I get a message saying that "all circuits are busy". I'm guessing that the conference system is hosed. I'll try again in a few minutes, but may not be able to join the call because of this. -Mark
-----Original Message----- From: owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org [mailto:owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org] On Behalf Of Hiro Kishimoto Sent: Monday, January 09, 2006 1:29 AM To: ogsa-wg@ggf.org Subject: [ogsa-wg] Proposed agenda for Jan. 9th call
Hi all,
I hope you and your family had a good holiday break and are looking forward to the new year.
The following is a proposed agenda for OGSA-WG telecon on Jan. 9th Monday from 4pm to 6pm (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: 0109 See more explanation: http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/ogsa-wg/2004/06/msg 00077.html
1) Early discussion (10 min) Note taker assignment Roll call Telecon minutes approval (Dec. 19) https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/minutes2 0051219/en/1 Do we have Jan. 11th telecon, since several people will be at GFSG F2F meeting? 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.
== 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
(1) Deployment and configuration section break-down 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/2005Wint er_F2F_survay https://forge.gridforum.org/projects/ogsa-wg/document/2006Jan- OGSA-F2F-agenda
4) Wrap up (10 min) AOB
<NEXT CALL>
OGSA-WG F2F Jan. 16-20. -- Hiro Kishimoto