October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann1 US CMS Software and Computing The Project Plan Matthias Kasemann Fermilab FNAL Oversight Panel October.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
High level expert meeting to develop the Near East Regional Action Plan to Implement the Global Strategy to improve Agricultural and Rural Statistics.
Advertisements

Proposal for a Constitution for MICE A Plan for Discussion P Dornan G Gregoire Y Nagashima A Sessler.
DOE/NSF U.S. CMS Operations Program Review Closeout Report Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory March 10, 2015 Anadi Canepa, TRIUMF Anna Goussiou, University.
Amber Boehnlein, FNAL D0 Computing Model and Plans Amber Boehnlein D0 Financial Committee November 18, 2002.
Distributed IT Infrastructure for U.S. ATLAS Rob Gardner Indiana University DOE/NSF Review of U.S. ATLAS and CMS Computing Projects Brookhaven National.
Cost, Schedule & Funding Closeout Jan Joint DOE/NSF CD2/3a Review 1 DOE/NSF Review of the Dark Energy Survey (DES) Project SC 6/7 Cost, Schedule.
1 LBNL Enterprise Computing (EC) January 2003 LBNL Enterprise Computing.
1 Software & Grid Middleware for Tier 2 Centers Rob Gardner Indiana University DOE/NSF Review of U.S. ATLAS and CMS Computing Projects Brookhaven National.
Parallel Programming on the SGI Origin2000 With thanks to Moshe Goldberg, TCC and Igor Zacharov SGI Taub Computer Center Technion Mar 2005 Anne Weill-Zrahia.
Title US-CMS User Facilities Vivian O’Dell US CMS Physics Meeting May 18, 2001.
1 US CMS ASCB (Advisory Software & Computing Board) u Function u Membership u Activities u Future Plans.
Proposal for a Constitution for MICE A Plan for Discussion P Dornan G Gregoire Y Nagashima A Sessler.
April 2, 2013 Longitudinal Data system Governance: Status Report Alan Phillips Deputy Director, Fiscal Affairs, Budgeting and IT Illinois Board of Higher.
CERN/IT/DB Multi-PB Distributed Databases Jamie Shiers IT Division, DB Group, CERN, Geneva, Switzerland February 2001.
Role of Management and Technical Coordination
October 24, 2000Milestones, Funding of USCMS S&C Matthias Kasemann1 US CMS Software and Computing Milestones and Funding Profiles Matthias Kasemann Fermilab.
CMS Software and Computing FNAL Internal Review of USCMS Software and Computing David Stickland Princeton University CMS Software and Computing Deputy.
Experiment Requirements for Global Infostructure Irwin Gaines FNAL/DOE.
November 15, 2000US CMS Tier2 Plans Matthias Kasemann1 US CMS Software and Computing Tier 2 Center Plans Matthias Kasemann Fermilab DOE/NSF Baseline Review.
NCSX Management Overview Hutch Neilson, NCSX Project Manager NCSX Conceptual Design Review Princeton, NJ May 23, 2002.
Requirements Review – July 21, Requirements for CMS Patricia McBride July 21, 2005.
Fermilab User Facility US-CMS User Facility and Regional Center at Fermilab Matthias Kasemann FNAL.
LIGO-G M Management of the LIGO Project Gary Sanders California Institute of Technology Presented to the Committee on Programs and Plans of the.
Chapter Three Organizational Structures.
CHEP 2000 (Feb. 7-11)Paul Avery (Data Grids in the LHC Era)1 The Promise of Computational Grids in the LHC Era Paul Avery University of Florida Gainesville,
Finnish DataGrid meeting, CSC, Otaniemi, V. Karimäki (HIP) DataGrid meeting, CSC V. Karimäki (HIP) V. Karimäki (HIP) Otaniemi, 28 August, 2000.
LHC Computing Review Recommendations John Harvey CERN/EP March 28 th, th LHCb Software Week.
Data Grid projects in HENP R. Pordes, Fermilab Many HENP projects are working on the infrastructure for global distributed simulated data production, data.
14 Aug 08DOE Review John Huth ATLAS Computing at Harvard John Huth.
US-CMS Software and Computing 1st Meeting of the FNAL Oversight Panel, October 2000 Core Applications Software Lucas Taylor Northeastern University.
Election Committee Report Florida State University May 11, 2002 US CMS Collaboration Meeting Jim Hanlon and Jay Hauser US CMS Election Committee.
November SC06 Tampa F.Fanzago CRAB a user-friendly tool for CMS distributed analysis Federica Fanzago INFN-PADOVA for CRAB team.
LIGO-G M Management and Operation Plans/Budget Stan Whitcomb NSF Annual Review 8 November 2004 Caltech.
LIGO-G M Summary Remarks: Management of LIGO Gary Sanders California Institute of Technology NRC Committee on Organization and Management of Research.
SA1/SA2 meeting 28 November The status of EGEE project and next steps Bob Jones EGEE Technical Director EGEE is proposed as.
Fermilab Annual DOE Program Review May 16-18, 2005 JF1 CMS M&O at FNAL Jim Freeman US CMS M&O Manager May 17, 2006.
Ian Bird LHC Computing Grid Project Leader LHC Grid Fest 3 rd October 2008 A worldwide collaboration.
October 30, 2001ATLAS PCAP1 LHC Computing at CERN and elsewhere The LHC Computing Grid Project as approved by Council, on September 20, 2001 M Kasemann,
US ATLAS Tier 1 Facility Rich Baker Brookhaven National Laboratory DOE/NSF Review of U.S. ATLAS and CMS Computing Projects Brookhaven National Laboratory.
CMS Computing and Core-Software USCMS CB Riverside, May 19, 2001 David Stickland, Princeton University CMS Computing and Core-Software Deputy PM.
Fermilab Presentation Greg Bock, Pepin Carolan, Mike Lindgren, Elaine McCluskey 2014 SC PM Workshop July 2014.
Ruth Pordes November 2004TeraGrid GIG Site Review1 TeraGrid and Open Science Grid Ruth Pordes, Fermilab representing the Open Science.
High Energy Physics and Grids at UF (Dec. 13, 2002)Paul Avery1 University of Florida High Energy Physics.
INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE EGEE SA1 in EGEE-II – Overview Ian Bird IT Department CERN, Switzerland EGEE.
CMS Computing and Core-Software Report to USCMS-AB (Building a Project Plan for CCS) USCMS AB Riverside, May 18, 2001 David Stickland, Princeton University.
Friday the 18th of May, 2001US CMS Physics J.G. Branson1 Physics in (US) CMS James G. Branson UC San Diego US CMS Collaboration Meeting Riverside CA.
1 Future Circular Collider Study Preparatory Collaboration Board Meeting September 2014 R-D Heuer Global Future Circular Collider (FCC) Study Goals and.
U.S. Grid Projects and Involvement in EGEE Ian Foster Argonne National Laboratory University of Chicago EGEE-LHC Town Meeting,
U.S. ATLAS Computing Facilities Overview Bruce G. Gibbard Brookhaven National Laboratory U.S. LHC Software and Computing Review Brookhaven National Laboratory.
LARP Collaboration Meeting April BNL -FNAL - LBNL - SLAC Status Report E. Harms 28 March 2006.
U.S. ATLAS Computing Facilities DOE/NFS Review of US LHC Software & Computing Projects Bruce G. Gibbard, BNL January 2000.
November 27, 2001DOE/NSF review of US LHC S&C projects1 The Software and Computing Committee (SC2) in the LHC Computing Grid Project M Kasemann, FNAL.
LHC Computing, SPC-FC-CC-C; H F Hoffmann1 CERN/2379/Rev: Proposal for building the LHC computing environment at CERN (Phase 1) Goals of Phase.
INFSO-RI Enabling Grids for E-sciencE EGEE Contributions to e-Infrastructure policy work Matti Heikkurinen, NA5 leader, CERN EGEE.
Project X Collaboration Plan Steve Holmes Accelerator Advisory Committee Meeting May 6-8, 2008.
DPS/ CMS RRB-T Core Software for CMS David Stickland for CMS Oct 01, RRB l The Core-Software and Computing was not part of the detector MoU l.
LCG Project Organisation Requirements and Monitoring LHCC Comprehensive Review November 24, 2003 Matthias Kasemann Software + Computing Committee (SC2)
Storage Management on the Grid Alasdair Earl University of Edinburgh.
1 Comments concerning DESY and TESLA Albrecht Wagner Comments for the 5th meeting of the ITRP at Caltech 28 June 2004 DESY and the LC What could DESY contribute.
Nigel Lockyer Fermilab Operations Review 16 th -18 th May 2016 Fermilab in the Context of the DOE Mission.
Scientific Computing at Fermilab Lothar Bauerdick, Deputy Head Scientific Computing Division 1 of 7 10k slot tape robots.
10-Feb-00 CERN HepCCC Grid Initiative ATLAS meeting – 16 February 2000 Les Robertson CERN/IT.
] Open Science Grid Ben Clifford University of Chicago
Bob Jones EGEE Technical Director
LHC Science Goals & Objectives
Ian Bird GDB Meeting CERN 9 September 2003
S4 will be a “big” Collaboration:
Collaboration Board Meeting
Preliminary Project Execution Plan
LHC Computing, RRB; H F Hoffmann
Presentation transcript:

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann1 US CMS Software and Computing The Project Plan Matthias Kasemann Fermilab FNAL Oversight Panel October 23, 2000

USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann2 Talk Outline Talk Outline  Overview of the US CMS Project Management Plan è Scope of the US CMS S&C project è Organization of the US CMS S&C Project è Relation to Int’l CMS è Status and Future Evolution of the PMP  Current status of the US CMS S&C Project

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann3 LHC Software & Computing Challenges è Geographical dispersion: of people and resources è Complexity: the detector and the LHC environment è Scale: Petabytes per year of data 1800Physicists (360 from US) 150 Institutes 32 Countries Major challenges associated with:  Coordinated Use of Distributed computing resources  Remote software development and physics analysis  Communication and collaboration at a distance R&D: New Forms of Distributed Systems: Data-Grids

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann4 US and Worldwide Data Grid Tier2 Center Online System Offline Farm, CERN Computer Center FNAL Center France Center Italy Center UK Center Institute Institute ~0.25TIPS Workstations ~100 MBytes/sec ~2.4 Gbits/sec Mbits/sec Bunch crossing per 25 nsecs. 100 triggers per second Event is ~1 MByte in size Physicists work on analysis “channels”. Each institute has ~10 physicists working on one or more channels Physics data cache ~PBytes/sec ~ Gbits/sec + Air Freight Tier2 Center ~622 Mbits/sec Tier 0 +1 Tier 1 Tier 3 Tier 4 Tier2 Center Tier 2 Experiment

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann5 The Goal of the “S&C Project”  To provide the software and computing resources needed to enable US physicists to fully participate in the physics program of CMS  Allow US physicists to play key roles and exert an appropriate level of leadership in all stages of computing related activities … è From software infrastructure to reconstruction to extraction of physics results è From their home institutions, as well as at CERN This capability should extend to physicists working at their home institutions

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann6 US-CMS Software and Computing Project  Aug 1998 First presentation to DOE/NSF (Newman + Taylor)  12/98 - 6/00Project Management Plan (PMP)  11/98, 5/99 Favorable DOE/NSF “Peer” Reviews; Funding for Software Engineers  11/ /99Biannual Reports and Discussion at JOG  7/99 - Acting Software and Computing Board; L1/L2 PMs  12/99 Submission of Draft PMP to DOE/NSF  1/00WBS, Draft Funding Profile for Presented at DOE/NSF Peer Review  3/00Start Up Funding for UF Subproject  5/17/00GriPhyN ITR Proposal (Grid IT R&D)  5/20/00SC Organization Approved and PMP by US CMS CB  5/30/00DOE/NSF Proposed Funding Profile  6/12/00US CMS Response, Discussion at JOG  6/25/00Finalize updated PMP, sent to collaboration  6/29/00 Quarterly Progress Report at DOE  6/ /00Update Requirements and Costs; Refine WBS  7/ /00Plan Tier2 Center Prototype Startup  11/14/00Project Baselining Review by DOE/NSF  11/00L1 PM Starts; Appoints L2 PMs (CAS, UF)

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann7 Outline of Software and Computing Plan  Goals of the Project  Project Organization  Upper Level Project Management  Interrelationship with Other Entities  Evolution of the US CMS Software and Computing Project p Newest Version is October 20, 2000 (separated Project Plan Management Plan from WBS, milestones and budget)  Additional Documents describe: è High Level Milestones, Work Breakdown Structure, and Budget for the User Facilities Subproject è High Level Milestones, Work Breakdown Structure, and Budget for the Core Applications Subproject è High Level Milestones, Work Breakdown Structure, and Budget for Overall Project è Appendix: p CMS Software Milestones and WBS

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann8 Participants/Key Players  CERN  International CMS  US CMS  US Funding agencies  US Universities and National Labs  US Physicists

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann9 Key Management Entities è Level 1 Project Manager + deputy è Level 2 Project Manager for Core Applications Software è Level 2 Project Manager for User Facilities è The Advisory Software and Computing Board -- ASCB è The Fermilab Director or Designee advised by the Project Management Group è The Fermilab Computing Division è US funding agencies and Joint Oversight Group

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann10 US Funding Agencies and Fermilab (CMS Host Institution) Fiscal Authority Policy & reporting Software and Computing Project Project Manager Liaison Core Applications Software User Facilities Support US CMS Advisory Software and Computing Board (USASCB) Reconstruction Detector Software and Physics Groups Organization of US CMS S&C Project

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann11 US CMS Software and Computing Scope  The US CMS Software and Computing Project è Core Application Software è User Facilities p Tier 1 and Tier 2 regional Centers  Networking support è CERN--US/Fermilab è Internal to US  Reconstruction and Detector Software  Physics Analysis è These are closely related but are dealt with outside of this particular project as an “extended project” or as “related activities” Project Scope

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann12 CAS Subproject In addition to developing software, this subproject will also provide expert programming personnel to assist the physicists in developing reconstruction and physics analysis programs by serving as mentors, reviewers, advisers and, where appropriate as software tool-writers. This will ensure that the software produced will be easy to integrate into the whole system, will be efficient in its use of hardware resources, and will be maintainable and adaptable for the full life of the CMS data analysis. è To support the design, development, modeling optimization and commissioning of software related to detectors being constructed by US CMS è To provide its share of the framework and infrastructure software required to support data analysis and simulation for CMS è For remote collaborative tools to enable the distributed model of computing that permits members of US CMS to carry out analysis whether they are at home in the US or visiting or resident at CERN è To satisfy any specialized needs required to carry out data analysis activities of interest to members of US CMS

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann13 UF Subproject è The goal of the User Facilities Subproject is to provide the enabling infrastructure of software and computing that will allow US physicists to fully participate in the physics program of CMS. è To this end the subproject will acquire, develop, install, integrate, commission and operate the hardware and software for the facilities required to support the development and data analysis activities of USCMS. è This subproject will include a major ‘Tier1’ regional computing center at Fermilab to support US physicists working on CMS. It is appropriately sized to support this community which comprises 20% of the full CMS collaboration. è Tier 2 Centers are part of the User Facilities Subproject

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann14 Tier 2 Centers  Tier 2s will partner with a Tier 1 which will provide support and liaison with CERN.  US CMS Tier 2 Centers (or the CMS parts of multiple customer centers) appear as Level 3 WBS items under the UF project, and the UF Level 2 manager has specific responsibilities with respect to them è Tier 1 interfaces to the Tier 2’s in the US è The Tier 2 CMS representative is a L3 manager of the US S&C project

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann15 Organization of US CMS Projects

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann16 Role of the ASCB  Helps in Development of the Project Plan  Advises on Scientific and Technical Policy  Advises on appointments  Provides Continuous Project Input and Feedback throughout the life of the construction project The US CMS Software and Computing Board provides crucial input and feedback for the US CMS Software and Computing project. It advises the Level 1 Project Manager and provides liaison to US CMS.

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann17 Composition of ASCB  Specifies elected and Ex Officio members  six members elected at large from the US CMS collaboration;  the US CMS Physics Coordinator (also elected);  the Chair of the US CMS Collaboration Board (ex-officio)  the Head of the Fermilab Computing Division (ex-officio)  the CMS Project Manager for Core Software + Computing (ex- officio)  the Project Manager of the US CMS Construction Project (ex- officio).  Level 1 Project Manager of the US CMS Software and Computing Project (ex-officio)  Two Level 2 Project Managers of the US CMS Software and Computing Project (ex-officio) è The 7 elected members will choose a chairperson from among the 6 members who were elected at large è Term is 2 years, 3 positions elected every year

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann18 Relation to CMS èTo create a strong linkage between the US CMS Software and Computing Project and the overall CMS Project, the CMS L2 manager will be an ex officio member of the USASCB. è The USASCB will have the responsibility for providing liaison between the US CMS Computing Project and the CMS Software and Computing Board. è The US CMS Software and Computing Project Level 1 Project Manager will act as liaison to the CMS Software and Computing Technical Board.

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann19

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann20 US-CMS Sub-System Links to International CMS Collaboration Board HCAL PM ECAL PM TRIDAS PM EMU PM Tracker PM Common Proj. PM HCAL PM ECAL PM TRIDAS PM Muon PM Tracker PM Note: Subsystem Institution and Finance Boards are omitted for clarity SW/Comp. PM Magnet PM Management Board Steering Committee US-CMSCMS

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann21 “Extended” Lines of Communication CMS SCB CMS SCTB US S&C L1PM US ASCB p Collaboration-elected members, chair of US CMS CB, Physics Coordinator p Construction Project Technical Director p FNAL CD -- head of CD p Technical -- L1, L2 PMs p CMS -- S&C Project Manager Joint Oversight Group Fermilab Director or Designee Software and Computing Project Project Manager Project Management Group p Fermilab Director or Designee -- aka FNAL Deputy Director and Assoc. Director for Research p Technical -- L1, L2 PMs p Collaboration -- chair of USASCB and chair of US CMS CB p Construction Project Technical Director p Head of FNAL CD

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann22 External Review Committee è The chair of the PMG will establish a standing external review committee that will periodically examine and evaluate all aspects of the US CMS Software and Computing Project.

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann23 Formal Agreements with CMS  The US CMS collaboration will be contributing to CMS computing in a variety of ways, each of which will have an appropriate formal mechanism for establishing milestones, deliverables, and specifications.  Levels of support for production activities, including those required to support the design, testing, simulation, and commissioning of the detector should be supported by MOUs negotiated with CMS by the L1PM with input from the US ASCB and with the approval of the PMG and funding agencies.

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann24 Formal Agreements with CMS (cont’d)  The software development that directly relates to the international CMS effort should be developed as part of the CMS software and computing plan and approved, presumably as part of the project plan for the US CMS Software and Computing Project, by the PMG and the funding agencies.  Software efforts specifically in support of US physicists or intended to solve particular problems specific to the US, should be developed as part of the project plan with substantial input from US ASCB and approved by the PMG and, if required, by the funding agencies.

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann25 The Project Organization: Status Advisory Software and Computing Board (ASCB)  ChairI. Gaines (FNAL) for 1 year  Elected MembersP. Avery (Florida) for 2 years S. Dasu (Wisconsin) for 1 year S. Eno, (Maryland) for 1 year S. Kunori (Maryland) for 2 years D. Stickland (Princeton) for 2 years  Physics CoordinatorJ. Branson (UCSD)for 2 years  Chair of US CMS CB H. Newman (Caltech), ex-officio  Construction Project ManagerD. Green (FNAL), ex-officio  Int’l CMS S&C Coordinator M. Pimia (CERN)ex-officio  Head of FNAL/CD M. Kasemannex-officio  Acting L1 PMM. Kasemann ex-officio  Acting L2 PM – CASL. Taylor ex-officio  Acting L2 PM – UFV. O’Dell ex-officio Level 1 Project Manager L. Bauerdick (DESY/ZEUS -> FNAL) è Appointment Confirmed by JOG 6/00 è Starts November 2000

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann26 US CMS S&C Subprojects: Status  Core Application Software Subproject u Resource-loaded WBS for CMS and US CMS u Task- Oriented Requirements + US Support u US part: 9 (2000) - 13 (2004) FTEs of software engineering  User Facilities Subproject u Implement R&D and Prototype Systems: r Preproduction ODBMS and Event-distribution systems r Simulated Event service for PRS and ORCA teams u Implement Production Systems in u Replenish and Upgrade from u Staff: u Tier 1: 35 FTEs by 2006, partly leveraged from FNAL/CD u Tier 2: 5  1.5 FTEs = 7.5 FTEs Caltech, NEU, Princeton, UC Davis + FNAL FNAL + Tier 2 sites

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann27 US CMS S&C: Data Grid Deploy computing resources as hierarchical grid è Tier 0  Central laboratory computing resources (CERN) è Tier 1  National center (Fermilab / BNL) è Tier 2  Regional computing center (Universities) è Tier 3  University group computing resources è Tier 4  Individual workstation/CPU u “Data Grid” to reflect the predominant role of data in the distributed analysis; Concept developed by Caltech, U. Florida and FNAL u This concept and “Tiers” has been adopted throughout Europe by the EU Grid Project u We have to start implementation of Tier 1 and Tier2 R&D systems now to: è Support physics and HLT studies è Support software development è Perform R&D on distributed data analysis

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann28 US CMS Tier2 planning  FY 2000/1Build basic services; HLT milestones 1-2 prototype-Tier 2Studies with ORCA  FY 2001Initial Grid systemFile replication service work with Tier 1 Multi-site cached file access  FY 2002Second set of Tier2 CMS Data Challenges centersS&C TDR and Physics TDR  FY 2003/4 Tier 2 centers 5%-Scale Data Challenge + at last set of sites PhysicsTDR; production data grid test  FY 2004/5 Production-quality 20% Production Grid System CMS Mock Data Challenge  FY 2005/6 Full distributed system Final Production Shakedown  R&D systems: leverage existing resources at Universities  Funding for Tier 2’s to come mostly from NSF initiatives

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann29 US CMS Tier 2 Centers  Discussed at US CMS Collaboration Board, May 20, 2000 è Agreed: start deployment of 1 prototype Tier 2 center è Query sent to each US CMS institute: p Interest and plans to participate in Tier2 R&D now? p Who can work on it? è Result: p Ready to started “now”: Caltech + UC Davis + UCSD9/00 Florida, 4/01 Univ. of Iowa + Iowa State~4/01 p Start later for production:Boston, Maryland, Minnesota Wisconsin è Next steps: p Consolidate Tier2 plans for R&D on distributed data analysis possibility to contribute to Monte Carlo production Possible leverage from Universities

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann30 First Prototype Tier 2 in California  Caltech + UC San Diego + UC Davis è Hardware Plan + Cost: 80 Dual CPU + Disk Linux Nodes$ 200 k [40 in Caltech, 40 in UCSD] Sun Data Server with RAID Array$ 30 k [partly from Caltech] Tape Library$ 20 k [in Caltech] LAN Switches$ 50 k Collaborative Infrastructure Upgrades $ 10 k Installation and Infrastructure$ 30 k Net Connect to Abilene$ 0 k Tape Media and Consumables$ 10 k Staff (Ops and System Support)$ 50 k Gigabit data access at UC Davis$ 30 k Total Estimated Cost (First Year)$ 430 k UCSD cost sharing $ -50 k UC Davis cost sharing$ -30 k Cost $ 350 k  Status: è Funding allocation request submitted to start first Tier 2 center in California è Hardware is arriving at sites

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann31 PMP: Status/Summary - I  WBS exists for the two major subprojects  Resource estimates exist è Revised recently: p With input from Int’l CMS planning during Hoffmann Review at CERN p After first funding guidelines received from DOE in May  Milestones and timelines exist and are frequent and aggressive enough to drive the project and its oversight  Key management roles are identified è ASCB elected in September 2000 è L1 PM identified, starts November 2000  Key interfaces are worked out in a manner consistent with the collaborative nature of CMS and US CMS and with their “scientific culture”  Key interfaces are worked out with funding agencies and CMS  A draft of a full Project Management Plan exists è We separated the “stable” (project organization and oversight) aspects of the plan from the more “changeable” aspects (funding dependent). We created two documents: p Project Management and Work Breakdown Structure p Schedules, Milestones, and Budgets (finishing now)

October 23, 2000USCMS S&C Project Matthias Kasemann32 PMP: Status/Summary - II PMP: Status/Summary - II  The plan draws strength and exploits the synergy between p US Universities and Fermilab p Software Professionals and physicists  It takes advantage of and contributes to key developments in the US in information technology p Drive towards a high speed network infrastructure p Development of ever better network software and applications such as grid computing concepts  It takes advantage through the Tier2 centers of the significant strengths of US universities in the area of computer science and information technology These are key elements to its eventual success