© 2005 Global Grid Forum The information contained herein is subject to change without notice Leading the pervasive adoption of grid computing for research and industry Session Name, CDDLM-WG # June, 2005 (GGF14 in Chicago) CDDLM-WG Sessions

2 GGF Intellectual Property Policy All statements related to the activities of the GGF and addressed to the GGF are subject to all provisions of Appendix B of GFD-C.1, which grants to the GGF and its participants certain licenses and rights in such statements. Such statements include verbal statements in GGF meetings, as well as written and electronic communications made at any time or place, which are addressed to any GGF working group or portion thereof, Where the GFSG knows of rights, or claimed rights, the GGF secretariat shall attempt to obtain from the claimant of such rights, a written assurance that upon approval by the GFSG of the relevant GGF 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 GGF 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 GGF Secretariat, and made available. The GFSG may also direct that a summary of the results be included in any GFD published containing the specification.

3 Check list At the beginning –Read note GGF IPR policy –Circulate sign-up sheet –Assign note taker (two is better) At the end –Pick up sign-up sheet

4 CDDLM-WG Sessions at GGF 14 ACS #1, 6/28, 2:30-4pm, Consulate West, ACS & CDDLM OGSA #4, 6/28, 4:30-6pm, Wellington 1, EMS, DMTF-UCWG, etc. CDDLM #1, 6/28, Jun 29, 7:30-9 am, Michigan, reference implementation OGSA #8, 6/29, 9-10:30am, Wellington 2, OASIS WSDM Deep Dive OGSA #9, 6/29, 11am-12:30pm, Consulate, OASIS WSDM TC WSDM 6/29, prior to j2pm, Governor's Suite, Multi-vendor WSDM demo CDDLM #2, 6/29, 2-3:30pm, Windsor, Interop CDDLM #3, 6/29, 6-7:30pm, Windsor, CDDLM-WG and WSDM CDDLM #4, 6/30, 7:30-9am, Regent 1, CDDLM demos CDDLM #5, 6/30, 9am-10:30am, Regent 1, CDDLM & mgmt groups ACS #2, 6/30, 11am-12:30pm, Michigan, ACS & OASIS SDD TC CDDLM#6, 6/30, 3:30-5pm, Regent 1, review of remaining specs

5 Session report template (3 slides) 1.Outcomes and achievements 2.Open Issues 3.Action Items and Next Step

6 Outcomes and achievements List of WG/RGs attended Topic discusses The outcome of their discussions and achievement

7 Open Issues Issues could not achieve consensus Raise issues that affect other design teams or the architecture in general

8 Interop Prerequisite: all components are conformant Individual conformance –CDL: if conformant, they should interoperate – all parse the same things (unit test) –Component model, act upon agreed set of components (assert, sleep, echo, etc.) (functional test) –Deployment API (system test) Interoperability –Support environment interoperability (fault if ! deployable) –Deploy CDL (different executables) to all three (fail for SF) –Deploy CDL (same executable, if appropriate) to all three

9 Tests Assumptions –Same client deploys to different CDDLM implementations –There is WSRF/WSDM interoperability 1.Single component on one node, can you deploy it? –Component has one property that can be queried? –Walk it through lifecycle, query properties 2.Multiple components on one/many nodes –Can you test references across components –Test semantics (e.g. ordering of deployed components) 3.NO: Cascaded deployment 4.NO: Multiple component across multiple reference implementation (NOTE: no shared graphs)

10 Interop, cont. Assumption –Do a number of conformance tests that Succeed (with predictable outcome) Fail –NOT: Capture outcome in a log, compare logs for different reference implementations –YES: deploy same executables which are self-checking NUnit/JUnit on sourceforge, aim is to automate Aim is for all tests to pass on interop ref implem.

11 Action Items and Next Step