Hi,
I think it should be 2) but only at the hardware, OS and basic service
level, but certainly not for anything that relates to VO installed
things. Now actually determining where a real problem is located is of
course not so clear.
Ian
> -----Original Message-----
> From: LHC Computer Grid - Rollout
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jeff Templon
> Sent: 07 October 2005 11:53
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [LCG-ROLLOUT] VOBox-Operations guide.
>
> Yo
>
> I don't understand the new stuff in red in section 7. it could be
> interepreted two ways:
>
> 1. we might not be able to save the VO box since its failure may be
> related to more important things such as storage for which we
> have QoS
> committments to LCG and hence these things have higher priority
>
> 2. we are accepting that the VO boxes fall under our QoS
> committments to
> LCG and hence need to know whether these boxes deviate from that.
>
> I sure hope it's not 2) since then we're committing to place high
> priority QoS (calling people out of bed in the middle of the
> night) for
> something that is largely out of our control ...
>
> JT
>
> Steve Traylen wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 10:58:52AM +0100 or thereabouts,
> Steve Traylen wrote:
> >
> >
> > Dear Site administrators and ROC Managers.
> >
> >> Following on the LCG operations meeting at Culham
> >
> >
> > Thanks for the feedback so far. Version 0.2 of the
> > document, LCG-VOBox-Operations-Guide. is at
> >
> > https://edms.cern.ch/document/655277
> >
> > All updates are in red.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> >>--
> >>Steve Traylen
> >>[log in to unmask]
> >>http://www.gridpp.ac.uk/
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
|