Hiro, I can take the action to draw up the BES profile for the tool that we have developed (available from www.cimwizard.com and fully functional on Eclipse). That tool can then output documentation as well :-). I like your suggestion and its simplicity. Andrea PS. Note that the work on cimwizard.com is only binaries. We have not yet finished the paperwork to release the open source.
-----Original Message----- From: owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org [mailto:owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org] On Behalf Of Hiro Kishimoto Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 1:24 AM To: ogsa-wg@ggf.org Subject: Re: [ogsa-wg] Information model profile doc for OGSA -- initial thoughts
Hi Fred,
My comments in line <HK>. ---- Hiro Kishimoto
Fred Maciel wrote:
Hi all,
I've been thinking of our guidance document on CIM profiles and how to represent them on the OGSA spec. I don't have any answers, but at least I got to the point where I have a lot of questions... :-) I'm hoping to have your opinion on them in Monday's teleconference. So, let's start.
First of all, DMTF's document on how to write a profile has started a one-month review inside the DMTF, so all DMTF members should have access to it. The document is right on the top of the document review page: http://www.dmtf.org/members/review/ . It's still DMTF confidential so I can't post it here (sorry), but I'm taking into consideration since it should be publicly available in a month as a preliminary document. Meanwhile, the first slides of Andrea's presentation in the last face-to-face (see
ml ) are a good summary of the sections and contents in such a profile.
The DMTF document gives all the details on how to specify a
includes a lot of experience (which allows us to avoid some
http://www-unix.gridforum.org/mail_archive/ogsa-wg/2005/08/msg00075.ht profile, pitfalls)
and saves us a lot of time. However, I think that it's an overkill for individual OGSA specs (*), especially the ones that cover only one or two classes.
So what I'm thinking for now is two levels: (1) We create an information model profile per OGSA area (Execution Management, Data, etc.), or, a profile for OGSA with sub-profiles for each area. These can be part of an OGSA profile (i.e., some of the OGSA profiles will include the corresponding information model profile). These profiles act as integration points between the pieces of the information models that each individual OGSA spec uses. The definition of these information model profiles follows the guidelines of the DMTF profile spec.
<HK> As I mentioned at the Aug. F2F, I would like to have simple management profile document on BES container as an example within OGSA-WG.
Given Fred, Andrea, and Ellen has done CIM/JSDL/GLUE comparison already. Is it possible to have very early profile draft at F2F meeting? Since DMTF's usage guide is not publically available, small sub team, who can access this document, draw up profile draft and full OGSA-WG reviews this draft.
Based on the synopsis definition on Andrea's slides, this profile is something like;
- Profile name: BES Container Profile - Version: 1.0 - Organization: GGF - CIM Schema: 2.9.0 (or 2.10.0?) - One paragraph summary: The BES Container Profile defines management capability of BES containers.
Mandatory CIM element: System, ComputerSystem, OperatingSystem, CPUArchitecture Optional CIM element: NetworkBandwidth, DiskSpace, FileSystem </HK>
(2) Individual specs show the information models they use in a lightweight way. The OGSA document on how to write an information model profile (we need a title and a nickname for it. Suggestions?) is a guideline on how to specify the information model on these specs.
Notice that Cisco's modeling tool (about to become open-source) will be useful for both (1) and (2) above. It can even change the balance of things above in subtle ways depending on how (and how much) it makes the creation of a profile easier.
That's all for now. Opinions please.
Regards,
Fred Maciel Hitachi America R&D
(*) By "individual OGSA specs" I mean specs like ByteIO, OGSA-BES, etc., not the roadmap, profile definition, guideline specs, the OGSA spec itself, etc.