Present: Mark, Matt, Diego, Giacinto, Johannes, Sy, Gergely, Damien, Tiziana, Yannick Report on WG1 (Mark) ---------------------- Mark and Sergio have now practically finished working on the service description templates, based on eInfraCentral, determining the gaps which are needed by EOSC-hub and adding these to the template. Awaiting feedback from others. In EOSCPilot there is also a category for data management policies and Mark intends to talk to Sergio about these. Giacinto asked if this includes regulations, policies which the SP is following. Mark confirmed it can include these. Also other relevant information, e.g. data retention, archival specs etc. Damien said SPs should only need to fill in one template - not one for eInfraCentral and another for EOSC-hub. Mark agreed but said that we need more fields than eInfraCentral. Next step is for us to agree on the template, report back to eInfraCentral and eventually (ideally) move towards a single template, depending on feedback received by eInfraCentral. Mark presented a UML diagram showing relationships between items on the template. Matt asked if this information is enough for the AMB. Tiziana & Johannes confirmed it was, initially - clearly there need to be further iterations. We need to demonstrate that we have documented services, inc. helpdesk. An important driver is that people ask how they wish to become part of the catalogue - we need to help them and show them defined RulesoP. Sy said it would be a good exercise to look at other templates, e.g. ELIXIR, who have tools, training, compute-based services. Report on WG2 (Matt) ---------------------- Matt reported on the status of D4.1, including the multiple iterations over service categorizations and the latest work defining operational coordination and incorporating input from SPs to the EOSC-hub SMS. Mark asked about the TRL coverage in D4.1. Matt said that there was a short introduction to the levels and an explanation covering EUDAT's practical application of TRL8. Report on WG3 (Mark) ---------------------- Mark presented slides from EOSC-pilot and the different levels of access: service promotion, semi integration and full integration, with a diagram of '50 shades of grey' showing the different levels that these three categories may be achieved. It was agreed that this terminology should eventually be aligned with the levels presented in D4.1 - supporting services and medium/low level of integration in the external catalogue. Damien asked whether it is possible to have an EOSC service with no relation to EOSC-hub? Mark said that there can be multiple service catalogues compliant with a certain standard, made available through an EOSC-gateway (e.g. eInfraCentral) Sergio said that we are defining RoP specifically for joining *our* catalogue. It should be a role model for the RoP eventually used by EOSC - if successful. This will be up to the future EOSC governance to establish. DONM: end of August. Mark & Matt to circulate a doodle. Chat ------------------------ 15:29Johannes Reetz (to All): KPIs can only be related to Service Instances/Installations. 15:31Johannes Reetz (to All): and indeed KPIs should be defined per SLA 15:31Johannes Reetz (to All): and an SLA is an annex of a contract (between customer and provider) 15:32Sergio Andreozzi (to All): in our service portfolio entry template we are focusing on service level targets 15:32Sy Holsinger (EGI) (to All): not sure how KPIs make sense in a catalogue/marketplace 15:32Sergio Andreozzi (to All): https://wiki.eosc-hub.eu/display/EOSC/Service+Portfolio+Entry+Template#ServicePortfolioEntryTemplate-ServiceLevelTarget 15:33Johannes Reetz (to All): SL targets that's a good concept 15:47Johannes Reetz (to All): the timeline was challenging anyway 15:48Tiziana Ferrari EGI Foundation/EOSC-hub (to All): people can mute if not speaking? 16:02Gergely Sipos (to All): apologies, i have to leave now. bye 16:08Johannes Reetz (to All): I agree with you Diego 16:16Johannes Reetz (to All): not services have different levels of integration but the level of integration can depend on how ITSM processes are implemented in a federated environment. 16:17Johannes Reetz (to All): I am saying that being "middle level" is not a function of a service but the process 16:27Tiziana Ferrari EGI Foundation/EOSC-hub (to All): have to leave the call now. have a good continuation 16:29Sergio Andreozzi (to All): what we did in EGI and proposing here is both, please see here a draft page 16:29Sergio Andreozzi (to All): https://wiki.eosc-hub.eu/display/EOSC/Service+Phases 16:29Sergio Andreozzi (to All): I think we need both because TRL is a concept becoming more relevant in EC-funded projects 16:29Diego Scardaci (to All): sorry for 2 minutes 16:32Diego Scardaci (to All): back online 16:32Sy Holsinger (EGI) (to All): sergio's link is more inline with what i was talking about 16:35Johannes Reetz (to All): SL targets are much more relevent, I think 16:37Sy Holsinger (EGI) (to All): so just to write my final thought, for me it is fine if you want to capture TRL numbers (for whatever reason, projects, EC, etc.), but we should focus more on service phases, what they mean and how it effects internal capturing and public promotion 16:44Johannes Reetz (to All): The EOSC must be lived, what ever the EC thinks. The EOSC-hub will be a concrete platform, initially featured by EGI and EUDAT