Review and discussion topics: DRAFT GENI Control Framework Requirements document

[Harry Mussman]

GENI Control Framework WG Members and interested GENI participants,


An effort is underway to define and document a first view of the GENI
Control Framework Requirements.  

A first DRAFT (v01.3) has been completed, and can be found at
http://groups.geni.net/geni/wiki/GeniControlFrameworkRequirements 

The abstract is:
GENI Control Framework Requirements
GENI-SE-CH-RQ-01.3
This document defines the GENI control framework subsystem, and then
specifies its requirements.  It is a DRAFT, to be used for discussion in the
GENI Facility Control Framework working group.  Once approved, it can be
used as a guide to judge the completeness of prototype control framework
designs, and as a guide to their continued evolution.  

Comments on and changes for the DRAFT document were received from community
by February 25, 2009 and have been merged into the DRAFT (v01.3) document,
that can be found at
http://groups.geni.net/geni/attachment/wiki/GeniControlFrameworkRequirements
/010909comments1%20%20GENI-SE-CH-RQ-01.3.pdf

A conference call was held on February 25, 2009 with members of the GENI
Control Framework Working Group to review the comments that had been
received to date, and to discuss the document and the process to define
control framework requirements.  

On this call there was a lively discussion of the document, the process
towards defining the GENI control framework requirements, and on the GENI
control framework.  

A summary of the call can be found at
http://groups.geni.net/geni/attachment/wiki/GeniControlFrameworkRequirements
/030609_CFRequireReviewTopics.pdf

Most importantly, 10 discussion items were identified, which are listed in
the summary and attached below.

Next steps:

1)  The discussion topics will be forwarded separately to the community via
the CF WG mailing list, with discussion encouraged in the next several weeks
before GEC4.  
Suggested approaches and draft text will be included, where possible.
The goal is "rough consensus".

2.  A report on progress towards rough consensus on each topic will be
prepared for consideration and discussion during the CF WG meeting at GEC4.


3.  After GEC4, the CF Requirements document will be revised to reflect the
"rough consensus" affirmed at GEC4.  Then a second review process will
commence.




Please feel free to contact me with questions or comments.

We welcome your active participation!

Thanks,

Harry

Harry E. Mussman
Sr. Systems Engineer - GENI Project Office
BBN Technologies
10 Moulton Street
Cambridge, MA 02138
[phone] - Office
[phone] - Mobile
[phone] - Fax
hmussman@...
www.bbn.com




Discussion Topic 1
Should opt-in users have the ability to control how their resources are
allocated in the GENI suite?  
How can this be done?



Discussion Topic 2
The CF requirements, once defined:  "can be used as a guide to judge the
completeness of prototype control framework designs, and as a guide to their
continued evolution".  
Can we affirm this?


Discussion Topic 3
This document should clearly reflect that there are several GENI suites,
with interfaces that allow them to interoperate.  
There is not "one big suite".  
This should be reflected in the System Overview, and not just mentioned in
the later Federation section.
Can we affirm this?

Discussion Topic 4
Should we define a precise interoperability spec between GENI suites?
What are the minimal interfaces required to permit interoperability between
GENI suites?  Between which elements?
What are the minimal functions required to permit interoperability between
GENI suites?  

Discussion Topic 5
The group felt that the CF needs to support a range of transactions:
        Resources that range from:  valuable to not valuable.
        Scope of resources from:  wide (many) to narrow (few).
        Resource control depth from:  superficial to deep (detailed).
        Researchers that range from:  well known insiders to possibly
anonymous outsiders.
        Access control that ranges from:  rigorous to loose.
        Quality of service that ranges from:  reliable to casual.
        Behavior of researcher that ranges from:  proper to disruptive.
It was felt that this indicates that multiple mechanisms and functions would
be appropriate, not just one (perhaps rigorous) mechanism.
Can we affirm this?
Note:  Perhaps we should focus two corner cases that the CF must support,
e.g.:  a)  Valuable resources, deep control, rigorous access control,
reliable service.  B)  Not valuable resources, superficial control,
anonymous researchers, loose access control, casual service.

Discussion Topic 6
How will trust be defined in one GENI suite?  
How can trust be transferred between multiple GENI suites?  

Discussion Topic 7
What will be the vocabulary or ontology that GENI suites must share for
principals?  aggregates and components?
slices?
other items?

Discussion Topic 8
Should there be a defined Slice Controller (Manager) in the GENI suite?  
What are its characteristics?  
What are its interfaces?

Discussion Topic 9
What are the "essential" functions of the control framework in a GENI suite?

What are the "extended" functions of the control framework in a GENI suite?


Discussion Topic 10
What can GENI learn from similar systems:
Shibboleth?
CoManage?
Digital Object Registry?
Web services?
MEMS exchange?
Others?


_______________________________________________
control-wg mailing list
control-wg@...
http://lists.geni.net/mailman/listinfo/control-wg