You mean nikhef and fermilab....
Gordon, JC (John) wrote:
> You can't expect Jeremy to stand up and say 'the UK objects to GLEXEC
> running on WNs to change the identity of a user job' without giving him
> the ammunition to defend this view. I know that some other
> countries/sites take the opposite view - that they will definitely NOT
> allow pilot jobs to run payloads for other users without explicitly
> changing the identity of the job so that they know for sure who every
> running job belongs to. We need to be explicit in what we are objecting
> to and what might mitigate our objections.
>
> John
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Testbed Support for GridPP member institutes
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Coles, J (Jeremy)
> Sent: 03 July 2007 16:30
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: UK input to tomorrow's WLCG GDB
>
> Dear All
>
> Tomorrow there is a GDB (happens monthly as I hope you know!) at CERN
> with the following agenda:
> http://indico.cern.ch/conferenceDisplay.py?confId=8485
>
> If you have any important issues that you would like raised/discussed in
> relation to any of these items (or others) please let me know. Current
> items to be take up from the UK include:
>
> 1) Confirmation of experiment readiness to move to SL4
>
> 2) Confirmation that a well defined list of rpms required by the
> experiments but not in the standard SL4 installation is available
> (either as a list in the VO ID card for the experiment or as an
> experiment meta-package).
>
> 3) To re-state that UK sites are generally opposed to running glexec on
> worker nodes (see this for background
> http://www.sysadmin.hep.ac.uk/wiki/Glexec). I have requested more
> information about specific objections via the T2 coordinators.
>
> 4) Clarification on how vulnerabilities in experiment/VO code should be
> handled.
>
> Kind regards,
> Jeremy
--
Alessandra Forti
NorthGrid Technical Coordinator
University of Manchester
|