W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2005

Re: Draft minutes of TAG telcon 13 Sep 2005

From: Vincent Quint <Vincent.Quint@inrialpes.fr>
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 10:42:32 +0200
To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Cc: Vincent.Quint@inrialpes.fr, www-tag@w3.org
Message-Id: <20050914104232.542227e5.Vincent.Quint@inrialpes.fr>

Just minor detail: my name is listed twice under "Present".
For the rest, these minutes give an excellent summary of
our discussion with Paul.
Thanks, Norm.


On Tue, 13 Sep 2005 14:43:38 -0400 Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM> wrote:
> Draft minutes published:
> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2005/09/13-minutes.html
>                                    - DRAFT -
>                                  W3C TAG telcon
> 13 Sep 2005
>    Agenda
>    See also: IRC log
> Attendees
>    Present
>            PaulStrong, Vincent, Norm, Ed, Vincent, DanC, DOrchard
>    Regrets
>            TimBL, HT, NM, Roy
>    Chair
>            Vincent
>    Scribe
>            Norm
> Contents
>      * Topics
>          1. Administrivia
>          2. Discussion of GRID
>          3. Edinburgh Face-to-Face
>      * Summary of Action Items
>      ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>    <scribe> Scribe: Norm
>    <scribe> ScribeNick: Norm
>   Administrivia
>    Most of today is for GRID discussions
>    Accept minutes of last telcon:
>    http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2005/09/06-minutes.html
>    Accepted (Vincent will remove "DRAFT").
>   Discussion of GRID
>    Thanks to Paul Strong for joining us
>    This is an informal discussion of GRID and it's connection to the Web
>    Paul: Paul Strong is a Systems Architect at Sun. Works in the N1 product
>    group. N1 is a suite of products that leverage the GRID
>    ... Grid is a somewhat ambiguous term being widely used by vendors
>    ... Within N1, I've been working on products for about five years. Mostly
>    working on data center and enterprise applications
>    ... Recommends July issue of ACM Queue
>    ... GRID is a view of the networking infrastructure
>    ... It's a view of computing resources that are pervasive. It's more about
>    the platform than the end-user applications
>    <DanC> (hm... http://www.sun.com/software/gridware/index.xml Sun N1 Grid
>    Engine 6 ... seems to be a hunk of hardware. I thought maybe N1 was a
>    service.)
>    Paul: GRID really is about recognizing two trends: growth in network
>    bandwidth, and network distributed services
>    ... GRID platform offers scalability, redundancy, ...
>    ... Needs services for distributing and managing work loads
>    ... Analogous to an electrical grid, in the sense that it's pervasive and
>    more-or-less uniform
>    <DanC> (hmm... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grid_computing "The SETI@home
>    project, launched in 1999, is a widely-known example of a simple grid
>    computing project." )
>    DanC: Sun N1 Grid seems to be a hunk of hardware...
>    Paul: The N1 products are a mixture of both hardware and services
>    ... Software is a meta-operating environment. Those products are called N1
>    ... They're closely tied to a set of hardware to run them on at Sun. The
>    result is an integrated set of components. You no longer care about
>    individual servers or OS instances.
>    DanC: So if I buy a chunk of N1, do I get CPU hours or a box?
>    Paul: It depends what you want, you can buy time on our GRID, or buy
>    hardware and setup your own
>    ... An example of a GRID application is SETI@Home
>    ... The use of the term GRID was prevalent initially in scientific and
>    academic community.
>    ... In the commercial space, rendering and simulation applications
>    ... The software that allows that workload to be
>    distributed/managed/aggregated is the middleware, integration layer that
>    is the meta-operating environment
>    DanC: Is it a style of computing, or is it technical standards that you
>    could interoperate with?
>    Paul: It's some of both
>    DanC: Does SETI@Home conform?
>    Paul: No, it predates them. The context is still being refined.
>    ... There are a couple of consortia working on this: The Global Grid Forum
>    ... There's The Enterprise GRID Alliance, focused on driving GRID adoption
>    within enterprises
>    <DanC> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grid_computing doesn't seem to
>    mention The Enterprise GRID Alliance )
>    Paul: To get the GRID used in less compute-intensive environments
>    <DanC> Enterprise GRID Alliance
>    Paul: discusses benefits of GRID: ability to manage pools of resources; a
>    mutable, dynamic space
>    ... reiterates the goal of treating these things holisticly...
>    <DanC> (EJB and J2... missed. hmm... I was starting to understand...)
>    Paul: workload management, mechanisms for monitoring, managing,
>    controlling processes
>    ... Users need to be able to combine a heterogeneous set of products and
>    services together
>    ... Standards are needed to allow each of these components to be managed.
>    ... The term GRID has become very loaded.
>    [scribe lost thread]
>    There's lots of marketing in this space: managing complexity, providing
>    agility, etc.
>    Paul: They're very similar, but they aren't identical. The GRID space is
>    very confusing for many of the end-users and consumers.
>    Ed: GRID is a very broad term. Everything from SETI@Home to shared system
>    resource pools that's more of a realtime virtual machine type of thing
>    Paul: Yes, absolutely.
>    ... One of the difficulties we have as an industry is articulating this
>    ... It's going to take a long time to get to the end.
>    ... A lot of the technologies we think about today in the GRID space that
>    do the mapping of workload onto resources
>    ... There are also provisioning services
>    ... What we're automating today is the provisioning processes, but that's
>    just the beginning.
>    DanC: How is provisioning expensive?
>    Paul: Consider an electronic book store that has a web tier, a web service
>    tier(?), and a database server tier
>    ... There's a set of database servers running on particular Sun hardware
>    with a particular OS
>    ... The services layer might be BEA running on some particular Dell
>    hardware
>    ... Right now there isn't a standardized way to describe all these
>    components
>    ... Not only are the components complex, but there's a relationship with
>    every other component already in the data center
>    ... Today, people manage individual resources
>    ... But those are increasing exponentially
>    ... Because they don't trust management tools, each server is typically
>    dedicated to a single function
>    ... This leads to silos of services that perform single tasks
>    ... This leads to waste and lack of agility
>    ... It's very hard to track relationships between all the components
>    DanC: Are there any GRID computing saves the day stories?
>    Paul: There are stories that it's leading that way
>    ... A lot of stuff is relatively static today. We have a tool that allows
>    you to provision complete projects, like the bookstore
>    ... It does all the work
>    ... It typically pays for itself in six to twelve months. There are fewer
>    unplanned outages because planned downtime is all automated
>    ... It's more deterministic in production and is more reliable.
>    ... The developers can create the model when they create the application.
>    For provisioning the test and QA engineers can test with a single button.
>    DanC: It has a little blinking light that says "you need a new database
>    server"
>    Paul: Yep.
>    [Scribe hears something about ad hoc construction that seems at odds with
>    the previous story..]
>    Paul: When load gets high, the provisioning application will attempt to
>    reconfigure (scribe ?)
>    ... Getting to the point where it all "just works" is going to take a long
>    time. It's very easy to solve problems with regards to concrete things,
>    but it's far more complicated when you're trying to model more abstract
>    components (a server vs. a tier of servers)
>    DanC: It's all proprietary things cobbled together, but Sun does have
>    products in this space?
>    Paul: Yes. It's mapping workload onto resources with respect to policy.
>    <Ed> HP and IBM do as well. Unfortunately, they don't work together to
>    create one grid, each has its own grid.
>    Paul: In the GRID world, we're talking about mapping services (a
>    bookstore, SETI@home, etc.) onto a network of resources (servers,
>    firewalls, etc.) with respect to policies
>    <DanC> (btw, norm, re partitioning your ubuntu box, I highly recommend
>    LVM)
>    Paul: The first things that get automated are the simple mechanisms.
>    ... There will eventually be a move towards automating higher order
>    problems, such as managing performance and availability.
>    ... Today there are no single products that let you do all of those things
>    ... Instead you get different products to manage different aspects of
>    that. You get something that is more automated, but still has lots of
>    human interaction
>    ... Sun has products that fit into a number of those spaces, but none are
>    integrated together as a whole meta-operating system. No one's products
>    are.
>    Vincent: What are the consortia doing today, what are the main standards
>    under development?
>    Paul: Several things are needed
>    ... A way of describing the requirements of the system
>    The Enterprise Grid Alliance is working on this sort of thing
>    Paul: And use cases based on that description
>    ... We're working on a standard set of requirements that we can give to
>    other standards organizations
>    ... The Global Grid Forum is working on standards farther downstream
>    ... A service-centric architectural view; the OGSA (Open Grid Services
>    Architecture)
>    ... Because GRID was originally driven by compute-intensive applications,
>    they have a lot of those, but they're working on getting more broad
>    ... A job control language is one example. How do I describe a work load,
>    schedule it, monitor it, etc.
>    ... As you approach the more concrete things, you want to standardize them
>    too. That's where interaction with DMTF occurs.
>    DMTF = Distributed Management Task Force (www.dmtf.org)
>    They own the SIM standard (Standard Information Model)
>    There's work to make some of these things more abstract as well (pools of
>    servers instead of single servers)
>    Paul: There are OASIS GRID/WS standards under development as well
>    ... You can look at GRID as the platform that is the network that is the
>    web
>    ... There are other standards in this space too (for storage, for example)
>    <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask if these enterprise grids have peers grids
>    DanC: Are enterprise grids mostly their own world, or do they have peers?
>    ... Does my grid talk to other grids?
>    Paul: We define an enterprise grid as the set of components (from disks to
>    CRM applications) managed by a single enterprise
>    ... But each may have several data centers
>    ... In some sense, they're isolated in terms of management, but they do
>    interact with the Web.
>    ... And one enterprise grid could interact with another (the bookstore
>    grid interacting with the credit card company grid)
>    DanC: How will these two talk to each other?
>    Paul: The expectation is that we'd be using standard mechanisms for
>    interaction
>    ... But I as the bookstore owner may have expectations about the speed of
>    service from the credit card company
>    ... I may want to negotiate that quality of service.
>    ... Possibly on a per-transaction basis.
>    If my customer is a real brick-and-mortar store ordering thousands of
>    books, I may want a faster answer than for Joe Individual User.
>    Paul: We chose to bound the problem at a single enterprise because it
>    makes authority and control simpler
>    ... When you're working across enterprises, then you have federation
>    rather than hierarchy
>    ... GGF views its charter as everything grid, they see what EGA does as
>    (an important) subset
>    ... They care about viewing the internet as a set of computers controlled
>    by different organizations but on which I could impose a virtual
>    organization
>    ... For example, automobile design is sometimes shared across companies
>    because it's so expensive
>    ... From the GGF perspective, a virtual GRID could be constructed between
>    these companies
>    ... Typically, the shared resources are segregated from the companies own
>    resources
>    Ed: It seems like because the GRID is undefined, a lot of work is
>    hindered. If it's more along the lines of a distributed computing
>    environment, then I can see where that comes into play. Is there progress
>    on defining either striations or a clear definition of what GRID is?
>    Paul: In terms of the word GRID, no
>    ... We're working on this to some sense in EGA by working on requirements.
>    By being able to clearly enumerate and describe problems, we can guide GGF
>    to work on a particular area.
>    ... A big challenge is identifying the set of problems that people care
>    about most and the boundary between the components we care about.
>    Paul describes a number of things that can be virtualized
>    Paul: Having a model for these components and the life cycle of those
>    components is critical for the standards bodies to be able to do stuff
>    that isn't unintentionally competitive
>    Ed: Right, and I guess that's why I think breaking the big problem down
>    into smaller problems seems like something you'd want to do
>    Paul: GGF is more of a boil the ocean perspective, EGA is about boiling
>    enough water to make a cup of tea
>    ... There is a working group called the SCRUM (scribe wonders about
>    spelling) in GGF that's trying to look at these issues
>    <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask about job migration between, say, sun's
>    and IBM's grid services
>    DanC: If Amazon rented time on the Sun N1 thingy and some IBM On Demand
>    computing, is it feasible to migrate jobs across those?
>    Paul: It totally depends.
>    ... There are certain classes of workflow where you can migrate the work
>    today. In a batchable system, you could move them around in stages.
>    ... Rendering would be a good example. I've got 20,000 jobs, I can send
>    10,000 to each. 3,000 fail on one system so I can migrate them to the
>    other.
>    ... If you have shared infrastructure, you can migrate between
>    transactions
>    DanC: Across the Sun/IBM boundary?
>    Paul: Technically, yes.
>    ... Right now a lot of this is really proprietary. It'll become easier
>    after the standards are written.
>    ... People are mainly looking at whole data centers or whole enterprises
>    at the moment.
>    Vincent: Is there anything important that you feel wasn't addressed?
>    Paul: I'm not really sure.
>    Paul recommends ACM Queue Magazine again
>    Most of the articles will be online soon.
>    http://www.acmqueue.org/
>    TAG thanks Paul for a great overview.
>    Vincent: Thanks also to Norm for organizing Sun's participation
>    Norm: Thanks again, Paul
>   Edinburgh Face-to-Face
>    Draft agenda: http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2005/09/20-agenda.html
>    Vincent: Some time for issue status, then time for four or five issues to
>    discuss.
>    ... Return to the discussion of new directions.
>    <Zakim> DanC, you wanted to ask for abstractComponentRefs-37 on the ftf
>    agenda, maybe
>    DanC feels more prepared to talk about abstractComponentRefs-37
>    Vincent: Try to review the draft agenda over the next day or so and send
>    feedback so it can be updated before the f2f.
>    ... Any other business?
>    Next meeting is the f2f on 20 Sep in Edinburgh
>    Adjourned
> Summary of Action Items
>    [End of minutes]
>      ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>     Minutes formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.127 (CVS log)
>     $Date: 2005/09/13 18:39:31 $
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
> -- 
> Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM / XML Standards Architect / Sun Microsystems, Inc.
> NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
> recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
> Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
> If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
> reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.

Vincent Quint                       INRIA Rhône-Alpes
INRIA                               ZIRST
e-mail: Vincent.Quint@inria.fr      655 avenue de l'Europe
Tel.: +33 4 76 61 53 62             Montbonnot
Fax:  +33 4 76 61 52 07             38334 Saint Ismier Cedex
Received on Wednesday, 14 September 2005 08:42:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:46 UTC