From igor.rosenberg at atosresearch.eu Mon Mar 2 09:01:26 2009 From: igor.rosenberg at atosresearch.eu (Igor Rosenberg) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 16:01:26 +0100 Subject: [GRAAP-WG] OGF: SLA framework In-Reply-To: <49A2A23F.4090505@udo.edu> References: <20090111225357.GA6387@arsc.edu> <20090222011802.GA61897@arsc.edu> <49A2A23F.4090505@udo.edu> Message-ID: Hello, I'd like to get in more detail of the "standardisation of SLA frameworks" idea I'd mentioned last month. Within the GRAAP group, a (pre)standard has been defined on how an SLA should look like, and how to create it. Fine. But this is only a fraction of what is needed for an implementation of SLAs for business. Let me present a possible view of the SLA lifecycle: A- Contract definition phase 1. Template creation 2. Publication&Discovery B- Negotiation phase 3. Negotiation 4. Optimisation of resources C- Enforcement Phase 5. Monitoring&Evaluation 6. Re-Negotiation 7. Accounting D- De-Commisioning phase 8. De-Commisioning Within GRAAP, only point 3 has really been addressed. If we look at other SLA "standards", like the ones presented in GRIA, GRASP, etc., we can see a lot of research effort in lots of SLA concepts. I personally think it is time to present some rationalized views of the previous work which has been done, and try to fix into a standard the basic blocks of an SLA framework. A possible starting point is [1] below. What functionality is required to have a framework which supports SLAs? Which are the optional bits, what do they add? GRIA and GRASP have a working SLA framework, how much work is needed to bring WS-Agreement to this level? I have a keen interest in seeing how an enforced agreement should be treated, both by provider and client: how do guarantees get evaluated fairly, how much information should the client receive, is it fair to let the provider request a re-negotiation, who sorts out litigations, etc. Or am I trying to go too fast? Do we need to see more implementations of WS-Agreement (negotiation) before trying to expand? Well, any comments appreciated... Regards Igor Rosenberg, Research Engineer, Atos Origin, Spain [1] A Comparison of SLA Use in Six of the European Commissions FP6 Projects, M. Parkin, R. M. Badia, J Martrat http://www.coregrid.net/mambo/images/stories/TechnicalReports/tr-0129.pd f -----Original Message----- From: Philipp Wieder [mailto:philipp.wieder at udo.edu] Sent: lunes, 23 de febrero de 2009 14:19 To: Igor Rosenberg Cc: graap-wg at ogf.org Subject: Re: [GRAAP-WG] OGF: SLA framework Hi Igor, thanks for the contribution. A first easy step to inform the community is to add your implementation to the respective site at the WS-Agreement web [1]. Just send me a link and two sentences and I will add it there. Secondly, it would be good to get your feedback on your actual implementation of WS-Agreement for the experience document. We have a questionnaire [2] for that an it would be very helpful for GRAAP if you filled it. Regarding the standardisation of SLA frameworks I am not sure what you are referring to in detail. Could you please elaborate a bit more on this and we than can decide whether this is within the scope of GRAAP. Best regards, Philipp. [1] https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.graap-wg/wiki/I mplementations [2] https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/docman/do/downloadDocument/projects.graap -wg/docman.root.current_drafts.ws_agreement_experience_docuemnt/doc15358 Igor Rosenberg wrote: > Hello GRAAP group, > Within the EU BeinGrid project (beingrid.eu), we've been developing an > SLA framework for GT4. It is based on a component architecture (by this, > understand independent modules). I have some material that describes it > that I could pass to the community, including a paper (attached). > Implementation of the different components is finished (nearly all > components are licensed as Apache V2, only one is freeware binary), and > we're currently making sure it all integrates smoothly. I think it > should be advertised to the OGF community (at least the guys and girls > interested in GT4). I also propose that from the work done, we could try > to standardize the SLA frameworks that exist for Grids (GRIA, GRASP, > Unicore, and now GT4); btw our framework is based on the March 2007 > WS-Agreement specification of the OGF, which describes SLA contracts > (www.ogf.org/documents/GFD.107.pdf), but is meant to be generic > (different SLA formats can be plugged in) . > What would be the way forward? Who should I get in touch with? > Regards > > Igor Rosenberg, > Research Engineer, > Atos Origin, Spain > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended > solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive > this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy it. > As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, the Atos Origin > group liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although > the sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, > the sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and > will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted. > > Este mensaje y los ficheros adjuntos pueden contener informacion confidencial > destinada solamente a la(s) persona(s) mencionadas anteriormente > pueden estar protegidos por secreto profesional. > Si usted recibe este correo electronico por error, gracias por informar > inmediatamente al remitente y destruir el mensaje. > Al no estar asegurada la integridad de este mensaje sobre la red, Atos Origin > no se hace responsable por su contenido. Su contenido no constituye ningun > compromiso para el grupo Atos Origin, salvo ratificacion escrita por ambas partes. > Aunque se esfuerza al maximo por mantener su red libre de virus, el emisor > no puede garantizar nada al respecto y no sera responsable de cualesquiera > danos que puedan resultar de una transmision de virus. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -- > graap-wg mailing list > graap-wg at ogf.org > http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/graap-wg ------------------------------------------------------------------ This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy it. As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, the Atos Origin group liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although the sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, the sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted. Este mensaje y los ficheros adjuntos pueden contener informacion confidencial destinada solamente a la(s) persona(s) mencionadas anteriormente pueden estar protegidos por secreto profesional. Si usted recibe este correo electronico por error, gracias por informar inmediatamente al remitente y destruir el mensaje. Al no estar asegurada la integridad de este mensaje sobre la red, Atos Origin no se hace responsable por su contenido. Su contenido no constituye ningun compromiso para el grupo Atos Origin, salvo ratificacion escrita por ambas partes. Aunque se esfuerza al maximo por mantener su red libre de virus, el emisor no puede garantizar nada al respecto y no sera responsable de cualesquiera danos que puedan resultar de una transmision de virus. ------------------------------------------------------------------ From hludwig at us.ibm.com Mon Mar 2 12:29:58 2009 From: hludwig at us.ibm.com (Heiko Ludwig) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 10:29:58 -0800 Subject: [GRAAP-WG] OGF: SLA framework In-Reply-To: References: <20090111225357.GA6387@arsc.edu> <20090222011802.GA61897@arsc.edu> <49A2A23F.4090505@udo.edu> Message-ID: Revisiting the life cycle is certainly a good idea to decide on next steps. My take is that 2 has been addressed by WS-Agreement, even though maybe not to the full extent required to drive the subsequent negotiation phase if more sophisticated protocols are to be required. Generally, as Igor is pointing out, it provides some content structure underpinnings that can be used throughout the life-cycle. The next question we should ask ourselves is what parts of this life-cycle should be standardized and where competing approaches provide more benefits for tools and services providers and customers. Is anyone aware of a good metric for this decision process? Heiko ----- Heiko Ludwig, Dr. rer. pol. IBM TJ Watson Research Center based at Almaden Research Center, 650 Harry Road, San Jose, CA 95120-6099 hludwig at us.ibm.com, tel. +1 408-927-1488, mob. +1 646-675-8469 http://www.research.ibm.com/people/h/hludwig/ From: "Igor Rosenberg" To: Date: 03/02/09 07:05 AM Subject: [GRAAP-WG] OGF: SLA framework Hello, I'd like to get in more detail of the "standardisation of SLA frameworks" idea I'd mentioned last month. Within the GRAAP group, a (pre)standard has been defined on how an SLA should look like, and how to create it. Fine. But this is only a fraction of what is needed for an implementation of SLAs for business. Let me present a possible view of the SLA lifecycle: A- Contract definition phase 1. Template creation 2. Publication&Discovery B- Negotiation phase 3. Negotiation 4. Optimisation of resources C- Enforcement Phase 5. Monitoring&Evaluation 6. Re-Negotiation 7. Accounting D- De-Commisioning phase 8. De-Commisioning Within GRAAP, only point 3 has really been addressed. If we look at other SLA "standards", like the ones presented in GRIA, GRASP, etc., we can see a lot of research effort in lots of SLA concepts. I personally think it is time to present some rationalized views of the previous work which has been done, and try to fix into a standard the basic blocks of an SLA framework. A possible starting point is [1] below. What functionality is required to have a framework which supports SLAs? Which are the optional bits, what do they add? GRIA and GRASP have a working SLA framework, how much work is needed to bring WS-Agreement to this level? I have a keen interest in seeing how an enforced agreement should be treated, both by provider and client: how do guarantees get evaluated fairly, how much information should the client receive, is it fair to let the provider request a re-negotiation, who sorts out litigations, etc. Or am I trying to go too fast? Do we need to see more implementations of WS-Agreement (negotiation) before trying to expand? Well, any comments appreciated... Regards Igor Rosenberg, Research Engineer, Atos Origin, Spain [1] A Comparison of SLA Use in Six of the European Commissions FP6 Projects, M. Parkin, R. M. Badia, J Martrat http://www.coregrid.net/mambo/images/stories/TechnicalReports/tr-0129.pd f -----Original Message----- From: Philipp Wieder [mailto:philipp.wieder at udo.edu] Sent: lunes, 23 de febrero de 2009 14:19 To: Igor Rosenberg Cc: graap-wg at ogf.org Subject: Re: [GRAAP-WG] OGF: SLA framework Hi Igor, thanks for the contribution. A first easy step to inform the community is to add your implementation to the respective site at the WS-Agreement web [1]. Just send me a link and two sentences and I will add it there. Secondly, it would be good to get your feedback on your actual implementation of WS-Agreement for the experience document. We have a questionnaire [2] for that an it would be very helpful for GRAAP if you filled it. Regarding the standardisation of SLA frameworks I am not sure what you are referring to in detail. Could you please elaborate a bit more on this and we than can decide whether this is within the scope of GRAAP. Best regards, Philipp. [1] https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.graap-wg/wiki/I mplementations [2] https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/docman/do/downloadDocument/projects.graap -wg/docman.root.current_drafts.ws_agreement_experience_docuemnt/doc15358 Igor Rosenberg wrote: > Hello GRAAP group, > Within the EU BeinGrid project (beingrid.eu), we've been developing an > SLA framework for GT4. It is based on a component architecture (by this, > understand independent modules). I have some material that describes it > that I could pass to the community, including a paper (attached). > Implementation of the different components is finished (nearly all > components are licensed as Apache V2, only one is freeware binary), and > we're currently making sure it all integrates smoothly. I think it > should be advertised to the OGF community (at least the guys and girls > interested in GT4). I also propose that from the work done, we could try > to standardize the SLA frameworks that exist for Grids (GRIA, GRASP, > Unicore, and now GT4); btw our framework is based on the March 2007 > WS-Agreement specification of the OGF, which describes SLA contracts > (www.ogf.org/documents/GFD.107.pdf), but is meant to be generic > (different SLA formats can be plugged in) . > What would be the way forward? Who should I get in touch with? > Regards > > Igor Rosenberg, > Research Engineer, > Atos Origin, Spain > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended > solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive > this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy it. > As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, the Atos Origin > group liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although > the sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, > the sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and > will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted. > > Este mensaje y los ficheros adjuntos pueden contener informacion confidencial > destinada solamente a la(s) persona(s) mencionadas anteriormente > pueden estar protegidos por secreto profesional. > Si usted recibe este correo electronico por error, gracias por informar > inmediatamente al remitente y destruir el mensaje. > Al no estar asegurada la integridad de este mensaje sobre la red, Atos Origin > no se hace responsable por su contenido. Su contenido no constituye ningun > compromiso para el grupo Atos Origin, salvo ratificacion escrita por ambas partes. > Aunque se esfuerza al maximo por mantener su red libre de virus, el emisor > no puede garantizar nada al respecto y no sera responsable de cualesquiera > danos que puedan resultar de una transmision de virus. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -- > graap-wg mailing list > graap-wg at ogf.org > http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/graap-wg ------------------------------------------------------------------ This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy it. As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, the Atos Origin group liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although the sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, the sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted. Este mensaje y los ficheros adjuntos pueden contener informacion confidencial destinada solamente a la(s) persona(s) mencionadas anteriormente pueden estar protegidos por secreto profesional. Si usted recibe este correo electronico por error, gracias por informar inmediatamente al remitente y destruir el mensaje. Al no estar asegurada la integridad de este mensaje sobre la red, Atos Origin no se hace responsable por su contenido. Su contenido no constituye ningun compromiso para el grupo Atos Origin, salvo ratificacion escrita por ambas partes. Aunque se esfuerza al maximo por mantener su red libre de virus, el emisor no puede garantizar nada al respecto y no sera responsable de cualesquiera danos que puedan resultar de una transmision de virus. ------------------------------------------------------------------ -- graap-wg mailing list graap-wg at ogf.org http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/graap-wg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/graap-wg/attachments/20090302/5ba90183/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: graycol.gif Type: image/gif Size: 105 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/graap-wg/attachments/20090302/5ba90183/attachment.gif -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: ecblank.gif Type: image/gif Size: 45 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/graap-wg/attachments/20090302/5ba90183/attachment-0001.gif From Wolfgang.Ziegler at scai.fraunhofer.de Mon Mar 2 14:05:38 2009 From: Wolfgang.Ziegler at scai.fraunhofer.de (Wolfgang Ziegler) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 21:05:38 +0100 Subject: [GRAAP-WG] OGF: SLA framework In-Reply-To: References: <20090111225357.GA6387@arsc.edu> <20090222011802.GA61897@arsc.edu> <49A2A23F.4090505@udo.edu> Message-ID: <49AC3C12.4050308@scai.fraunhofer.de> Dear Igor, I agree, regarding the entire SLA life-cycle is certainly a relevant and interesting topic. However, beyond the scope of the GRAAP working group. I would support starting a new group with an appropriate charter as soon as we finish the experience document and have re-chartered the GRAAP-wg for the final work on multi-round negotiations of SLAa based on WS-Agreement. To that extent, I think that 3 and 6 will be completely addressed by WS-Agreement. Also 1 will be addressed in WS-Agreement since creation of templates is an issue when looking on interoperability. For the other points I agree with Heiko that we probably won't need a standard there. But this could be clarified during the discussion when preparing a BoF for a new wg ;-) Best regards Wolfgang Heiko Ludwig schrieb/wrote: > Revisiting the life cycle is certainly a good idea to decide on next steps. > > My take is that 2 has been addressed by WS-Agreement, even though maybe > not to the full extent required to drive the subsequent negotiation > phase if more sophisticated protocols are to be required. Generally, as > Igor is pointing out, it provides some content structure underpinnings > that can be used throughout the life-cycle. > > The next question we should ask ourselves is what parts of this > life-cycle should be standardized and where competing approaches provide > more benefits for tools and services providers and customers. Is anyone > aware of a good metric for this decision process? > > Heiko > > ----- > Heiko Ludwig, Dr. rer. pol. > IBM TJ Watson Research Center > based at Almaden Research Center, 650 Harry Road, San Jose, CA 95120-6099 > hludwig at us.ibm.com, tel. +1 408-927-1488, mob. +1 646-675-8469 > http://www.research.ibm.com/people/h/hludwig/ > > > > Inactive hide details for "Igor Rosenberg" ---03/02/2009 07:05:31 > AM---Hello, I'd like to get in more detail of the "standardis"Igor > Rosenberg" ---03/02/2009 07:05:31 AM---Hello, I'd like to get in more > detail of the "standardisation of SLA > > > From: > "Igor Rosenberg" > > To: > > > Date: > 03/02/09 07:05 AM > > Subject: > [GRAAP-WG] OGF: SLA framework > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Hello, > I'd like to get in more detail of the "standardisation of SLA > frameworks" idea I'd mentioned last month. Within the GRAAP group, a > (pre)standard has been defined on how an SLA should look like, and how > to create it. Fine. But this is only a fraction of what is needed for an > implementation of SLAs for business. Let me present a possible view of > the SLA lifecycle: > > A- Contract definition phase > 1. Template creation > 2. Publication&Discovery > B- Negotiation phase > 3. Negotiation > 4. Optimisation of resources > C- Enforcement Phase > 5. Monitoring&Evaluation > 6. Re-Negotiation > 7. Accounting > D- De-Commisioning phase > 8. De-Commisioning > > Within GRAAP, only point 3 has really been addressed. If we look at > other SLA "standards", like the ones presented in GRIA, GRASP, etc., we > can see a lot of research effort in lots of SLA concepts. I personally > think it is time to present some rationalized views of the previous work > which has been done, and try to fix into a standard the basic blocks of > an SLA framework. A possible starting point is [1] below. What > functionality is required to have a framework which supports SLAs? Which > are the optional bits, what do they add? GRIA and GRASP have a working > SLA framework, how much work is needed to bring WS-Agreement to this > level? I have a keen interest in seeing how an enforced agreement should > be treated, both by provider and client: how do guarantees get evaluated > fairly, how much information should the client receive, is it fair to > let the provider request a re-negotiation, who sorts out litigations, > etc. > > Or am I trying to go too fast? Do we need to see more implementations of > WS-Agreement (negotiation) before trying to expand? > > Well, any comments appreciated... > > Regards > Igor Rosenberg, > Research Engineer, > Atos Origin, Spain > > [1] A Comparison of SLA Use in Six of the European Commissions FP6 > Projects, M. Parkin, R. M. Badia, J Martrat > > http://www.coregrid.net/mambo/images/stories/TechnicalReports/tr-0129.pd > f > > -----Original Message----- > From: Philipp Wieder [mailto:philipp.wieder at udo.edu] > Sent: lunes, 23 de febrero de 2009 14:19 > To: Igor Rosenberg > Cc: graap-wg at ogf.org > Subject: Re: [GRAAP-WG] OGF: SLA framework > > Hi Igor, > > thanks for the contribution. > > A first easy step to inform the community is to add your implementation > to the respective site at the WS-Agreement web [1]. Just send me a link > and two sentences and I will add it there. > > Secondly, it would be good to get your feedback on your actual > implementation of WS-Agreement for the experience document. We have a > questionnaire [2] for that an it would be very helpful for GRAAP if you > filled it. > > Regarding the standardisation of SLA frameworks I am not sure what you > are referring to in detail. Could you please elaborate a bit more on > this and we than can decide whether this is within the scope of GRAAP. > > Best regards, Philipp. > > [1] > https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/wiki/do/viewPage/projects.graap-wg/wiki/I > mplementations > [2] > https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/docman/do/downloadDocument/projects.graap > -wg/docman.root.current_drafts.ws_agreement_experience_docuemnt/doc15358 > > Igor Rosenberg wrote: >> Hello GRAAP group, >> Within the EU BeinGrid project (beingrid.eu), we've been developing an >> SLA framework for GT4. It is based on a component architecture (by > this, >> understand independent modules). I have some material that describes > it >> that I could pass to the community, including a paper (attached). >> Implementation of the different components is finished (nearly all >> components are licensed as Apache V2, only one is freeware binary), > and >> we're currently making sure it all integrates smoothly. I think it >> should be advertised to the OGF community (at least the guys and girls >> interested in GT4). I also propose that from the work done, we could > try >> to standardize the SLA frameworks that exist for Grids (GRIA, GRASP, >> Unicore, and now GT4); btw our framework is based on the March 2007 >> WS-Agreement specification of the OGF, which describes SLA contracts >> (www.ogf.org/documents/GFD.107.pdf), but is meant to be generic >> (different SLA formats can be plugged in) . >> What would be the way forward? Who should I get in touch with? >> Regards >> >> Igor Rosenberg, >> Research Engineer, >> Atos Origin, Spain >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended >> solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive >> this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy > it. >> As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, the Atos Origin >> group liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although >> the sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, >> the sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and >> will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus > transmitted. >> >> Este mensaje y los ficheros adjuntos pueden contener informacion > confidencial >> destinada solamente a la(s) persona(s) mencionadas anteriormente >> pueden estar protegidos por secreto profesional. >> Si usted recibe este correo electronico por error, gracias por > informar >> inmediatamente al remitente y destruir el mensaje. >> Al no estar asegurada la integridad de este mensaje sobre la red, Atos > Origin >> no se hace responsable por su contenido. Su contenido no constituye > ningun >> compromiso para el grupo Atos Origin, salvo ratificacion escrita por > ambas partes. >> Aunque se esfuerza al maximo por mantener su red libre de virus, el > emisor >> no puede garantizar nada al respecto y no sera responsable de > cualesquiera >> danos que puedan resultar de una transmision de virus. >> ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> -- >> graap-wg mailing list >> graap-wg at ogf.org >> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/graap-wg > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended > solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive > this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy it. > As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, the Atos Origin > group liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although > the sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, > the sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and > will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted. > > Este mensaje y los ficheros adjuntos pueden contener informacion > confidencial > destinada solamente a la(s) persona(s) mencionadas anteriormente > pueden estar protegidos por secreto profesional. > Si usted recibe este correo electronico por error, gracias por informar > inmediatamente al remitente y destruir el mensaje. > Al no estar asegurada la integridad de este mensaje sobre la red, Atos > Origin > no se hace responsable por su contenido. Su contenido no constituye ningun > compromiso para el grupo Atos Origin, salvo ratificacion escrita por > ambas partes. > Aunque se esfuerza al maximo por mantener su red libre de virus, el emisor > no puede garantizar nada al respecto y no sera responsable de cualesquiera > danos que puedan resultar de una transmision de virus. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -- > graap-wg mailing list > graap-wg at ogf.org > http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/graap-wg > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > -- > graap-wg mailing list > graap-wg at ogf.org > http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/graap-wg -- Wolfgang Ziegler www.scai.fraunhofer.de/ziegler.html Fraunhofer-Institute for Algorithms and Scientific Computing (SCAI) Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany Tel: +49 2241 14 2258; Fax: +49 2241 14 42258 SmartLM - Software Licence Technology for Grids, Clouds, SOA: www.smartlm.eu CoreGRID Network of Excellence www.coregrid.net Institute on Resource Management and Scheduling www.coregrid.net/irms -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3766 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/graap-wg/attachments/20090302/86f27b41/attachment.bin From philipp.wieder at udo.edu Wed Mar 4 16:08:51 2009 From: philipp.wieder at udo.edu (Philipp Wieder) Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 23:08:51 +0100 Subject: [GRAAP-WG] WS-Agreement Veriosn 1.0 experience document Message-ID: <49AEFBF3.9080305@udo.edu> Dear All, please find the first draft of the WS-Agreement experiment document at GridForge [1] (thanks Dominic for starting and pushing, thanks Wolfgang for your input, thanks all projects for implementing and feedback). We got some last minute additions from the BEinGRID project (thanks Igor), which also can be found at GridForge [2]. Wolfgang will discuss the document tomorrow at the session(s) and we will try to publish it asap, which, I guess, is not only in the group's interest. Best regards, Philipp. [1] http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/go/doc15550?nav=1 [2] http://forge.gridforum.org/sf/docman/do/listDocuments/projects.graap-wg/docman.root.current_drafts.ws_agreement_experience_docuemnt.beingrid_questionnaire_input From Wolfgang.Ziegler at scai.fraunhofer.de Wed Mar 11 17:53:41 2009 From: Wolfgang.Ziegler at scai.fraunhofer.de (Wolfgang Ziegler) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 23:53:41 +0100 Subject: [GRAAP-WG] OGF 25 session outcome Message-ID: <49B840F5.2050000@scai.fraunhofer.de> Dear GRAAPians we had two productive sessions at OGF 25 in Catania last week. The slides of the two sessions have been uploaded to the gridforge space of GRAAP along with the minutes and a presentation of "A lightweight annotation approach of WS-Agreement based specifications" which was given by Ioannis Kotsiopoulos. We continued the work on the experience document, the next draft version taking into account the recommendations and requests of the GFSG will be available soon. We also continued the discussion of the negotiation. Based on the outcome of OGF 24 a first prototype implementation was presented. Since a number of the participants will meet again in Dagstuhl in two weeks for a seminar on SLAs we decided to have two half day work group meetings there to finalise the experience document and the initial document on negotiation. I attach the minutes of the two sessions to this mail for your convenience. Best regards Wolfgang -- Wolfgang Ziegler www.scai.fraunhofer.de/ziegler.html Fraunhofer-Institute for Algorithms and Scientific Computing (SCAI) Schloss Birlinghoven, D-53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany Tel: +49 2241 14 2258; Fax: +49 2241 14 42258 SmartLM - Software License Technology for Grids, Clouds, SOA: www.smartlm.eu CoreGRID Network of Excellence www.coregrid.net Institute on Resource Management and Scheduling www.coregrid.net/irms -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: OGF25 minutes.txt Url: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/graap-wg/attachments/20090311/c147b9f6/attachment.txt -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: smime.p7s Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature Size: 3766 bytes Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/graap-wg/attachments/20090311/c147b9f6/attachment.bin From igor.rosenberg at atosresearch.eu Mon Mar 16 06:07:16 2009 From: igor.rosenberg at atosresearch.eu (Igor Rosenberg) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:07:16 +0100 Subject: [GRAAP-WG] FW: Announcing Grid Voices, a new blog from European research leaders brought to you by Gridipedia Message-ID: An announcement on a new blog... Dear all, (Apologies for cross posting) Gridipedia is pleased to announce the launch of a new blog, Grid Voices, to be hosted on www.Gridipedia.eu. This blog will be written by prominent members of the European Grid, Service oriented and Cloud computing areas, from both industry and academic institutions. The blog will focus on Grids, clouds, and related technologies, in particular in reference to their commercial use and exploitation. It can be found at www.gridipedia.eu/grid_voices.html. Today we have published our first post. From Stefan Wesner, Deputy Director of Stuttgart's High Performance Computing Centre, it focuses on key limitations of Cloud from the perspective of the BEinGRID research initiative. We have a publication schedule that anticipates a new post approximately every two weeks. Next week's post will be written by Theo Dimitrakos, Research Group Leader at BT. He will be followed by Professor Varvarigou from the National Technical University of Athens. Please forward this message to your contacts and colleagues. I believe it will offer valuable insight from the heart of the European "Grid Scene". The blog will shortly be hosted by Wordpress software so comments will become enabled, and at Gridipedia we hope that this can become the centre of a lively online community. Sincerely, Daniel Field Atos Origin Research and Innovation Avda. Diagonal 200 08018 Barcelona, Spain Tel: +34 93 486 1818 fax: +34 93 486 0766 SKYPE : daniel_field www.atosresearch.eu ------------------------------------------------------------------ This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy it. As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, the Atos Origin group liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although the sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, the sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted. Este mensaje y los ficheros adjuntos pueden contener informacion confidencial destinada solamente a la(s) persona(s) mencionadas anteriormente pueden estar protegidos por secreto profesional. Si usted recibe este correo electronico por error, gracias por informar inmediatamente al remitente y destruir el mensaje. Al no estar asegurada la integridad de este mensaje sobre la red, Atos Origin no se hace responsable por su contenido. Su contenido no constituye ningun compromiso para el grupo Atos Origin, salvo ratificacion escrita por ambas partes. Aunque se esfuerza al maximo por mantener su red libre de virus, el emisor no puede garantizar nada al respecto y no sera responsable de cualesquiera danos que puedan resultar de una transmision de virus. ------------------------------------------------------------------ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/graap-wg/attachments/20090316/c1c55afd/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/jpeg Size: 6356 bytes Desc: image001.jpg Url : http://www.ogf.org/pipermail/graap-wg/attachments/20090316/c1c55afd/attachment.jpe