 |
 |
Hi Jeremy Yes, I can do that. I already have one response, please could other sites send me their replies. cheers Duncan On 28/09/2016 20:27, Jeremy Coles wrote: > Dear All, > > As I cannot see to whom this message has gone I thought it worth > forwarding to the list. It would be useful to compile a GridPP response > between those who are most interested in the questions raised. Duncan, > perhaps this is something you may like to lead please? > > Many thanks, > Jeremy > > > >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> *From: *Tony Cass <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >> *Subject: **Collecting input for the networking session at the WLCG >> workshop* >> *Date: *28 September 2016 20:12:58 GMT+1 >> *Cc: *Shawn Mc Kee <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>, >> Edoardo Martelli <[log in to unmask] >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>, Marian Babik <[log in to unmask] >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >> >> Dear Colleagues and WLCG Workshop attendees, >> >> To help encourage productive discussions during the networking >> session, we’d like to circulate some thoughts and questions >> beforehand. On the thoughts side, we see networking issues on varying >> time horizons as: >> >> - Short term (the rest of Run2): can we cope with the extra >> load due to the better than expected LHC performance? Can we be IPv6 >> ready? Can we monitor, diagnose and manage our networks sufficiently >> for HEP needs? >> - Medium term (LS2/Run 3): Upgrading the networks for Run 3; >> moving towards complete availability of data over IPv6. How do we >> integrate Software Defined Networking capabilities that exist in our >> networks to support our needs? >> - Long term (HL-LHC): Do we influence the international >> network environment or live in an environment built for more demanding >> customers? To frame this another way, will HEP continue to enjoy >> abundant bandwidth and prioritised attention or will we need to adapt >> to an environment filled with other network intensive science domains >> competing for the network? >> >> In the background there is also the issue of integrating commercial >> cloud resources into our networking infrastructure. For this, though, >> we imagine that you (and especially the experiments) just want the >> network engineers to “make it work” rather than to have any detailed >> discussion of the issues at the workshop. >> >> With this in mind, we’ve scheduled talks on IPv6, network technology >> evolution and LHCOPN/LHCONE status. >> >> In terms of questions, we would like to ask >> >> Sites >> ==== >> - What fraction of your LAN capacity is used? What fraction >> of your WAN capacity? >> - On what timescale will you upgrade your LAN? Your WAN? >> - If you don’t have an upgrade planned, what are you waiting for? >> o Money? >> o Increased traffic? >> o Guidance? >> >> Experiments >> ========== >> - What bandwidths (LAN & WAN) should Tier-1 and Tier-2 sites >> be targeting for Run3? HL-LHC? >> - Do you want Tier2 sites to separate clearly into ones with >> disk and ones without? Will networking infrastructure influence the >> choice or have to be adapted to a choice that is made for other reasons? >> - Will there be an experiment focused update of the Bos/Fisk >> networking document (http://lhcone.web.cern.ch/node/2935)? If so, when? >> >> Both >> ==== >> - What obstacles do you see preventing you migrating to an >> IPv6 only environment? >> >> Please send answers to these questions as well as any comments or >> thoughts to us ([log in to unmask] >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask] >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>) by noon Geneva time on Thursday 6^th >> October and we’ll use the input to organise the session. Bonus! If we >> get lots of input, you won’t have to sit through presentations of >> material available to read on Indico! >> >> Regards — and apologies if you receive two copies of this mail, >> Tony & Shawn >> Network Session co-chairs >