On Wed, 2005-10-12 at 15:05 +0100, Henry Nebrensky wrote:
> I don't really understand this: the LCG middleware hasn't been ported much
> beyond Fedora has it - certainly not (e.g.) AIX?
Take a look at
http://agenda.cern.ch/askArchive.php?base=agenda&categ=a054670&id=a054670s45t1/transparencies
from the latest operations meeting.
But this doesn't just apply to LCG it also applies to EGEE and the gLite
middleware which will get ported to lots more than LCG has been.
> Whatever the WNs use, I would expect that the service nodes at a site
> would be running something pretty close to an EGEE/LCG/EDG supported OS.
> For a number of reasons including its external visibility, I'd class the
> VO-box as a service node, rather than a WN.
Yes it is a service node, but that doesn't imply that it will run
"EGEE/LCG/EDG supported OS". It will run whatever the site wants it to
run as long as the neccesary features can be deployed.
> > The SITE determines the OS unless special arrangements are made with the site.
> > These special arrangements are indeed *special* meaning the default OS for the
> > WNs at the site is what you should expect to be getting.
>
> This seems wrong: surely the VO should expect the default OS for the
> *service nodes* (CE,SE, etc.) at the site. ([Un]helpfully, this shouldn't
> be published by sites for security reasons...)
Which might very well be different OS:es for different services
depending on how far porting has gone.
|