Vendor and Software Developers Adoption Forum

1. Vendor and Software DevelopersAdoption Forum OGF-19, Tuesday, January 30, 2007 Session Chair: Dr. Craig A. Lee The Aerospace Corporation (a non-profit, federally funded R&D center)

2. OGF IPR Policies Apply • “I acknowledge that participation in this meeting is subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy.” • Intellectual Property Notices Note Well: All statements related to the activities of the OGF and addressed to the OGF are subject to all provisions of Appendix B of GFD-C.1, which grants to the OGF and its participants certain licenses and rights in such statements. Such statements include verbal statements in OGF meetings, as well as written and electronic communications made at any time or place, which are addressed to: • the OGF plenary session, • any OGF working group or portion thereof, • the OGF Board of Directors, the GFSG, or any member thereof on behalf of the OGF, • the ADCOM, or any member thereof on behalf of the ADCOM, • any OGF mailing list, including any group list, or any other list functioning under OGF auspices, • the OGF Editor or the document authoring and review process • Statements made outside of a OGF meeting, mailing list or other function, that are clearly not intended to be input to an OGF activity, group or function, are not subject to these provisions. • Excerpt from Appendix B of GFD-C.1: ”Where the OGF knows of rights, or claimed rights, the OGF secretariat shall attempt to obtain from the claimant of such rights, a written assurance that upon approval by the GFSG of the relevant OGF document(s), any party will be able to obtain the right to implement, use and distribute the technology or works when implementing, using or distributing technology based upon the specific specification(s) under openly specified, reasonable, non-discriminatory terms. The working group or research group proposing the use of the technology with respect to which the proprietary rights are claimed may assist the OGF secretariat in this effort. The results of this procedure shall not affect advancement of document, except that the GFSG may defer approval where a delay may facilitate the obtaining of such assurances. The results will, however, be recorded by the OGF Secretariat, and made available. The GFSG may also direct that a summary of the results be included in any GFD published containing the specification.” • OGF Intellectual Property Policies are adapted from the IETF Intellectual Property Policies that support the Internet Standards Process. 2

3. Vendor and Sfw Developers Adoption Forum • Goal: • Identify Drivers and Roadblocks for Adoption of OGF Standards • Identify Concrete Action Items to Facilitate Adoption for Specific Standards • Context: • Standards Alignment Process 3

4. OGF Technical Strategy/Stakeholder Alignment Process Application of Best Known Practices and Current Standards Uses Cases Architectures OGF Events Requirements Milestones Technical Strategy Committee Standards Groups & Workshops Requirements Workshops OGF Technical Strategy & Roadmap Best Practices Specifications OGF Document Series Analysis, Interpretation & Prioritization of Requirements 4

5. The OGF Alignment Process (A More Detailed View) Standards Groups Requirements Solicitation Best Practice Workshops ERG-RG Applications Best Practices Req Req SN-CG Architecture Requirements Rollup, Analysis & Prioritization (ERG-RG) TSC GAP Analysis Financial Compute Telco Req Prioritized Req and Req Patterns Data Pharma Infrastructure What WGs are doing over time (spec roadmap) Req and Req Patterns EDA Management • Composite roadmap • Gap analysis btwn WG roadmap vs. prioritized Req • Recommended actions Security Vendors Requirements Specs 5

6. What Are the Failure Modes for this Process? Standards Not Adopted Application of Best Known Practices and Current Standards Uses Cases Architectures OGF Events Skewed or non-rep. req’ments WGs late or off-topic Requirements Milestones Technical Strategy Committee Standards Groups & Workshops Requirements Workshops OGF Technical Strategy & Roadmap Faulty or incomplete analysis Best Practices Specifications OGF Document Series Analysis, Interpretation & Prioritization of Requirements 6

7. 2) Working Group 1.Requirements 3) Draft Specification 4) Interoperability Testing 5) Proposed Recommendation 2.Standards 6) Full Recommendation 7) Product (commercially supported) 3.Product 8) Deployment (actual production use) The Progressionof a Given Standard 1) Concept What’s really important for Vendors? For standards under development at OGF, what are the adoption stumbling blocks? 7

8. What Are the Issues Surrounding Adoption of OGF Standards? • Possible Issues: • Too Broad/Too Large • Too Monolithic • Too Vague • Too Specific (constraining) • Off-target • Don't need it • Too Expensive to adopt • Too Divergent from my business plan • Too Late • Technical Gap in one area prevents adoption of completed standard in another area • The 800-lb. gorillas (MS, IBM, … ) are going to define it • What are the Issues for Specific Standards? • What are the Possible Mitigation Efforts? • Every OGF standard should have an Adoption Strategy 8

9. Current OGF Standards Work • Infrastructure Grid and Virtualization Working Group (gridvirt-wg) Network Mark-up Language Working Group (nml-wg) Network Measurements Working Group (nm-wg) • Management Application Contents Service WG (acs-wg) Configuration Description, Deployment, and Lifecycle Management WG (cddlm-wg) Glue Schema Working Group (glue-wg) OGSA Resource Usage Service WG (rus-wg) Usage Record WG (ur-wg) • Security OGSA Authorization WG (ogsa-authz-wg) Trusted Computing Research Group (tc-rg) • Applications Distributed Resource Mgmt App. API WG (drmaa-wg) Grid Checkpoint Recovery WG (gridcpr-wg) Grid Information Retrieval WG (gir-wg) Grid Remote Procedure Call WG (gridrpc-wg) Simple API for Grid Applications Core WG (saga-core-wg) • Architecture OGSA Naming Working Group (ogsa-naming-wg) Open Grid Services Architecture WG (ogsa-wg) • Compute Grid Resource Alloc. Agreement Protocol WG (graap-wg) Job Submission Description Language WG (jsdl-wg) OGSA Basic Execution Services WG (ogsa-bes-wg) OGSA High Perf. Computing Profile WG (ogsa-hpcp-wg) OGSA Resource Selection Services WG (ogsa-rss-wg) • Data Data Format Description Language WG (dfdl-wg) Database Access and Integration Services WG (dais-wg) Grid File System Working Group (gfs-wg) Grid Storage Management WG (gsm-wg) GridFTP WG (gridftp-wg) Info Dissemination WG (infod-wg) OGSA ByteIO Working Group (byteio-wg) OGSA Data Movement Interface WG (ogsa-dmi-wg) OGSA-Data Working Group (ogsa-d-wg) 9

10. TS&RSimplified Specification Roadmap 10

11. Examine Adoption Issues for Specific Standards in These Areas • SAGA • DRMAA • JSDL • DMI • GridFTP • CDDLM • OGSA Areas of Standards Work(aka “Standards Use Cases” in TS&R doc) • Grid APIs • Job Submit • File Movement • Data Provisioning and Data Grids • App. Provisioning • Grid Security 11

12. Standard Adoption Template • Standard Synopsis • Known Key Stakeholders/Potential Adopters • Pros – Adoption Drivers • Cons – Adoption Issues • Adoption Strategy 12

13. SAGA (in development) • Simple API for Grid Applications • A simple API that tries to hide most grid complexity while providing common “look-and-feel” for basic operations, e.g., remote file access, remote job management, etc. Does not replace lower level tools that actually do these functions. • Known Key Stakeholders/Potential Adopters • Pros – Adoption Drivers • Cons – Adoption Issues • Adoption Strategy 13

14. DRMAA (GFD-R-P.022) • Distributed Resource Management Application API • Provides an API submit and manage remote jobs. Many attributes can be set prior to execution. • Known Key Stakeholders/Potential Adopters • Pros – Adoption Drivers • Cons – Adoption Issues • Adoption Strategy 14

15. JSDL (GFD-R.056) • Job Submission Description Language • XML-based language for describing jobs to be submitted to a grid. Does not address actual job submission or management. • Known Key Stakeholders/Potential Adopters • Pros – Adoption Drivers • Cons – Adoption Issues • Adoption Strategy 15

16. OGSA-DMI (in development) • OGSA-Data Movement Interface • Will provide an abstract interface for data movement (point-to-point, third-party) that is transport-agnostic. • Known Key Stakeholders/Potential Adopters • Pros – Adoption Drivers • Cons – Adoption Issues • Adoption Strategy 16

17. GridFTP (GFD-R.020) • Grid File Transfer Protocol • This document builds on RFC 959 “File Transfer Protocol” for grids. Grid Security Infrastructure is incorporated, along with disk striping, channel striping, third-party transfer. • Known Key Stakeholders/Potential Adopters • Pros – Adoption Drivers • Cons – Adoption Issues • Adoption Strategy 17

18. CDDLM (GFD-R-D.051) • Configuration Description, Deployment and Lifecycle Mgmt • CDDLM consists of five documents and is based on SmartFrog (Smart Framework for Object Groups). The Configuration Description Language describes system configuration of components in the CDDLM Component Model. The Deployment API uses a deployment descriptor to manage deployment lifecycle. • Known Key Stakeholders/Potential Adopters • Pros – Adoption Drivers • Cons – Adoption Issues • Adoption Strategy 18

19. OGSA (GFD-R-P.072) • Open Grid Services Architecture, Web Services Resource Framework Basic Profile 1.0 • The specifications considered in this profile are specifically those associated with the addressing, modeling, and management of state: WS-Addressing, WS-ResourceProperties, WS-ResourceLifetime, WS-BaseNotification, and WS-BaseFaults. • Known Key Stakeholders/Potential Adopters • Pros – Adoption Drivers • Cons – Adoption Issues • Adoption Strategy 19