SRM collaboration Conf call

6/8/2005

Jon, Timur, Rob (FNAL), Olof, Sebastian, Ben (CERN), Alex, Arie (LBNL), Owen (RAL), �Chip, Bryan, Michael (Jlab)

Arie; from last time, consecutive space for files (Olof) in space reservation, this can be added for optional feature to v2 and v3. How needs to be discussed. List of all sizes is kind of too much. So pair of (how many and size) would be okay as estimates. This is more concise. V.2.2 to be for that�� �

Timur: explained his ideas and about space allocation in general doing at FNAL.

Arie: that is a general space management, and for specific implementation. For some implementations, we are discussing a hint for space allocation. What happens internally is not a user�s concern. If not being used, just ignore.

Olof: explained the idea of having hint

Timur: good idea to have optional hint

Arie; it�s more reasonable to have it at the time of reservation. Time of the copy request, you can give the hint as well.� We can have it in v3, as well as as part of the discovery function.

Leo(?): good to return by the servers response if it can accommodate the file sizes

�..

1) ACLs are tightly couple to authentication

2) File ownership must exist

3) What assumption we make about the existence of other components:

��� - VO

��� - authorization manager

��� - metadata catalogs that keep track of ACL

��� - use of SAML in GridFTP,

Arie; Chicago GGF ?

Arie: Chip, what did you implement?

Chip; we have not implement ACL, as part of SRM. It is just on tope of a flat file system. The flat file system may have ACL.

Arie: who is the one determines authZ.� External comp to determine or internal to storage? ESG SAML honor in SRM.� If you don�t have this env. Some srm whould use some lib to give it�� 1. infrastructure with VO � authZ model.� 2. simply have underlying system have it� Peter in bio medical data, needs this.

Olof; not inclined to include to SRM which is already complex

Arie: understand, not a good idea to include it in SRM.

Expect some form of logical- physical mapping before coming to srm.

Olof: remove from v2

Arie: can have it in v3 as optional feature

Olof: feature discovery can be used.

Chip: v2 spec has none flexibility. We�re not driving changes.

Arie: it�s okay not to implement

Timur: find out about authz in ggf

Arie: talk about ESG little bit

Owen: interested in an srm does nothing more than talking to another srm.

Chip: main purpose?

Owen: large number of request, with security handling�� negotiation.

����������� I�ll make a short description with a use case.