[GSA-RG] Proposal for a new structure of the GSA Requirements document
Philipp
philipp.wieder at udo.edu
Fri Feb 22 09:36:44 CST 2008
Alexander, Joachim,
thank you for that effort. To me, this gives a new spin to the good old
requirements document which is around for quite a while ...
I think, since we want to link the Use Case document with the interop.
work, a concise description of the requirements in the light of common
use cases and existing OGF standards is a good way to go.
More inline ...
Alexander Papaspyrou schrieb:
> Philipp, all,
>
> Joachim Lepping and I thought about a new structure for the GSA reqs
> document, which has been around for a while now. We would suggest to put
> a stronger focus on gap analysis regarding what's there in OGF and
> what's needed for realizing certain (hopefully common and useful) Use Cases.
>
> Our intention in doing so was to foster the process of proposing
> recommendations (I use this OGF overloaded term loosely here) to other
> WGs in the scheduling context in order to kick off discussion there.
> Hopefully, this will then lead to an incorporation of our proposals into
> current standards.
>
> Since the interaction between us and the different WGs is probably going
> to be an ongoing process, we would suggest to focus on simple use cases
> that can be easily realized. This is also the reason why we left out
> certain parts of Nicola's and Ramin's requirements stuff. As a first,
> very basic example, we picked HPC Job Scheduling (this will be difficult
> enough to fully cover). Additionally, we added what was formerly called
> "Complex Workflow", assuming that this comprises jobs with (data)
> interdependencies. Of course, these examples are just proposals.
> However, they could serve as an example for how discussion on the
> recommendation part could be organized in our group in Dortmund.
Is the level of detail given in GFD.64, what you have in mind? I think,
especially wrt the HPC use case, we may also look into the stuff done in
the HPCP context.
> The general structure of the document is intended as follows: in the
> third chapter (requirements), general requirements of Grid scheduling
> are discussed on a pretty high level (list of desiderata). The use case
> part should be very concrete on what is necessary to tackle for each of
> the examples. This subchapter will then serve as a reference for the
> comparison to what current efforts in OGF do or plan to do (chapter 5).
> We grouped the WGs with respect to what is absolutely necessary for
> doing scheduling, what would be nice to have and what is related in
> general, but pretty far away. The final chapter (recommendations) should
> then again follow the structure of requirements; there, general
> recommendations for other higher-level WGs could be given in the first
> part. In the second part, very concrete recommendations should be given
> to other WGs regarding the different Use Cases, respectively.
It might be also a good idea to include (maybe categorised as "future
aspects") efforts which are going on in OGF, but which are not
"specification-near" yet. From the top of my head I could think of
WS-Agreement Negotation and the activity schema instance work. If you
just give brief directions there (with the necessary disclaimer), this
might be helpful, too).
> Possibly, if we see that this is getting to much / too large, we could
> spawn the Use Case-specific recommendations to separate documents;
> these, however, should be created jointly with the affected WGs (think
> of the HPCP profile approach).
This is one of the issues to be discussed on Thursday at OGF. I guess
that we might again find ourselves being blundered into the "broadest
view" trap, but if we stay realistic and maybe evaluate the interest in
the use case-specific recommendations before making them a separate
document, this could be a good option.
> We hope that our proposal is somewhat useful for GSA. Questions and
> rants are, of course, very welcome.
It is. Let us put this on the agenda and start collecting discussion
issues ...
>
> Looking forward to a lively discussion in Boston and beyond, we remain with
See you there. Have a safe flight, Philipp.
>
> Kind regards,
> Joachim & Alexander
>
> --
> Dipl.-Inform. Alexander Papaspyrou
> http://ds.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de/~alexp
> <http://ds.e-technik.uni-dortmund.de/%7Ealexp>
>
> Robotics Research Institute phone : +49(231)755-5058
> Information Technology Section fax : +49(231)755-3251
> Dortmund University of Technology, Germany
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> --
> gsa-rg mailing list
> gsa-rg at ogf.org
> http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/gsa-rg
More information about the gsa-rg
mailing list