Hi Kostas/Graeme/All
I agree that this needs to be escalated and it will be. First though I
would like biomed representatives and Heinz to explain/respond - I can
not think of a justification on their side but that does not mean there
isn't one. Once everyone has responded directly (or if the ticket goes
without a proper response) then it can be taken further. Tier-2s/sites
are of course able to decide themselves if they wish to take more
immediate action as some have already done.
Regards,
Jeremy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Testbed Support for GridPP member institutes [mailto:TB-
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Kostas Georgiou
> Sent: 01 November 2007 02:19
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Heinz' Challenge
>
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 12:19:26AM +0000, Graeme Stewart wrote:
>
> > From the CIC portal, biomed described itself as:
> >
> > "These VO covers the areas related to health sciences. Currently, it
> > is divided in 3 sectors: medical imaging, bioinformatics and drug
> > discovery."
> >
> > We support the VO for it to engage in _that_ work, and we're happy
to
> > have done work related to malaria, avian flu, etc. However, I don't
> > see anything about rsa768 factorisation.
> >
> > So, this is, to my mind, even worse. This is not just Heinz being a
> > loose cannon, but sites being conned by top level EGEE management
> > into running jobs to which they had in no way agreed to run.
> >
> > The problem was then exacerbated by the way that Heinz wrote the
> > code, which resulted in biomed being able to grab far more of many,
> > many clusters in the UK than was reasonable. (And so much for EGEE
> > promoting push model RBs - just send in the pilots and watch our
> > fairsharing go all to hell.)
>
> This is exactly what I was going to say (better worded and probably
far
> more polite though).
>
> > Frankly, as the UK, I think we should give them a bloody rocket for
> > this. They've shown huge disrespect to sites - and how on earth can
> > they expect other EGEE users and VOs to play by the rules when then
> > engage in such a gross violation of our trust?
> ...
> > We haven't banned biomed - we've banned Heinz. And I am in no hurry
> > to unban him. I'd expect an apology at the very least, as well as an
> > assurance that this will not happen again.
>
> People should keep in mind that we are going to have similar cases in
> the future. If our responce today is going to be "a sorry is enough"
> what is going to stop the next user doing the same thing tomorrow
> considering how hard it is for us to spot an abuse? Unless there is
> a strong repsonce people will think "If I am not found (quite likely)
> great, if I am found a sorry will solve everything".
>
> Cheers,
> Kostas
>
> PS> BTW if the management agrees that breaking rsa768 is fine then
I'll
> have a go as well or is it only Heinz/biomed that can have a go?
|