[Go-essp-tech] Initial reactions to the revised registry schema

[Cinquini, Luca (3880)]

Hi Estani,
	I think the general idea is to have one single registry, where all components of the federation advertise all their useful information: endpoints for Attribute and Authorization services, CAs, MyProxy endpoints end so on.
Both Data Nodes and Gateways are simply an aggregation of services from the point of view of the federation, so they should be described within the same document. We also talked about a "type" that can help discriminate between different types of "node".
thanks, Luca

On Apr 16, 2011, at 2:17 AM, Estanislao Gonzalez wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I'm not sure it's totally clear what the registry should offer (nor 
> where), at least not for me...
> 
> I haven't seen the xsd yet (I get a file not found), but I would assume 
> that the schema Gavin's has provided is intended for the data-node (it's 
> in the data node manager), not the gateway, so:
> 1) (Gateway->datanode) Can be done, but it's not really required. The 
> data node can only describe itself.  The gateway should know while 
> parsing this (or is this being harvested at a central repository?)
> 2) (Gateway list) There's no way the data-node can have information 
> regarding other gateways. If it can, I still think it's not a good idea.
> 
> I think we are mixing two different registry concepts: The ESGF Registry 
> of the whole federation, and the data node registry of their services.
> 
> I would assume that the data nodes have a description of their services 
> publicly accessible. This should also be the case of the gateway.
> And the question would be where all this get linked together. For the 
> time being, I would assume hard coded at PCMDI, where all this data 
> might get harvested. Or the gateway harvest the description of its 
> data-nodes and from there to PCMDI.
> 
> I'm not sure I've understood the intention of the current 
> implementation, so sorry if I ask a stupid question here.
> Please, feel free to enlighten me :-)
> 
> Thanks,
> Estani
> Am 14.04.2011 22:21, schrieb Nathan Wilhelmi:
>> Hi Gavin,
>> 
>> A couple of initial reactions to the schema revision you sent out today.
>> 
>> 1) In the previous revisions the AuthorizaionPolicy was used to map
>> Gateways->Datanodes. We need this to drive which datanodes we collect
>> metrics from. In the schema you sent out how are you envisioning the
>> mapping between gateways and datanodes being represented?
>> 
>> 2) In the gateway we need to know the URL of the other gateways for
>> generating links. In the previous schema these were gateway element
>> attributes. What attributes are you envisioning these moving to? (Used
>> to be baseURL&  secureURL)
>> 
>> Thanks!
>> -Nate
>> _______________________________________________
>> GO-ESSP-TECH mailing list
>> GO-ESSP-TECH at ucar.edu
>> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/go-essp-tech
> 
> 
> -- 
> Estanislao Gonzalez
> 
> Max-Planck-Institut für Meteorologie (MPI-M)
> Deutsches Klimarechenzentrum (DKRZ) - German Climate Computing Centre
> Room 108 - Bundesstrasse 45a, D-20146 Hamburg, Germany
> 
> Phone:   +49 (40) 46 00 94-126
> E-Mail:  estanislao.gonzalez at zmaw.de
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GO-ESSP-TECH mailing list
> GO-ESSP-TECH at ucar.edu
> http://mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/go-essp-tech