Here's another response. Same drill as Dave's - object by the 25th. The comment is here: https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/topc4033 And reads:
Feedback on the OGF Technical Strategy document From: Tony DiCenzo Oracle
1. The time frame (06-10) seems a bit stretched, considering the pace of technological change.
Understood, but it attempts to take into account the relatively slow pace of standards work, in particular the time it takes to achieve adoption of newly released standards.
2. in the intro -- the mission is to accelerate grid adoption worldwide. To build an international community and to make it an open forum is the way that will be done, ie the strategy, not the mission itself.
We'll take this under advisement; it's a worthwhile distinction.
3. I think it correctly identifies why the strategy is important.
4. I think the primary job of the TSC is more than formulating the strategy. I see the job as formulating the strategy and then monitoring the implementation and revising it when and if necessary. Stating it the first way implies the TSC will disband after the Strategy is set, and of course it won't.
Yes, and see below (and section 3 of the doc).
5. I think the numbering in section 1.2 document structure may be wrong. There are two references to Section 5. Maybe they should refer to 5.1 and 5.2?
Yes, there are many numbering issues in this version.
6. The way PP 2 in section 1.3 is written it seems to imply Grid started with Seti@home. I believe grids were around before that.
Several readers have identified problems with this paragraph and we will rework it to clarify.
7. Did you notice all the pages say number 18????
Yes.
8. In the PP on Collaboration Grids, you might want to note these are primarily found in e-Science.
and fix the typos.
9. In the same vein, you might want to note Data Center Grids and Cluster Grids can be found in both Commercial Enterprises and e-Science.
Yes.
10. Section 2 -- interesting way to state the goal. Doesn't say how much of the grid has to be OGF- defined. Doesn't say that advanced capabilities will or will not be available. Doesn't say if the goal will be satisfied if 2 customers does it or a thousand. (would need to be at least 1 commercial and one academic). Doesn't say if there needs to be any measurable performance gain. Doesn't state the readiness and completeness of the technology, nor does it suggest the customers would state their grids are built upon an OGF-defined or OGF supported grid architecture.
In essence it doesn't feel like a technical goal to me. Feels weak to me. (certainly isn't as sharp as putting a man on the moon and bring him back).
But I may be too negative here. If what you are saying is that the strategy defined here is what is necessary to meet that goal, then it migth be ok. let me think more about that as I read on.
*(Not sure what to respond to this, actually.)*
11. i would like it better if the last sentence in section 2 said "To achieve the goal, the strategy defined in this report:....." The bullets would also need to be tweaked.
OK.
12. Section 3. It doesn't say it (perhaps it should) but it seems to imply a major aspect of the strategy is to employ an alignment process.
13. Section 3...I note this section say more about the 'job' of the TSC after the strategy is set. I knew it wouldn't be easy for the TSC to just fold shop. :)
Yes.
14. Section 4. question: does the strategy for secutiry employ modern secutiry techniques that are already used and being widely considered by the industry? I think it does, and ity would be a strong point to say so.
OK.
15. Section 4.4 File movement. This sounds batch and e-science oriented. It fails to recognize the interest in transaction oriented commercial apps where data might be transactional. I think that should be expanded to show sensitivity to the commercial customers needs.
OK. We're distinguishing between file movement and data provisioning/data grids as separate capabilities.
16. Section 4.6 I don't understand where this grid api came from or what it does.
SAGA is the output of the Simple API for Grid Apps RG, https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/projects/saga-rg and is focused on consolidating application driven API specifications.
17. section 6...isn't that covered in section 4...why not just make section 6 the same as 4 and delete 4?
"All OGF documents must have this section." Thanks.