Hi Jon,

I know some type of requirements capture is under way in EMI since I was passed questions from a DEISA contact.

It's a small accounting world :-)

I have asked similar questions to IN2P3 who deploy a large iRODS instance and also to iRODS developers.

Although EMI may not have iRODS on the roadmap I thought it would make sense for me to forward the responses I get before we meet in Brussels so you can correlate requirements - Would this be OK?

It would be more than OK, it would be great!

The iRODS responses raised a few issues, it shows that different people see things in a slightly different light.

I'd simple post to the list but if we start posting all the responses it'll get quite noisy.

Yes, I suppose so :-) Maybe you can send me the responses and I can collect them on our wiki (https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/EMI/StorageAccounting).

I will also ask for input from OSG if we still need a better description of their storage accounting.

From my point of view it would be nice if people could try to break the elements down into 3 brackets.
* Must Have - I really need this
* Very Useful - Can I please have
* Useful - but I can live without

We can ask - people generally don't though.

I guess it can be worth asking, maybe give it as an optional grading not to make it too much hassle for people to answer?

thanks,

Jon

Just some though

cheers
johnk

--
+------------------------------------------------------------+
|Dr. John Alan Kennedy          Rechenzentrum Garching (RZG) |
|Mail:jkennedy@rzg.mpg.de      Boltzmannstrasse 2           |
|Phone: +49 89 3299 2694        85748 Garching               |
|Fax:   +49 89 3299 1301                                     |
+------------------------------------------------------------+