Hi,
So the new map seems to be working fine again (certainly the map program
itself), and I've now been thinking about what information we should
present on the page.
What I'd like to suggest is that we have red (no recent response) and
amber (recent direct Globus response) dots as at present, but that instead
of maintaining a distinction between green dots and stars by "GridPP" vs
"EDG" resource brokers, we do this via some kind of GridPP Certified site
tag.
The original idea of distinguishing between sites that could be reached
via the IC/GridPP RB, and via the EDG RB was that it was harder to get
into the EDG RB, and it implied a greater level of verified functionality
at the site (eg that the SE really worked.)
Now this distinction doesn't seem so clear cut - especially when we go to
multiple RBs, including ones outside of the EDG Application Testbed. So my
suggestion is that test jobs are submitted to whatever RBs we know of,
both with and without an environment requirement GRIDPP-STAR. Sites that
have been checked by the GridPP testbed support group, can publish that as
one of their "available" environments (in the same way they publish their
site's label.)
(It seems natural to me that Steve Traylen either makes these decisions or
says what the criteria are.)
Cheers,
Andrew
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[log in to unmask] http://www.hep.man.ac.uk/~mcnab/ +44-161-275-4227
"/C=UK/O=eScience/OU=Manchester/L=HEP/CN=Andrew McNab"
Grid Research, High Energy Physics Group, University of Manchester, UK
------------------------------------------------------------------------
|