On 30/08/13 11:37, Ewan MacMahon wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Testbed Support for GridPP member institutes [mailto:TB-
>> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Martin Bly
>>
>> The problem with the central UI service at the Tier1 was not the UI
>> systems in particular, since we had (and still have) them anyway - it was
>> (would be) managing and keeping track of all the remote users.
>>
> Indeed, I don't think there's a simple way around that, but I'd
> hope that there just wouldn't be many users to keep track of;
> this would only be a fallback option for people that don't have
> their own in their departments.
Whilst I see where you are coming from, I think it's the wrong approach.
What we should do is make the complicated bit easier rather than bodging
around it - and expending lots of effort in the process.
What I intended to ask Steve to do I estimated as taking a couple of
days work. Given that I always underestimate these things, I'd expect
around a week to get a site-info.def and vo.d files that worked for the
operations-portal VOs and submitted to a WMS that actually worked for
the VO in question. That would be a big step forward I think -
especially as the EMI packages are actually quite easy to install.
> There should be no Particle Physics
> people using it, and at the moment there simply aren't many non-PP
> people using GridPP at all.
For people for whom the command line is challenging, I suspect that
portals using institutional credentials (eg SaroNGS) would be a way
forward.
>
>> Particularly when they go dormant / disappear without telling you.
>>
> We could limit that to pretty much the same as our existing exposure
> by expiring accounts after a year unless they're renewed, just as we
> do with grid certs and VO memberships.
Chris
|