Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Attendees:



Canonical Meeting Template (as a reminder):

1. Review of meeting agenda
2. Addressing issues

  • Description/Status of issue
  • Review of action items from previous meeting if any
  • Recommended actions and discussion of same
  • Close issue or identify next action items

3. Status updates from SMT members

  • Status update on significant activities
  • Review of prior open issues if any (and not addressed earlier in agenda)
  • Identification of new issues if any (and not addressed earlier in agenda)

Agenda/Notes

1. Review of Meeting Agenda: Any comments/additions? 

 

2. XSEDE2 Reporting (Karla Gendler

Previously:

  • Previous discussion archived: SMT Meeting - May 24, 2018
  • (6/21) Scott - about half-way through the current reporting cycle that runs May through July. Timelines will go out in July for an August report prep time.
  • (6/21) Ron - Annual Report was approved, and it has been loaded into IDEALS
  • (7/19) Karla - IPR L2 text due to project managers 8/9. Got an extension from NSF, final due 8/22. Email from Leslie Morsek coming early next week during PEARC. Questions from John via your PM around 8/15, please be responsive.
  • (8/2) Karla - IPR cycle starting this week and the final is due 8/22. 8/8 is when L2/L3 text due. Template has changed, text should convey the story about the metrics as if presenting to NSF panel.

Discussion:

  • (8/16) Karla - IPR in progress. Submission should be on target for next week.
  • (8/16) John - new report format is more digestible. Will be commenting more on the L3 portions, so watch for improvements there.
  • (8/16) Karla - Quarterly would be a good time to discuss

Decisions:

  • note

Actions:

  • Maytal requested a Quarterly Leadership Radar identifying major project level activities, new tools/functionality released, etc. - Ron to proposal options to serve the need


3. XSEDE External Code of Conduct - Phasing into website (Ron PayneMaytal Dahan

Previously:

  • (6/8) - Added to agenda
    • Suggested phases:
      • Phase I - basic wording on the site since there was clear directive from NSF regarding harassment and repercussions for grantees.  web page: https://www.xsede.org/codeofconduct
      • Phase II – create the form for reporting. Need ETA
      • Phase III – add it to the portal account creation and training registration forms as a check off box indicating read and understand. Need ETA
  • (6/21) - Suggested phases: 
    • Phase I - basic wording on the site since there was clear directive from NSF regarding harassment and repercussions for grantees.  web page: https://www.xsede.org/codeofconduct
    • Phase II – create the form for reporting. Need ETA
    • Phase III – add it to the portal account creation and training registration forms as a check off box indicating read and understand. Need ETA
  • (8/2) Phase II and III ETA dates needed.
  • (8/2) Maytal - 2-4 week estimate on the reporting form, will talk to team about the checkbox. Break out training and account creation to two different tasks since those require different amounts of work.

Discussion:

  • (8/16) Ron - Quarterly meeting topic
  • (8/16) Dave H - Looks good; however, Chris Hempel is listed
  • (8/16) Kelly - Linda is working on a replacement

Decisions:

  • note

Actions:



4. XSEDE Service Provider Forum Membership (Shawn Strande / David Hart / Philip Blood

Previously:

  • (7/10) - Added to agenda
    • Email thread concerning a single institution adding multiple resources/services to the SPF
    • Phil Blood's question about the possibility of international entities joining the SPF
  • (7/19) Johathon will bring these topics to the SP Forum
  • (8/2) Bioburst approved and reps have been invited to meetings. Had face-to-face meeting at PEARC18 and posted notes. Continue to schedule topics for future meetings. L3 voting and membership topic: multiple L3 at a given SP and how they contribute to voting. The SPF charter makes it clear that there are 2 separate voting lines: XSEDE vs. non-XSEDE business. 
  • Dave - less concerned about the formalities of the voting process. SDSD asked for L3 status for a resource. Other sites submit status reports for their organization. Confusing that L3 members that are either the organization or the resource. Why is that an option and is it valuable–could we make it less confusing; membership granted to organization
  • Shawn - SP Forum vs. XSEDE Federation
  • John - this was brought up with the chartering process but many are still open issues. Membership in the SP Forum is different from the XSEDE Federation. You do not need to be in the Federation to be in the Forum. You do need to be in the Forum to be in the Federation. Many of these are SP Forum issues–it is only when they want to be in the Federation as well that these lines blur. Track 2 award projects is who XSEDE partners with, and we need their representation at the SP Forum. These distinctions are made in the Charter. Do we still need dual Charter situation or could we make it more sane now? 
  • Dave - how important has this distinction been in the past 7 years? 
  • John - difficult to tease apart
  • Shawn - Indiana is another example...would like to have a side discussion to streamline. From the Forum point of view is that resources that come in are the first-order citizens. One vote for an L3. Could look at the current list of members to see how they are resources or something else.
  • Victor - voting is handled fairly well in Charter. Some SPs have L1, L2, and/or L3–if we register as institutions, we run into issues where there are distinctions in types of resources
  • Shawn - resource comes first, institution comes second
  • Dave - flexibility vs. confusion. There is also no mechanism for a timeframe to reconsider inclusion. If you get 2 centers at Indiana, in the database this is difficult
  • Shawn - move to reconsider the Charter with the SP Forum and make a recommendation to XSEDE and the SMT sometime in the next month
  • John - MRI awardees who are L2 and resources is the exception
  • Shawn - XSEDE has created a rich ecosystem and we want to ensure that going forward
  • Dave - should we reconsider the L3 entry point or better explain it

Discussion:

  • (8/16) John - would like to know where things stand if someone can summarize
  • (8/16) Jonathon - no update as of yet
  • (8/16) Dave H - Charter said it was vaguely expected the L3 would be organizations and not resources. Might need to state that clearly
  • (8/16) John - let's chat at Quarterly

Decisions:

  • note

Actions:



5. Publishing the 2004 - 2017 XSEDE Allocations Data Set (David Hart

Previously:

  • (8/16) - Added to agenda

Discussion:

  • (8/16) Dave - published first data set. Project not a person is publishing data. Changes to policy being finalized. They are not set up to control IDB is the only other outstanding. Sorting out the final details.
  • Illinois Data Bank.pdf

Decisions:

  • note


6. Updated Graphics for XSEDE Booth (Kristin WilliamsonRon Payne

Previously:

  • (8/16) - Added to agenda; email sent to SMT mail list with current and new graphics for the XSEDE Booth. We need to order these in the next few weeks. Nothing about the structure changes as in previous years (due to cost limitations).
  • (8/16) Kelly - don't like the graphics–they don't represent us in any way. We don't do wet lab stuff. People should see what we do in a big way. What would be better might be LIGO–a huge discovery. Replace the stock art with graphics from projects that we have been a part of the discovery.
  • (8/16) John - agree, need different imagery. 
  • (8/16) Kelly - discovery, innovation, anything abstract images would be better. NSF has some images that are nice, too related to Ruby Mendenhal. 
  • (8/16) Emre - if I can relate to the images in my work, I might be interested in learning more about what XSEDE can do for me
  • (8/16) Dave - a person is great to have in the image...couple people in front of a computer
  • (8/16) Bob S - image of people looking at one of the caves of a simulation might represent us better

Discussion:

  • note

Decisions:

  • note



Status updates

Follow this basic outline:

  • Status update on significant activities
  • Review of prior open issues if any (and not addressed earlier in agenda)
  • Identification of new issues if any (and not addressed earlier in agenda)
  • Identification of recent improvements implemented

Updates from SMT members:

  • PI (John/Ron) - 
    • Awaiting NSF's PY8 approval to spend and will push sub-award amendments
      • Kelly - same rules for carry over?
      • John - yes, willing to consider something different if there is justification
    • PRACE and RIST MOU - both have been in new funding rounds but are coming back into view to develop a mechanism for joint-allocation requests sometime in the next calendar year. XRAS would be used. Setting aside resources that could be allocated through this mechanism, so will need to talk with SPF. Intent that there would be a meeting at SC18 for the call to then be released.
      • Phil - current funds or additional funds for this activity? There are other international partnerships that have come up
      • John - not aware of joint funding opportunities. Everyone agreed initially to do this without additional funding but should watch how much effort it takes. 
  • CEE (Kelly) - CASC doing a write-up on XSEDE's Broadening Participation
  • ECSS (Bob/Phil) - 
    • Phil - addressing adaptive. Getting results from PEARC18 evaluation. Altering impact ratings after the ECSS activity is complete.
    • Bob - improving how allocations look
    • Emre - groups.io mailing list
      • Bob - searchable, archival, interactive. groups.io emerged as a clear winner
      • Phil - how to create a more community feel. Bringing Campus Champions into the fold to understand their lessons learned. Potential Quarterly discussion?
  • XCI (Dave L/Craig) - 
  • Ops (Greg/Victor) - IPR and KPI target considerations. Hybrid cloud virtualization. 
  • RAS (Dave H/Ken) - publication of the dataset. Working with Ops to move more RAS components into the cloud.
  • Program Office (Ron/Laura) - 
  • SP Forum (Shawn/Jonathon) - will be sure the loop gets closed on the L3 discussion 
  • UAC (Emre) - let us know topics for Fall meeting. Will be at XRAC soliciting reviewers
    • John - top 10 or 20 users in the last few months who are not PIs might be interesting candidates
    • Phil - maybe ECSS could help with this too. We might know some in different communities of users. NIP, etc.
  • PM&R (Karla/Scott) - 
  • NSF (Bob) - 

Next Meeting: 

  • SMT - August 30, 2018 – cancelled due to Quarterly
  • SMT - September 13, 2018

 

  • No labels