© 2006 Open Grid Forum Geoffrey Fox GFSG Meeting Friday Center UNC January OGF eScience Function

© 2006 Open Grid Forum 2 Four major types of eScience Activities Group activities such as those in GIN (Interoperability) Groups perform long term activities in focused areas Typically does not get much high level visibility except for GIN Note two newish groups in Education and Reliability Typically one or more distinct 90 minute sessions Timely community activities arranged in the two-five months before meeting and including panels, tutorials and short workshops Current submissions to community program Typically one or two 90 minute sessions per submission Long lead time single track workshops with invited and contributed presentations in topics of broad interest to OGF. Typically 4 or 5 90 minute sessions Refereeing similar to high quality conferences Software Development Track starting at OGF minute sessions at OGF19

© 2006 Open Grid Forum Community Program Community oriented activities with relatively light weight approval process with call 3-5 months before meeting and decisions 2-3 months before Joint between Enterprise and eScience Exploratory (Birds of a Feather) sessions that could leads to groups or full one-day workshops Tutorials but not well done in OGF as no easy thoughtful coordination and don’t easily attract Grid users (as opposed to Grid builders) Need to establish a track with a uniform audience like we have for software development Small workshops often led by groups such as OGF19 Grid Reliability and Robustness 2 session workshop 3 Grid Services Grid Subsystems Users Grid Projects

© 2006 Open Grid Forum Software Development Sessions Grids are built from services which hopefully respect standards However there are several building blocks or subsystems like Globus or SRB which are used in many Grid projects TeraGrid EGEE Geon LEAD MyGrid China National Grid Naregi are Grid Projects Form initially at least de facto standards What is OGSA in the “non Green Field” of existing subsystems? OGF will offer “user group” sessions in “Grid Subsystems” in a set of consecutive sessions aimed at those building Grids and not at people using Grids OGF can provide one-stop shopping so don’t need to attend XYZweek for all XYZ GIN-Standards Interaction? 4 Grid Services Grid Subsystems Users Grid Projects

© 2006 Open Grid Forum OGF19 Software Development Track Clarens Grid Portal Toolkit Condor Scheduling system Genesis II OGSA Grid Infrastructure Globus core Grid Infrastructure Grid Federated Identity (GridShib, GAARDS, MyProxy) GridSphere portlet container for portals Ninf-G core Grid RPC Infrastructure NWS and BQP Network/Queuing Tools OGCE Open Grid Computing Environments collection of portlets (for Science Gateways) OMII core Grid infrastructure (includes OGSA-DAI and Taverna) SRB data Grid infrastructure Unicore core Grid infrastructure 5

© 2006 Open Grid Forum Future of Software Development Track Not clear how many at OGF20 but not very many! Less widely adopted software could be showcased in community program Suggested additional software from call – no response to request to select from these A Introduce/GAARDS: Suggested by Stephen A. Langella (part of development team) Action: GAARDS already part of track in federated identity session organized by Von Welch B: Nimrod Tools for Distributed Parametric Modeling: Suggested by Geoffrey Fox to broaden geographical scope C: CGSP China Grid Supporting Platform: Suggested by Geoffrey Fox to broaden geographical scope D: GOS China National Grid Software Environment: Suggested by Fox to broaden geographical scope E: European Grid Software: Suggested by Mirco Mazzucato (INFN Padua, Italy) and others EGEE core grid Infrastructure, EGEE high level services, SRM based MSS, INFN Grid policy and accounting framework F: Nordugrid core grid infarstructure: Suggested by Jean-Pierre Prost (IBM, France) and Balazs Konya (Lund University, Sweden) G: ProActive ( and its associated grid component model: Suggested by Jean-Pierre Prost (IBM, France) H: GAT The Grid Application Toolkit: Suggested by Thilo Kielmann I: SAGA: Suggested by Ed Seidel J: PyGridware Python Grid infrastructure: Suggested by Mary Thompson (LBL) K: Broader Coverage in Scheduling and Workflow: Suggested by Lennart Johnsson (Houston) L Commercial Systems: Suggested by Dave Berry (Edinburgh) M: Altair: Suggested by Bill Nitzberg but said he didn’t want to talk! 6

© 2006 Open Grid Forum 7 Current Workshop Topics Federated Identity at OGF19 organized by Ken Klingenstein and Satoshi Matsuoka Semantic Web 2.0 at OGF19 organized by Dave de Roure Resource Aggregation Grids at OGF20 organized by Wolfgang Commercial Web 2.0 at OGF21 organized by Charlie Catlett Preferred organization of one –day workshops Invited and Contributed Talks Panel aimed at summarizing topic as relevant to Grids or Grid technology After meeting one would Post presentations Convert panel discussion into a “review” “synopsis” or “Best Practice” for area covered Possibly arrange for scholarly publication for follow-up papers

© 2006 Open Grid Forum BP: Best Practice? There are many grids and experience building and using them. These use “standard” software packages supplemented by more or less “local” work BP’s, Status reports, Summaries, Reviews presumably capture current understanding of research, practice and experience These consist of Integrated reviews and/or Broad collection of articles such as sets of papers at a focused meeting Provide a set of links organized by say OGSA categories if possible which link to BKM’s which may or may not be OGF Generated Portals, Workflow, Science Gateways were covered in OGF workshops We will put an OGF web page with some existing surveys and solicit additions 8

Why Web 2.0 is Useful Captures the incredible development of interactive Web sites enabling people to create and collaborate

Web 2.0 APIs currently (Jan ) 356 Web 2.0 APIs with GoogleMaps the most used in Mashups This site acts as a “UDDI” for Web 2.0

So there is more or less no architecture difference between Grids and Web 2.0 and we can build e-infrastructure or Cyberinfrastructure with either architecture (or mix and match) We should bring Web 2.0 People capabilities to Grids (eScience, Enterprises) We should use robust Grid (motivated by Enterprise) technologies in Mashups See Enterprise 2.0 discussion at