Kickoff meeting of the Resource Allocation working group

Room link: Please provide you Name and Affiliation as Guest Name. In left top corner you will find "Meeting->Audio Setup Wizard" Button which will help you to configure your audio. You can test Your Computer with this link Adobe Connect tutorials:

Next meeting: 24.01.2013 15:3o-17:oo


EGI: Tiziana Ferrari, Małgorzata Krakowian
NGI_FR:  Hélène Cordier, Gilles Mathieu
NGI_PL: Marcin Radecki, Tomasz Szepieniec
NGI_NDGF: Oxana Smirnova
NGI_CZ:  Miroslav Ruda
NGI_IT: Luciano Gaido, Riccardo Brunetti
NGI_AEGIS: Vladimir Slavnic

BIOMED: Franck Michel
WeNMR: Marco Verlato
COMPCHEM : Alessandro Costantini


Oxana: We provide same resources for Prace and EGI. User may be confused what is the difference. Are we going to synchronize those two
RA processes?
Tiziana: This topic should be discussed with Prace. If we specify which resources are available in EGI then there should be no confusion.
Oxana: We should check RA process in Prace and get benefits from their expertise.
@Action on Tiziana: contact with Prace and ask for document describing RA process in Prace.

Resource allocation model in EGI (NGI_IT proposal)

Tiziana: I like the flow but some steps should be automated and we can think to use different processes for different calls.
Oxana: this proposal sounds reasonable but we need to think about scale. From our experience (1 NGI) we have big calls from big VOs which doesn't need to be reviewed but small ones have to be because we don't have enough resources to satisfy their needs. We have 100 reviews each year and for each of them we need a reviewer. Now we have 20 which is for us lightweight level - no chance for reduction of this number.
Franck: How will be done NGI matching to the request? Should NGI be selected if there is no preference form VO side?
Tiziana: We need to have freedom to express what is possible for NGIs (law,resources etc.). Not all of them are able to support given VO, even if they want to.

Resource allocation model in EGI (NGI_PL proposal)

Tiziana: Are there any SLA parameters VO would be interested in ?
Tristan: distribution of min storage/CPU on each site, availability/reliability, responsiveness to ticket.
It is also important to give a suggestion what can be requested (especially important for new VOs).
Gilles: it depends on VO so the request form should be flexible (mandatory and not mandatory fields)
Summary: The SLA should be easy enough to be filled in, which means that many service levels should be made optional, as we do now in the VO ID card.

Tiziana to NGI_FR and NGI_AEGIS: Do you have RA procedures in place?
Vladimir: We do have some knowledge about resource allocation procedures in HP-SEE and PRACE projects, but we don't have formal procedures for Grid resources on a national level.
The NGI is represented by the Institute of Physics Belgrade who is also responsible for the main resource centre in the country, so is also a Resource Provider.
But generally sites are free to use local resource allocation policies.
Gilles: NGI_France is a coordinator of resource allocation rather than a contributor of resources. We've started work to allocate resources for national VO but it is a human process. FOr international VOs we didn't have time but we are willing to do that as well.


The role of the NGI as opposed to the role of a generic Resource Provider should be described in the various models 1/2/3 presented. This is necessary as most of the NGIs report in the meeting that no influence on the local site resource allocation policies is possible.
Tiziana: should the resource allocation processes also applicable to national VOs?
Malgorzata: National VOs need to talk to their NGIs, however, the same processes and interfaces used for EGI international users could be adopted for regional ones.
Malgorzata: the resource allocation process should not only allow to address a resource request with an offer, but also vice versa a site with free resources to advertise it.
@Action on Malgorzata: prepare 3 RA models with pros, cons and use cases when the model can be used. Role of NGI, EGI and RP in each model. Is in the model a place for scientific review.

Both BIOMED and WeNMR express the need of exposing a single interface to user communities for resource allocation (rather than asking VOs to negotiate with multiple resource providers). The internal allocation processes and liaison to individual resource contributors should be made transparent.
Oxana: WLCG has internal allocation procedures, an MoU that regulates the relationship between users and providers, each RP is free to decie how much is going to be provided and a a board is responsible of evaluating the resource demands received. EGI processes should not conflict with this process, and this process should prove to be useful to other communities.
Tiziana: in many cases WLCG the customer  is also the resource provider. The WLCG use case currently is internally managed without involvement of EGI, so the risk of a conflict with EGI processes is minimal.
COMPCHEM (A. Costantini): The models proposed can be applied only to expert user communities. The same processes that are being defined for resource allocation, could be generalized to request services, i.e. to allow new user communities to request services to be provided by NGIs, such as application porting.


@Action on Tiziana: contact with Prace and ask for document describing RA process in Prace.
@Action on Malgorzata: prepare for next meeting: 3 RA models with pros, cons and use cases when the model can be used. Role of NGI, EGI and RP in each model. Is in the model a place for scientific review.
There are minutes attached to this event. Show them.
    • 15:20 15:35
      Introduction 15m
      Speaker: Dr Tiziana Ferrari (EGI.EU)
      Demonstrating Excellent European Science
      Task force wiki pages
    • 15:35 15:55
      Resource allocation model in EGI (NGI_PL proposal) 20m
      Speakers: Marcin Radecki (CYFRONET) , Mr T. Szepieniec (CYFRONET)
    • 15:55 16:15
      Resource allocation model in EGI (NGI_IT proposal) 20m
      Speaker: Luciano Gaido (INFN)
      Draft proposal
    • 16:15 16:35
      Discussion 20m
      Speaker: Malgorzata Krakowian (EGI.EU)