1. Proposed Panel Jeremy Yates Dave Britton (chair) Manuel Delfino Jeff Templon Bob Mann Stephen Fairhurst

2. Mandate What are the issues? What do we do next?

3. Comment-1 We support the principle expressed in Pete’s figure to migrate things below the dotted line where it makes sense to do so. However we recognise that bespoke elements are often needed within individual infrastructures and our principle should be never to take take anything away from people that they need.

4. Comment-2 We recognise that opportunities might arise for funding for collaborative projects and that we should develop short, high level, descriptions that describe: Why the funding is needed; who (plural) it will benefit. What it will deliver. Etc. We will progress with 2 documents A draft “Case” to capture requirements of each activity..etc... to be “prepared” A short summary

5. Comment-3 We should make progress, irrespective of funding. We need to identify “low hanging fruit” and identify pilot projects in bi-lateral discussions. The outcome of these pilot projects might demonstrate success or difficulties; both are valuable. ACTION: We should ask each speaker from this meeting whether they can identify an area where they feel some further collaboration would help; or whether they have an expertise that they think they could contribute to an issue that was raised.

6. Comment-3a Possible low hanging fruits:  Shared CPU now  several activities have a need for CPU now –  they are being held up o scale of weeks (to get a study done)  LOFAR ?  EUCLID?  Re-enforce efforts to give access  Give projects a “point-of-contact”  Software distribution CVMFS  High volume data transport  This community has a huge experience of this – so none needs suffer  Need to ensure mechanism to propagate experience to where its needed.

7. Comment-3b Things to investigate further  LOFAR cloud experience  The “Bump” in resources required by EUCLID  Blackberry? AAI Stuff – can we start to use the same things?  Assent ?

8. Comment-4a Data Scientists: The elephant in the room is manpower. The bigger vision is about a new breed of data scientists who probably start off as domain specialists (need practical experience) but then migrate to a career-path which can cross to new domains or becomes multi-domain. Should/could UK-T0 enable/foster a community of data experts (i.e. not us; but the people who work at the coal-face) to promote communication and mobility? re-re-re-double lobbying that it is ever more false economy to invest in hardware but not in evolving software

9. Comment-4b Community Jeff….

10. Comment-5 AAI: Authentication and Authorization Infrastructure This is a recognised imperative for integration of infrastructures. However, UK-T0 cannot solve this problem. There are now many funded initiatives – most recently H2020 AARC. Our role should be to try and inject requirements and ensure *practical* outputs.

11. Comment-6 UK-T0 is OK apart from the “UK” and the “T0” bits UK: In fact we have, in the room, international-like-minded- friends from Spain and the Netherlands and we should collaborate as, and where, appropriate. ALSO Many of us our part of international collaborations so any solutions must be compatible with our international partners. T0: Is misleading. We are addressing the whole “Branscomb pyramid”.

12. Comment-7 It would be good to meet in four months time and report on things we had achieved as a result of bi-lateral collaborations. Even “simple things” would be a “success” because they would demonstrate that we could make this work. Challenge: Collaborate on something (however trivial) and talk about it in four-months time.

13. Comment-8 A national storage/archival facility? A necessary (though not “sufficient”) part of the response to the “Data Preservation” agenda – for which funding must follow. Data storage and preservation for consortia (that are short lived, are not the primary data sources, and so have no easy way to ensure longevity of the date) is probably important in the Astronomy community?

14. Comment-9 Cloud service?  How important is it to try to put more effort into a usable cloud service  SKA-AWS worked well due to maturity+documentation (Ian?)  RAL-Cloud was not as usable  How beneficial would it be to try to make RAL-Cloud as good as SKA-AWS  Note: assumption that many sites would then run this Cloud service  Is VAC/Vcycle of general use ?

15. 3 Ogres of Big Data Bryan Lawrence